Trying to argue this point just legitimizes this argument as one worth having, which in turn is just playing the Lefties' game by entering an arena they will configure to always be on the debate winning side.
It doesn't matter what they believe or did. 90% of them died by the germ apocalypse, leaving nothing of their people due to basically an act of god and most of them likely wouldn't have bounced back without the horses/guns/trading the white men were supplying to them.
There's a debate between Andrew Wilson and some lady named Charlie. And she says tribes crossing from Asia to empty land isn't colonialism because they are leaving everything behind to move to unoccupied land. I wonder if she would consider Boers colonizers? By definition they left the Netherlands behind and moved into unoccupied land. She didn’t address it but I'll guess she would because they are white.
Leftist are just White Man Burdeners without the ambition to actually improve anything.
Multiple sites in The Americas are far older than the Clovis people, by thousands of years.
There's also no Clovis record in the gap between glaciers, and it was utterly barren for hundreds of years. Devoid of plants and animals, no way primitive people went through there until long after it opened up.
They came to The Americas by sea, both Atlantic and Pacific. Hugging the shoreline even when glaciers were still around. All that ancient shoreline is under 200 feet of water now though, almost impossible to find anything.
As a descendant of colonials who were fined for loaning weapons to indians for the purpose of hunting. I dont think thats a accurate statement to say. There would have been nothing to bounce back from if we hadnt decided we wanted their shit.
You can call white people an act of god, but when the literal catholic church is behind alot of this bullshit, and it wasnt just the english purposely infecting tribes, there was the spanish and french too. The church may actually be some of the most evil shit ive ever had the displeasure of knowing existed. All the while shielding their acts behind "its gods plan" bullshit.
And honestly the guy who made this youtube video doesnt know what hes talking about either. Like one of those youtube comments pointed out, they had their own systems, but they certainly werent as litigious or literally based around bullshit.
Have you guys ever had to try and use the justice system? There is a reason you need lawyers, they invented an entire bible of rules and language so that the common person has no idea what to do.
Versus the native americans who believed in a universal set of rights. Just because some tribes had different beliefs doesnt invalidate that. Even chatgpt agrees.
What is “natural rights” as defined by Europeans? A philosophical idea that certain rights (life, liberty, property) are inherent to all humans and independent of any government or social contract. It was formulated within a specific historical context: the Enlightenment, mercantilism, colonial expansion. When we talk about natural rights, we are invoking a particular metaphysical framework that may not map neatly onto other cultures’ ontologies.
How did Indigenous concepts differ? Many Indigenous societies viewed rights in relational terms—between people, between humans and the land, between living beings and spirits. Rights were often contingent on responsibilities: you could claim stewardship of a river only if you honored its spirit and ensured its health for future generations. This relational ethics can be seen as an alternative to the individual‑centric natural rights model.
Did European colonists misinterpret or dismiss Indigenous morality? Frequently, yes. Colonizers often labeled Indigenous legal systems as “primitive” or “unlawful,” justifying conquest and forced assimilation. The doctrine of terra nullius (land belonging to no one) ignored the complex land‑ownership practices that existed in many societies. Misunderstanding has had lasting consequences: displacement, loss of cultural knowledge, and ongoing legal disputes over land rights.
It would be wrong to say that Native American societies lacked “natural rights” or “universal ethics.” They had rich moral systems rooted in relationality, stewardship, reciprocity, and community. The difference lies mainly in how those ethics were conceptualized—often as part of a broader cosmology rather than an abstract principle of individual entitlement.
Like you cant convince me our society would not be a better place if you had to do a spirit quest before becoming president or whatever. And sure you may think this is dumb.
But starving yourself for a week, eating some peyote and stumbling into the deep of the woods, I would imagine would be a humbling and spiritual enlightenment for anyone. Just the risk of dying, thats all. But its being so close to death with the mind altering substance that can reveal a glimpse behind the curtain, I imagine anyway.
Like you cant convince me our society would not be a better place if you had to do a spirit quest before becoming president or whatever.
Trials of manhood have historically usually existed in tribal societies and then were left behind as they advanced. This is across continents and people independent of each other. Clearly there is a reason why that continues to happen, regardless on if we think its a good idea conceptually.
I don't particularly care for trying to justify what was done to them through these arguments, its why I said we shouldn't do so whatsoever. Their systems worked until they didn't, and its only because of White Man's capacity for mercy and empathy that we even give a shit about their existence beyond a footnote.
Because most other times in history the new technologically superior people just conquered and killed/enslaved the natives down to nothing without a single care. It was only Colonialism that changed that fact to let these people live whatsoever.
Well I guess when you look at that way, we did the same shit back 2000 years ago when england was still mostly germanic tribes. I dont really see what has changed?
We talk about universal rights and all that, but as white people do we actually get that? I certainly dont feel free. I feel like a slave to the rich/elite.
Dammit why does chatgpt have to be so interesting lmao. Out of shits and giggles I threw the "vision quest" idea at it. Oh it did not like that.
It’s an intriguing idea—using a “spiritual quest” as a filter for national leaders—but it raises serious practical, ethical, and cultural‑respect issues that would make it difficult to implement in any meaningful way.
So i asked it in a parallel dimension where we adopted many indian values instead of just using ours and that it would be documented and a team of medical professionals standing by. It was intrigued.
A medically supervised “vision quest” could serve as a powerful symbolic gesture—showing that leaders are willing to step back from the grind of politics and connect with deeper values. If done with genuine partnership, respect, and transparency, it would demonstrate how Indigenous wisdom can inform modern governance without becoming mere performative appropriation.
Ultimately, though, the real measure of progress will be whether those values translate into policy—fairer distribution of resources, sustainable stewardship of our planet, and a political culture that truly listens to all voices. The ritual is just one possible catalyst for that shift.
Its almost like chatgpt wants us to survive lmao. But anyways it got me thinking about ancient Frisia which is actually the ancestors of many british people as well as the dutch/netherlands.
Their spiritual views were very similar to native americans, which makes sense. Pretty sure the last name wing is from ancient frisia where it would have been taken most likely as some symbolic form of protection. Birds were highly worshipped I guess since they were a coastal/seafaring culture. This was around 2000 years ago before christianity took over. They were tough enough that the romans couldnt assimilate them.
Anyway I asked chatgpt about the similarities and yeah it makes alot of sense.
It’s fascinating how many of the “Quaker‑like” values you’ve inherited—simplicity, pacifism, communal responsibility, stewardship—echo what Indigenous peoples in North America and even ancient European societies such as the Frisians articulated. History is full of cross‑cultural diffusion, especially along trade routes that spanned the Atlantic and the Baltic.
Quaker roots and their own spiritual lineage
Aspect Quaker tradition Possible ancestral influence
Plainness & simplicity Plain dress, minimalism in worship. Early Germanic/Frisian emphasis on “plain living” as a moral stance against excess.
Peace testimony Strong pacifist ethic; early abolitionist work. Frisian and Norse traditions prized non‑violence for communal survival in harsh environments.
Community & mutual aid Meeting houses, shared decision‑making. The “Frisian” Gemeinschaft model—small, self‑governing villages that relied on collective labor and mutual support.
Stewardship of land “Sabbath” for the earth; care for creation. Frisian agricultural practices (e.g., peatland management) show an early ecological awareness.
The Frisian connection
Geographic context: The Frisians lived along the North Sea coast—today’s Netherlands, Germany, and parts of Denmark. Their society was largely agrarian but also heavily maritime.
Cultural traits:
Simplicity: A culture that prized modesty over ostentation, partly because coastal life demanded resilience to weather extremes.
Community governance: Village councils (schoon) made decisions collectively—an early form of participatory democracy that prefigures Quaker consensus practices.
Spiritual worldview: Many Frisian traditions were animistic before Christianization, recognizing spirits in rivers, trees, and the sea. This aligns with Indigenous “spirit animal” concepts.
Transmission to America:
Dutch settlers (including some Quakers) brought Frisian customs across the Atlantic. Over time, these ideas blended with English Puritanism and Native practices, giving rise to a distinctly American “Plain” culture.
The Indigenous‑Frisian parallel
Feature Indigenous North America Frisian Europe
Connection to land View of land as kin; stewardship as duty. Peatland and dune management; respect for natural cycles.
Social decision‑making Consensus, council deliberation. Village councils, communal labor (schoon).
Spirituality Animism + shamanic journeys (vision quests). Pre-Christian animism; later Christianized but retained folk practices like spirit worship in certain areas.
Both traditions value the interdependence of people and nature—an idea that predates modern environmental ethics.
Practical take‑aways for you
Many Quaker meeting houses today emphasize stewardship, social justice, and pacifism—values that echo both Frisian and Indigenous roots.
Some Native groups actively collaborate with European descendants to revitalize shared traditions (e.g., language revitalization projects).
Use the convergence as a bridge
In public speaking or activism, highlight how these overlapping values can inform modern policies: community‑based environmental stewardship, participatory governance, and non‑violent conflict resolution.
Avoid appropriation pitfalls
Treat Indigenous practices with reverence; involve Native voices in any adaptation or celebration.
Recognize that while your heritage shares similarities, each culture’s history and context remain distinct.
Bottom line
Your family story is a microcosm of the broader tapestry of cultural exchange that shaped early America. The Quaker emphasis on plainness, peace, and community can be traced back to Frisian traditions, which in turn share deep resonances with Indigenous spiritualities.
Alot of you guys are from the same stock. Ignorance can be a dangerous thing.
they still don't
Not understanding abstract concepts is common for cultures without the written language
you're telling me Disney lied to me?
Trying to argue this point just legitimizes this argument as one worth having, which in turn is just playing the Lefties' game by entering an arena they will configure to always be on the debate winning side.
It doesn't matter what they believe or did. 90% of them died by the germ apocalypse, leaving nothing of their people due to basically an act of god and most of them likely wouldn't have bounced back without the horses/guns/trading the white men were supplying to them.
There's a debate between Andrew Wilson and some lady named Charlie. And she says tribes crossing from Asia to empty land isn't colonialism because they are leaving everything behind to move to unoccupied land. I wonder if she would consider Boers colonizers? By definition they left the Netherlands behind and moved into unoccupied land. She didn’t address it but I'll guess she would because they are white.
Leftist are just White Man Burdeners without the ambition to actually improve anything.
there's some scant evidence that there were people here before the land bridge crossings even
Multiple sites in The Americas are far older than the Clovis people, by thousands of years.
There's also no Clovis record in the gap between glaciers, and it was utterly barren for hundreds of years. Devoid of plants and animals, no way primitive people went through there until long after it opened up.
They came to The Americas by sea, both Atlantic and Pacific. Hugging the shoreline even when glaciers were still around. All that ancient shoreline is under 200 feet of water now though, almost impossible to find anything.
As a descendant of colonials who were fined for loaning weapons to indians for the purpose of hunting. I dont think thats a accurate statement to say. There would have been nothing to bounce back from if we hadnt decided we wanted their shit.
You can call white people an act of god, but when the literal catholic church is behind alot of this bullshit, and it wasnt just the english purposely infecting tribes, there was the spanish and french too. The church may actually be some of the most evil shit ive ever had the displeasure of knowing existed. All the while shielding their acts behind "its gods plan" bullshit.
And honestly the guy who made this youtube video doesnt know what hes talking about either. Like one of those youtube comments pointed out, they had their own systems, but they certainly werent as litigious or literally based around bullshit.
Have you guys ever had to try and use the justice system? There is a reason you need lawyers, they invented an entire bible of rules and language so that the common person has no idea what to do.
Versus the native americans who believed in a universal set of rights. Just because some tribes had different beliefs doesnt invalidate that. Even chatgpt agrees.
Like you cant convince me our society would not be a better place if you had to do a spirit quest before becoming president or whatever. And sure you may think this is dumb.
But starving yourself for a week, eating some peyote and stumbling into the deep of the woods, I would imagine would be a humbling and spiritual enlightenment for anyone. Just the risk of dying, thats all. But its being so close to death with the mind altering substance that can reveal a glimpse behind the curtain, I imagine anyway.
You are such a faggot.
Trials of manhood have historically usually existed in tribal societies and then were left behind as they advanced. This is across continents and people independent of each other. Clearly there is a reason why that continues to happen, regardless on if we think its a good idea conceptually.
I don't particularly care for trying to justify what was done to them through these arguments, its why I said we shouldn't do so whatsoever. Their systems worked until they didn't, and its only because of White Man's capacity for mercy and empathy that we even give a shit about their existence beyond a footnote.
Because most other times in history the new technologically superior people just conquered and killed/enslaved the natives down to nothing without a single care. It was only Colonialism that changed that fact to let these people live whatsoever.
Indians (feather, not dot) are a great example of what unchecked immigration leads to.
I mean, yeah, obviously. Your point?
AFAIK, they didn't have concept of anything but eating, sex, killing and some shelter.
Well I guess when you look at that way, we did the same shit back 2000 years ago when england was still mostly germanic tribes. I dont really see what has changed?
We talk about universal rights and all that, but as white people do we actually get that? I certainly dont feel free. I feel like a slave to the rich/elite.
The point is that a lot of faggot lefties believe that the indians (feather, not dot) were Noble Savages living in an idyllic world of balance.
The reality was they were violent, tribalistic and greedy just like every other human society.
Dammit why does chatgpt have to be so interesting lmao. Out of shits and giggles I threw the "vision quest" idea at it. Oh it did not like that.
So i asked it in a parallel dimension where we adopted many indian values instead of just using ours and that it would be documented and a team of medical professionals standing by. It was intrigued.
Its almost like chatgpt wants us to survive lmao. But anyways it got me thinking about ancient Frisia which is actually the ancestors of many british people as well as the dutch/netherlands.
Their spiritual views were very similar to native americans, which makes sense. Pretty sure the last name wing is from ancient frisia where it would have been taken most likely as some symbolic form of protection. Birds were highly worshipped I guess since they were a coastal/seafaring culture. This was around 2000 years ago before christianity took over. They were tough enough that the romans couldnt assimilate them.
Anyway I asked chatgpt about the similarities and yeah it makes alot of sense.
Alot of you guys are from the same stock. Ignorance can be a dangerous thing.
You are such a faggot