Of course it matters to you. You wrote that you will be judging all the responses to determine a degree of racism.
I'm just mentioning that, based on what I read, I dont accept your qualifications for that judgement, so decided not to vote.
Understandable. I don't recall coming out and saying that I would judge responses based on degree of racism, but there is probably enough in my posts to suggest that that is the case. Therefore, you are correct. I expect someone who is in favor of governmental segregation based on DNA to defend their position.
And the bold is the verification that I had speculated correctly...because "you seem to" assume that Native Americans are still forced to live on reservations. There is no forced segregation, Native Americans are also full American citizens and may live where ever they want.
Since they are not forced, and they are full American citizens, does this mean that a Bureau of Indian Affairs is just? Only Americans of certain genetics fall under its jurisdiction.
Why would it be 'unjust'? On what legal premise? Native American's do have a different status in the US, a status that's legally recognized and there is a different sovereignty accorded them *on their semi-sovereign* land. We have federal organizations that oversee foreign affairs and foreign persons. The CIA for one.
Are you saying, or exploring, that they should lose this status?
My views don't matter, it is your view that I'm interested in. The poll questions are pretty straightforward.
Assuming Indians are American citizens, special rules set aside for them based on their genetics violate the 14th Amendment (equal protection under the law) and the Civil Rights Act (discrimination based on race). If their sovereignty dictates different treatment from other American citizens that happen to be of another genetic code (people of Irish descent, for example), then I would argue that Indians are not fully American citizens.
Nope...sorry...doesn't work that way. If your views don't matter, then mine don't matter either.
A proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion?
Why are you using a proxy, and why do your views not matter?
Taking a hard pass after reading that massive attempt at obfuscation.
Why is the poll coupled with voting preferences? Are we talking about Indian reservations or electoral candidates?
It is as if people are wanting to do more to what is left of North American Indians. One of the worst genocides in human history, largely ignored by the history books, and here we are debating removal of reservations? How white does this nation need to be to make some of you happy?
Nope...sorry...doesn't work that way. If your views don't matter, then mine don't matter either.
A proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion?
Why are you using a proxy, and why do your views not matter?
Taking a hard pass after reading that massive attempt at obfuscation.
I'm learning the poll thing. I should have left out the candidates.
It is not even close to the worst genocide in history. And it is not ignored at all.
The sovereign status of Indian reservations has allowed casino development and large profits to the Indians that don't gamble. Poetic justice as they pick the pockets of widows, weak-minded, ignoramuses, addicts, and others that live in a dream World. OTOH, if we're not going to return land we stole from them, they have entitlement.
/
I often use Indians as a proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion. I have a guess as to what the results will be. I'm very interested in your reasoning behind your choice.
Fair enough. In this community when people do that kind of thing, it usually looks like the OP is trying to pigeonhole people into two sides so they can go after their partisan opponents, rather than talk about the topic itself.
I voted for neither and I'm indifferent about Indian reservations.
well opinions vary!
when columbus arrived estimates vary but it was roughly 10 million people. by the 1800's the population was reduced by more than 90%.
it was even worse in central and south America.
All land everywhere was "stolen" in that case. No country anywhere is governed today by its original inhabitants or owners.
Easy to explain, it's government sanctioned oppression of a minority that's been going on in the U.S. for many, many decades. It was Trumps favorite president, Andrew Jackson that decided to round up all the Cherokee tribe, take away all their property East of the Mississippi, and forced them all West by foot in the middle of winter to a remote area of Oklahoma. The 'Trail of Tears' is only one small example of how horrid this country has treated native Americans. Their misery doesn't end with the Trail of Tears either. The treatment of native American Indians is a historic lesson regarding the morality of this country.
Anyone that has traveled to the Navajo Indian reservations in Arizona has seen that the reservations are places where the Navajo were forced to remain in abject poverty, totally forgotten and completely mistreated by history. And yes, the U.S. Government stole everything from them and land was only one, their dignity was another.
View attachment 67240444
Why does how we voted have anything to do with Indian reservations?I often use Indians as a proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion. I have a guess as to what the results will be. I'm very interested in your reasoning behind your choice.
How are the 'forced' to remain in abject poverty? Arent they free to do what they like with their land? Are they not free to leave? Plus, it should be pointed out that American indians have always lived in abject poverty. No one put them there, that is how we found them and how they have chosen to remain.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?