Mount Rushmore

[NatMorton]

Because the United States is not responsible for the crimes of the Spanish Empire. It is however responsible for its own crimes, like violating the treaty it had with the Lakota.

You’re out of luck then re the OP. We acquired South Dakota from the French, yes?

 

[NatMorton]

Moving is free right? You'll pay for me?

No, it’s your penance for not researching the title of the property you rented. How could you be so careless? Have you no concern for non-white peoples?

 

[Questerr]

You’re out of luck then re the OP. We acquired South Dakota from the French, yes?

And then what happened after that? Did we sign our treaty with the Lakota before or after the Louisiana Purchase?

(Here's a hint: Decades after)

 

[Questerr]

No, it’s your penance for not researching the title of the property you rented. How could you be so careless? Have you no concern for non-white peoples?

I don't believe the US is responsible for the crimes of the Spanish Empire. You do. So how much should the US pay Mexico for the genocide of the Aztecs?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Start by giving back your land.

It’s more Progressive to give away the property of others.

 

[NatMorton]

I don't believe the US is responsible for the crimes of the Spanish Empire. You do. So how much should the US pay Mexico for the genocide of the Aztecs?

I’m not in the reparations camp; you are. Though that camp does seem to have its boundaries, and curiously enough, those boundaries seem to extend only to a point just before you’re inconvienced.

 

[Questerr]

It’s more Progressive to give away the property of others.

Whose property would be given away by giving Mount Rushmore back to the Lakota?

 

[Questerr]

I’m not in the reparations camp; you are. Though that camp does seem to have its boundaries, and curiously enough, those boundaries seem to extend only to a point just before you’re inconvienced.

My boundaries are the United States. Not the Spanish Empire.

 

[Questerr]

I'm curious, the Conservatives opposed to giving Mount Rushmore back to the Lakota, where do you stand on the Bundy's/other white ranchers in the West demanding to be given Federal land?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Whose property would be given away by giving Mount Rushmore back to the Lakota?

Public lands (acquired by the Louisiana purchase in this case) and the improvements on them are not his to give away. He, like the rest of us, have equal say on the matter.

 

[Questerr]

Public lands (acquired by the Louisiana purchase in this case) and the improvements on them are not his to give away. He, like the rest of us, have equal say on the matter.

Was the treaty with the Lakota giving them ownership of the Black Hills signed and ratified before or after the Louisiana Purchase?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Was the treaty with the Lakota giving them ownership of the Black Hills signed and ratified before or after the Louisiana Purchase?

I guess those folks were Indian givers.

 

[Questerr]

I guess those folks were Indian givers.

If the Federal Government tomorrow just decided to "colonize" Jeff Bezos's wealth and turn Amazon into "public lands", would you still be saying the same thing or would you think the Federal government should give that property back?

 

[ttwtt78640]

If the Federal Government tomorrow just decided to "colonize" Jeff Bezos's wealth and turn Amazon into "public lands", would you still be saying the same thing or would you think the Federal government should give that property back?

I agree that it was a case of might makes right, but we still have eminent domain and civil asset forfeiture to this day.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Fun fact: There were supposed to be only three heads on Mount Rushmore.

 

[Antiwar]

Everything that doesn’t support your extreme left views is not extreme right.

I don't have extreme left views.

Look at who aligns with your position.

 

[Questerr]

I agree that it was a case of might makes right, but we still have eminent domain and civil asset forfeiture to this day.

Is stealing gold from people to give to other people an appropriate use of eminent domain?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Is stealing gold from people to give to other people an appropriate use of eminent domain?

Nope.

 

[IGotPie]

By your own reasoning, you are in possession of stolen property. Why are you so hesitant to give it back to the descendants of the non-white people who first occupied it?

At some point majority of the land was stolen.

Look no further than lands in North Europe.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

I don't have extreme left views.

Yeah, you really do.

Look at who aligns with your position.

My positions vary, depending on the subject. On some matters I tend to be conservative and on others, liberal

Never ever far left or far right.

 

[Questerr]

Nope.

So then the Federal Government taking the Lakota's land was not an appropriate use of Eminent Domain and they should give it back.

 

[Bok Tuklo]

Mount Rushmore features the heads of four Presidents:
George Washington (1732–1799), Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) and Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865)
View attachment 67345330

So let's pretend, that it has been decided to another another head to the mountain, and you are sent a survey to ask you which former President you would like to see added to Mount Rushmore, which one would you pick?

James K. Polk

 

[ttwtt78640]

So then the Federal Government taking the Lakota's land was not an appropriate use of Eminent Domain and they should give it back.

IIRC, this has already been before the SCOTUS.

 

[Antiwar]

Yeah, you really do.

No, I really don't. I have progressive political views; that's not far-left.

My positions vary, depending on the subject. On some matters I tend to be conservative and on others, liberal

Never ever far left or far right.

I agree, you're a mixed bag (from what little I've seen you post that shows your positions). You're a mixed centrist. You're conservative on militarism and guns. You're not against easy centrist liberal positions. That's like being a Republican with a couple of liberal positions. The Republicans moved right, so you're a little liberal.

Far-left would be true socialism (and possibly communism), or left-libertarian.

 

[D_NATURED]

My land was never part of native land per any treaty with the US government.

Is that to say there is some US property that the Europeans legitimately acquired, without deceit or false promises, and every pale face should squeeze in to it? It's really all or nothing, depending upon whether one thinks the past can be undone or not. If we're going to undo history, let's also demand that the Catholic church pay reparations to their many historical victims. And the remaining European estates of the various monarchies should compensate the ancestors of the victims of feudalism. There's been so much taking of shit throughout history, a massive, worldwide redistribution is the only answer, I suppose.

Or, maybe the answer is not to be backward looking at all, and cease yelling insults at the skeletons of slavers and demanding we honor a long dead injustice while many contemporary ones exist. Certainly there are sufficient moral battles to be fought in the present.

Giving the land back to the natives is yet another naive, liberal fantasy that some actually believe in, but do so as silly, moralizing self-deceptions. Progress is what we should concern ourselves with. We can never make the past right because it's already wrong. We can, however, make the future right, provided we don't squander the opportunity for progress by wasting our time trying to recreate a perfect world that never existed.

Giving the land back is impossible and the very idea is laughable.