As if I needed another reason to never buy Ben & Jerry's

[RoadKingLarry]

I think we're going to see more of this. And people are gonna get pissed.
Here we are seeing increasing fallout from the McGirt decision.   Cops won't even bother pulling over a vehicle with tribal tags. Speeding, reckless, suspected DUI, isn't worth the hassle. Non-native gets assaulted by native? Pretty much tough *expletive deleted*it. It'll go to federal/tribal jurisdiction and never see the light of day, in large part due to the huge case backlog.
Now there are the beginnings of talk about taking back "tribal land" from the white thieves. I don't think it'll get much  traction but it's popping up.

[cordex]

Giving it back would involve the current property owner being compensated by the entity that took the land.

Why is that the only possible route for justice?  You have made up an arbitrary standard that is specifically designed to protect you from the consequences of your claims or having to bear the guilt you are trying to impose on others.

You are in possession of something you believe was stolen and you were aware of the situation when you purchased it. Most laws relating to stolen property require only that someone be in possession of something stolen and to know that it was stolen to be liable for the crime of being in possession of stolen property. That certainly seems to apply to your case.

Regardless of what other possible paths that could settle the issue, one that would be consistent with a moral person who really believes that they knowingly bought stolen goods would be for you to give up your land to the Ho-Chunk nation tomorrow. But you won’t.

[charby]

Why is that the only possible route for justice?  You have made up an arbitrary standard that is specifically designed to protect you from the consequences of your claims or having to bear the guilt you are trying to impose on others.

You are in possession of something you believe was stolen and you were aware of the situation when you purchased it. Most laws relating to stolen property require only that someone be in possession of something stolen and to know that it was stolen to be liable for the crime of being in possession of stolen property. That certainly seems to apply to your case.

Regardless of what other possible paths that could settle the issue, one that would be consistent with a moral person who really believes that they knowingly bought stolen goods would be for you to give up your land to the Ho-Chunk nation tomorrow. But you won’t.

I bought my house, and the previous owners bought it in good faith that there were no restrictions on the sale. The original thief of my property is the US government. I will give my property willing to the Ho-Chuck after the original thief compensates me at fair market value.

I would not want you to give up your property to the pervious indigenous people either without fair compensation from the original thief's either. 

I was referencing the story about the Lakota winning monetary value for the Black Hills lands was to be paid to the Lakota via Supreme Court Decision.

[cordex]

I bought my house, and the previous owners bought it in good faith that there were no restrictions on the sale. The original thief of my property is the US government. I will give my property willing to the Ho-Chuck after the original thief compensates me at fair market value.

If it is in fact stolen property then the person who is in possession of it while knowing it is stolen is guilty of receiving stolen property and there is no requirement that they be reimbursed prior to being made to return it … or ever. Even if they paid for it. If you weren’t aware of the fact that it was stolen land then that might be a defense, but you clearly are aware of it. If you knowingly bought a stolen car it would be taken from you without compensation. You couldn’t just keep it until you were reimbursed by the original thief.

I’m also curious why it should return to the Ho-Chunk and not the Ioway or Otoe or the Oneota people instead.

Regardless, my point is that your stated morals conflict with your revealed morals.

[charby]

If it is in fact stolen property then the person who is in possession of it while knowing it is stolen is guilty of receiving stolen property and there is no requirement that they be reimbursed prior to being made to return it … or ever. Even if they paid for it. If you weren’t aware of the fact that it was stolen land then that might be a defense, but you clearly are aware of it. If you knowingly bought a stolen car it would be taken from you without compensation. You couldn’t just keep it until you were reimbursed by the original thief.

I’m also curious why it should return to the Ho-Chunk and not the Ioway or Otoe or the Oneota people instead.

Regardless, my point is that your stated morals conflict with your revealed morals.

Ioway and Ote are part of the Ho-Chunk.

Oneota are believed to be the ancestors of the Ho-Chunk. Many of the Mississippian cultures died out by 1700, they figured it was due to the European diseases.

So, Ho-Chunk would be correct (also known as the Winnebago Nation as the French and English called them).

Regarding stolen property, I was going off what the Supreme Court ruled for the Lakota.

Me giving it up, well I'm Native American, so do I keep my house or do I get a different house where my ancestors are from. Best they can figure is that my ancestors were enslaved from the Carribean or Central America and taken to Europe during the early days of the conquests and came back to the North America 50-100 years later. Yes the European enslaved Indians and brought them back to Europe.

[charby]

One gift the Natives gave the Europeans was Syphilis.

[Ben]

Me giving it up, well I'm Native American,

Make up your mind, Elizabeth Warren. You've also told us you're a "direct descendant of Rollo" and Catholic. You realize there's a search function here, yeah?

Teuton, Hebrew, Germanic-French, Native American, Swiss, Portuguese, Scotch and English here. I prefer Samsonite to describe my ethnicity.

[cordex]

Ioway and Ote are part of the Ho-Chunk.

I'm not sure that is true.  They share a language and moved around in the same region, but they have their own tribal governments, cultures, and traditions.  I guess if we start giving back everything there would be plenty to go around, but it's not nearly as simple or straightforward as presented.

Regarding stolen property, I was going off what the Supreme Court ruled for the Lakota.

The supreme court ruling is immaterial to your personal beliefs or Ben and Jerry's corporate beliefs.  If you don't believe you live on stolen property then you can point to your clear title and say that you don't personally owe previous occupants of that land anything.  If you do believe you live on stolen property which you bought knowing it was stolen then you have a clear moral path and it is not to wait for someone else to reimburse you.  Are you going to act or do you just like virtue-signaling with empty words?

Me giving it up, well I'm Native American, so do I keep my house or do I get a different house where my ancestors are from. Best they can figure is that my ancestors were enslaved from the Carribean or Central America and taken to Europe during the early days of the conquests and came back to the North America 50-100 years later.

You have no ancestral claim to the land, you have no association with the tribes that you say are the rightful owners of your land, your ancestors didn't even live within 2,000 miles of your home, and your ancestral lands (whether they be in the Caribbean or Central America) aren't even part of the USA?  Given your situation I don't think you'd have any tribal claim to your home in Iowa whatsoever.  I have no doubt that like every human on earth you have some ancestors who were enslaved, displaced, and mistreated.  You'd have to take up your complaints with Europe and the government of whatever island or nation your distant native ancestors came from.

Since you lack proof of lineal descent (to the point of not knowing whether you were from the Caribbean or Central America), blood quantum, or cultural/community involvement you'd have a hell of a hard time convincing them that you should be party to their reparations.  Tribes tend to be pretty racially exclusive, and given your history you're almost certainly not pure blooded enough to be considered a member of any tribe.  My wife can show at least 1/16th which gets her beautiful skin and high cheekbones but zero tribal affiliation.

[HankB]

Can the redskins who claim they owned the land produce any deeds or titles dating back to before the ones the palefaces have? Including a record of who they obtained the land from?

If not, their ancestors must have been - at best - squatters. And the only reason they can make a claim is because their ancestors had more bows & arrows than the next tribe over.

[dogmush]

Again, virtue signaling on the internet aside, Conquer =/= Steal.

Nation States gain and lose territory through war all the time, and have for the entire history of the world, including the native tribes of North America.  It is a valid way to gain territory. 

[cordex]

Nation States gain and lose territory through war all the time, and have for the entire history of the world, including the native tribes of North America.  It is a valid way to gain territory.

Indians might justifiably point out that the agreements made after hostilities concluded were rarely upheld by the US.  At that point it might be argued that it was no longer conquering but theft.

Regardless, at some point you have to move forward and not constantly be dwelling in the past.  Historical recriminations and obsessing about someone else's ancient ancestor's evils toward your ancient ancestor only encourages and justifies modern atrocities.  If you go back far enough we all have ancestors on both sides of horrors, and given the way survival works most of our ancestors tended to be on the perpetrating side of the worst of them.

[charby]

Make up your mind, Elizabeth Warren. You've also told us you're a "direct descendant of Rollo" and Catholic. You realize there's a search function here, yeah?

Teuton, Hebrew, Germanic-French, Native American, Swiss, Portuguese, Scotch and English here. I prefer Samsonite to describe my ethnicity.

Different ethnicities can have sex and produce offspring. Plenty of Darkies and Whities f*cked a lot in my ancestry.

Also almost all of my European ancestry were here and settled (British and French colonies) before the Revolutionary War.

Also DNA tests are a thing now too. I and other family members paid quite a bit of money for a couple extremely comprehensive ones since 2009 that matched up with family stories. I'm a lot more Native American than Elizabeth Warron, FYI.

Add Hebrew, Italian, Greek, South Asian, East Asian and East African to the mix since then.

Not related to Charlemagne. Someone managed not to be one of his bastards.

You're probably not going to give a *expletive deleted*it about reading this. 

I met a Lakota man at a conference pre Covid (also pre DNA tests), he asked me if I was Native, I said a little bit, not sure how much. He replied, claim it, one drop if native blood makes you native. Ran into him earlier this year at a conference, he asked me if I joined a tribe yet, I said well I did the DNA but wasn't any nations of the lower 48 or Alaska. He told me to claim my heritage and it stinks that you don't have a nation to learn about your past. He told me that he was taken as a baby shortly after birth from his mother by Christian missionaries (late 1950s) and adopted out as a Mexican child. His extended family ended up finding him several years later as a young adult and invited him the reservation to learn about his ancestry. Now he teaches you people on the reservation their language and traditions. If he gave me the ok to claim my native roots, I'm going to claim them.




 

[cordex]

This sad little lizard told me that he was a brontosaurus on his mother's side. I did not laugh; people who boast of ancestry often have little else to sustain them. Humoring them costs nothing and adds happiness in a world in which happiness is always in short supply.
-- Lazarus Long

I was under the impression that tribes tended to be pretty protective of their membership and require a hell of a lot more than “one drop” or permission from a random dude at a conference to allow you to be part of the tribe. My wife has considerably more native blood than you do.  Her ancestors would have come out of Oklahoma in the 1870s so could be any of a bunch of tribes. Which tribes would allow her and my kids to join?  I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t be allowed, but at the one drop level I bet even I could find an ancestor.

[charby]

The supreme court ruling is immaterial to your personal beliefs or Ben and Jerry's corporate beliefs.  If you don't believe you live on stolen property then you can point to your clear title and say that you don't personally owe previous occupants of that land anything.  If you do believe you live on stolen property which you bought knowing it was stolen then you have a clear moral path and it is not to wait for someone else to reimburse you.  Are you going to act or do you just like virtue-signaling with empty words?

Why do you want me to say give it back? I haven't said give any land back. I have said the federal government should compensate the indigenous people for taking of their resources and property.

You have no ancestral claim to the land, you have no association with the tribes that you say are the rightful owners of your land, your ancestors didn't even live within 2,000 miles of your home, and your ancestral lands (whether they be in the Caribbean or Central America) aren't even part of the USA?  Given your situation I don't think you'd have any tribal claim to your home in Iowa whatsoever.  I have no doubt that like every human on earth you have some ancestors who were enslaved, displaced, and mistreated.  You'd have to take up your complaints with Europe and the government of whatever island or nation your distant native ancestors came from.

Since you lack proof of lineal descent (to the point of not knowing whether you were from the Caribbean or Central America), blood quantum, or cultural/community involvement you'd have a hell of a hard time convincing them that you should be party to their reparations.  Tribes tend to be pretty racially exclusive, and given your history you're almost certainly not pure blooded enough to be considered a member of any tribe.  My wife can show at least 1/16th which gets her beautiful skin and high cheekbones but zero tribal affiliation.

You are correct, I wouldn't get sh*t. I was trying to make a joke that failed.

The quantum blood was created to limit the rights of the natives at first by the government, later it was used by the government to limit benefits to the natives. Weird how it wasn't applied to African decedents, in the same way, figuring the reservations and treaties were in full swing before and after the US Civil War.

Taino/Arawak is one of the DNA markers I have, I have checked at the US doesn't even recognize them as a nation. Native Puerto Ricans and other islands are the Taino people, US doesn't recognize any indigenous people outside of the lower 48 or Alaska. I found out over lunch that a movement was made several years ago to catalog all the people who are US citizens with known Taino ancestry or DNA and to petition the US Government to recognize them as a indigenous nation. It just sort of fizzled out. I did find it cool that they were trying to find people with Taino DNA since many of them were enslaved back to Europe and their descendants returned to NA as mixed heritage. Christopher Columbus is reported to have to enslaved 550 of them and brought 350 of them back to Spain to be sold as slaves, 200 or so died at sea.

I figured the Aztec/Mayan DNA markers are out because of being located in Mexico and other Central American countries.  No, I am not Mexican, ancestors left there, but never returned to stay.

[charby]

This sad little lizard told me that he was a brontosaurus on his mother's side. I did not laugh; people who boast of ancestry often have little else to sustain them. Humoring them costs nothing and adds happiness in a world in which happiness is always in short supply.
-- Lazarus Long

I was under the impression that tribes tended to be pretty protective of their membership and require a hell of a lot more than “one drop” or permission from a random dude at a conference to allow you to be part of the tribe. My wife has considerably more native blood than you do.  Her ancestors would have come out of Oklahoma in the 1870s so could be any of a bunch of tribes. Which tribes would allow her and my kids to join?  I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t be allowed, but at the one drop level I bet even I could find an ancestor.

I was replying to Ben, not you. I replied to your post in a different reply.

[cordex]

Why do you want me to say give it back? I haven't said give any land back. I have said the federal government should compensate the indigenous people for taking of their resources and property.

Because you keep saying how you bought and live on stolen land, but your unwillingness to act on that indicates you don’t really believe that it is stolen.

Just like Ben & Jerry’s could give up their land to the tribes that historically lived there, but they won’t because it is all empty words.

[charby]

Because you keep saying how you bought and live on stolen land, but your unwillingness to act on that indicates you don’t really believe that it is stolen.

Just like Ben & Jerry’s could give up their land to the tribes that historically lived there, but they won’t because it is all empty words.

Seriously, does everything have to be black and white to you?

Isn't it just fine to recognize that the history we are taught to believe is different than it really was?

[Perd Hapley]

Isn't it just fine to recognize that the history we are taught to believe is different than it really was?

I think so, as long as we realize that a lot of the history people believe is not really taught; just pieced together from random scraps of things they've heard, read, assumed, and half-remembered from somewhere.

And obviously, "history" (what actually happened), and "history" (what is recorded and passed on about what happened), will always be two different things, just because we can't know or understand everything about the past.

[230RN]

Insanity cannot be logically countered.

It's nearly impossible to reason a person out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

My observation is that most of the Left's "reasoning" only involves a thin veneer of the top layer of wish-fulfillment without delving any deeper into more realistic consequences.

Just a general observation, subject to confirmation.

"I want a cookie."

Conclusion:

"Therefore, give me one."

Terry, 230RN

[Ben]

I met a Lakota man at a conference pre Covid (also pre DNA tests), he asked me if I was Native, I said a little bit, not sure how much. He replied, claim it, one drop if native blood makes you native.

Lakota man. That's some real scienceymcscience right there.

It baffles me that people want to Rachel Dolezal themselves with race infatuation to the point that they want to claim to be something that is a miniscule part of their genetic makeup. One percent indian, and you want to put on buckskins, dance around going "woo woo woo" and try to make it rain. You're 99% other stuff, and having mixed genetics could be argued to make one healthier and less susceptible to many genetically inherited diseases.

If you want to claim to be something, claim to be whatever your DNA test says you're the most of, not the least of. My DNA ancestry says that I'm 0.2% Senegambian & Guinean and 93.4% Bavarian. I'm not grabbing a BLM flag and demanding reparations. I'm drinking beer, eating sausage, and making kraut jokes while wearing funny looking shorts with suspenders.

[HankB]

. . . One percent indian, and you want to put on buckskins, dance around going "woo woo woo" and try to make it rain . . .

No buckskins or rain dances for me - If I thought I had any Amerindian blood, I'd get a DNA test and see if it came from a tribe that had a profitable casino so I could claim a share of the profits. Woo woo woo indeed.   

[WLJ]

That's okay, just came across another YT video that claimed blacks were here first so we need to give the land back to them.
You can actually find people saying blacks were here first and that the slave trade and Indian stuff was a story created to cover up the fact that this land belongs to them. First found out about this stuff when I encountered a man preaching this stuff in a coffee shop. Starting searching the internet and yep, there's a movement and web sites devoted to pushing this.

[dogmush]

Hot Take:

If you need a DNA test to learn about some cultural ancestry of yours, then it's not your heritage, and attempts to make it so is just Cosplay.

[WLJ]

Hot Take:

If you need a DNA test to learn about some cultural ancestry of yours, then it's not your heritage, and attempts to make it so is just Cosplay.

As a side note when E.Warren "apologize" when her DNA tests came back if you listen to what she actually said she apologized for taking the test not for claiming she was Cherokee this whole time. Wonder how many caught that

[HeroHog]

I supposedly have a small bit of Cherokee and Choctaw in my family but it is WAY back and not worth "proving".