an "expanded interpretation of the Native American history of Philadelphia." The plan was "developed in consultations with the representatives of the indigenous nations of the Haudenosaunee, the Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe of Indians, the Shawnee Tribe, and the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma."
William Penn bought the land he turned into Pennsylvania, from not one, but three tribes due to the other 2 claiming the land was stolen from the initial tribe. So are we going to make it explicitly clear that the “Native Americans” were colonizers and savages?
You forgot cannibals. The only tribe of the east that weren't eaters of human flesh were the Cherokee. The rest didn't stop until the missionaries put a stop to it.
I don't know about all of them (haven't looked into it that much), but I do know that the Mohawks at a minimum practiced at least some cannibalism. And if one part of the Iroquois Confederacy is doing it, it's logical to assume that the other tribes were at least OK with it if not actively doing it themselves.
Like it or not the history of the world is full of people that were conquered by a stronger group. A simple study of world history will show one group conquering another. Heck, the history of North and South America is full of tribal groups conquering and taking over before Europeans arrived. I’ve heard hand wringing over the British conquering Shaka Zulu, but he was “colonizing” the local tribes and from what I hear was very cruel.
All this to say that I’m so tired of being ashamed of history. It is what it is. You don’t like it go find the perfect country
Penn didn’t even conquer anyone, in fact he did quite literally the opposite and even paid the original “owners” of the land who had it taken by force from another tribe. Quaker history is quite unimpeachable when it comes to pacifism.
Oh yea, I remember learning about that in school. I just meant overall. It just shows their ignorance of history. Like the moronic blm protestors tearing down the Lincoln statue, Frederick Douglas statue, and the vandalization of that memorial for that black civil war regiment in Massachusetts.
I guess if I were to try to explain that about Penn they would just chant about being on stolen land
Of course, it’s never about reality it’s just about destroying western culture. Everytime I hear about “native” lands I always ask were they the first there? The answer every single time is no, but it isn’t about who originally “owned” the land, it’s about taking it away from western civilization. This is also why I just call Africans and “native Americans” colonizers because 1. It pisses them off and 2. It’s a completely accurate use of the term.
I remember some article talking about giving back the land Mt Rushmore is on to the Sioux. Of course in the comments there were people cheering on the article and then a guy who was full blooded Sioux mentioned that the Sioux had conquered another tribe that had been on that land and if you go back thousands of years you’ll find one tribe conquering another. The response he got was “well the Sioux didn’t have the same reach and power of the American govt”.
American history alone is basically an infinite list of Natives warring and stealing from each other so much that by the time the Europeans arrived the losing tribes were rushing to enlist their help to fucking destroy the bigger ones.
Any tribe you can name is only that way because they were imperialist conquerors who absolutely did worse things to other Indians than most Americans ever did. They didn't invent scalping and other horrors when the Wild West came around, that had plenty history.
They all thought it would be beneficial to them, and for a long time it was through trade and local treaties. The just rapid expansion of the US, and its constant wars, just made those benefits slowly degrade until things got pretty bad.
The Aztecs were just unique in being so awful that everyone was happier being conquered than having to deal with them.
They LOVED trading cheap and easy to steal skins of inedible non-humans for metal trinkets.
All the fuckers who whine about not still being in the stone age are welcome to strip naked and knap them some stone in the boreal forest. Preferably in February.
The Brits allowed the River Raisin massacre (War of 1812) to happen because their injun allies threatened to take their manpower elsewhere if they weren't allowed to do whatever they wanted ... which included scalping, and killing/enslaving little kids.
Everytime an Indian speaks, I just move slightly more into the "should have just finished the job" category.
Considering the state of most reservations, it would probably be the kinder action even. Because the only types of Indians left are broken alcoholics and insanely rich Grifters/Casino owners.
This is how the neomarxists can destroy White man's history on the sly. If they can't tear down a statue during a riot, they will use the man's background through a Presentist lens as an excuse to remove statues. In this instance, they don't even have that excuse so they're using their made-up versions of Native American history as an excuse to erase the land that William Penn got by fair means.
I love how this virtue signaling stunt could have easily been done without dismantling more of our culture and history, but we all know that's the actual point.
William Penn bought the land he turned into Pennsylvania, from not one, but three tribes due to the other 2 claiming the land was stolen from the initial tribe. So are we going to make it explicitly clear that the “Native Americans” were colonizers and savages?
You forgot cannibals. The only tribe of the east that weren't eaters of human flesh were the Cherokee. The rest didn't stop until the missionaries put a stop to it.
I've never heard of this before.
I don't know about all of them (haven't looked into it that much), but I do know that the Mohawks at a minimum practiced at least some cannibalism. And if one part of the Iroquois Confederacy is doing it, it's logical to assume that the other tribes were at least OK with it if not actively doing it themselves.
Interesting. Navajo hold that as a massive Taboo.
Why would you? Same thing as Haiti. It'd stop the pity party if normies knew they were people eaters.
Like it or not the history of the world is full of people that were conquered by a stronger group. A simple study of world history will show one group conquering another. Heck, the history of North and South America is full of tribal groups conquering and taking over before Europeans arrived. I’ve heard hand wringing over the British conquering Shaka Zulu, but he was “colonizing” the local tribes and from what I hear was very cruel.
All this to say that I’m so tired of being ashamed of history. It is what it is. You don’t like it go find the perfect country
Penn didn’t even conquer anyone, in fact he did quite literally the opposite and even paid the original “owners” of the land who had it taken by force from another tribe. Quaker history is quite unimpeachable when it comes to pacifism.
Oh yea, I remember learning about that in school. I just meant overall. It just shows their ignorance of history. Like the moronic blm protestors tearing down the Lincoln statue, Frederick Douglas statue, and the vandalization of that memorial for that black civil war regiment in Massachusetts.
I guess if I were to try to explain that about Penn they would just chant about being on stolen land
Of course, it’s never about reality it’s just about destroying western culture. Everytime I hear about “native” lands I always ask were they the first there? The answer every single time is no, but it isn’t about who originally “owned” the land, it’s about taking it away from western civilization. This is also why I just call Africans and “native Americans” colonizers because 1. It pisses them off and 2. It’s a completely accurate use of the term.
True. That term could be used for everyone
eh, tearing down lincoln statues is based.
I remember some article talking about giving back the land Mt Rushmore is on to the Sioux. Of course in the comments there were people cheering on the article and then a guy who was full blooded Sioux mentioned that the Sioux had conquered another tribe that had been on that land and if you go back thousands of years you’ll find one tribe conquering another. The response he got was “well the Sioux didn’t have the same reach and power of the American govt”.
American history alone is basically an infinite list of Natives warring and stealing from each other so much that by the time the Europeans arrived the losing tribes were rushing to enlist their help to fucking destroy the bigger ones.
Any tribe you can name is only that way because they were imperialist conquerors who absolutely did worse things to other Indians than most Americans ever did. They didn't invent scalping and other horrors when the Wild West came around, that had plenty history.
Then you had the tribes who helped Europeans because it was beneficial for them. Like the neighboring tribes helping the Spanish against the Aztecs
They all thought it would be beneficial to them, and for a long time it was through trade and local treaties. The just rapid expansion of the US, and its constant wars, just made those benefits slowly degrade until things got pretty bad.
The Aztecs were just unique in being so awful that everyone was happier being conquered than having to deal with them.
They LOVED trading cheap and easy to steal skins of inedible non-humans for metal trinkets.
All the fuckers who whine about not still being in the stone age are welcome to strip naked and knap them some stone in the boreal forest. Preferably in February.
The Brits allowed the River Raisin massacre (War of 1812) to happen because their injun allies threatened to take their manpower elsewhere if they weren't allowed to do whatever they wanted ... which included scalping, and killing/enslaving little kids.
That’s what’s happening here, too.
True, and it makes me very sad
The chucklefucks doing this aren't physically stronger like those of the past. They're just not getting the pushback they should be.
Everytime an Indian speaks, I just move slightly more into the "should have just finished the job" category.
Considering the state of most reservations, it would probably be the kinder action even. Because the only types of Indians left are broken alcoholics and insanely rich Grifters/Casino owners.
it's not yours to remove
If he can't get it legally removed, he'll just have his BLM, Antifa, or Arab "mostly peaceful protestors" do it for him.
This is how the neomarxists can destroy White man's history on the sly. If they can't tear down a statue during a riot, they will use the man's background through a Presentist lens as an excuse to remove statues. In this instance, they don't even have that excuse so they're using their made-up versions of Native American history as an excuse to erase the land that William Penn got by fair means.
I love how this virtue signaling stunt could have easily been done without dismantling more of our culture and history, but we all know that's the actual point.