-
You asked and we delivered! AMPReviews now provides the option to upgrade to VIP access via paid subscription as an alternative to writing your own reviews. VIP Access allows you to read all the hidden content within member-submitted reviews AND gives access to private VIP-only forums in each city. You can upgrade your account INSTANTLY by visiting the Account Upgrades page in your own user profile and using a valid credit card to purchase a subscription. You can get to this page by clicking the link in any review, by clicking the red "See the Details Now" banner on the home page, and by clicking the Purchase Private Details link in the navbar at the top of every page
Reparations
- Thread starter Nicksuperlover
- Start date
- Status
Here's how it goes:
1 - We give "reparations" to the current generation of Victim Group X
2 - Current members of VGX mostly squander that windfall within 2-10 years. Not all, but most (over 90%)
3 - Next generation of VGX comes of age and wants to know where its reparations are. I'm guessing they won't be satisfied with "we gave it to your parents"
4 - Wash, rinse and repeat
Of course, the real endgame is to get a perpetual Gov stipend for being a member of VGX.
1 - We give "reparations" to the current generation of Victim Group X
2 - Current members of VGX mostly squander that windfall within 2-10 years. Not all, but most (over 90%)
3 - Next generation of VGX comes of age and wants to know where its reparations are. I'm guessing they won't be satisfied with "we gave it to your parents"
4 - Wash, rinse and repeat
Of course, the real endgame is to get a perpetual Gov stipend for being a member of VGX.
The conquest ethic has been universal throughout history. Pretty much everyone practiced it. Including the native americans. Not justifying it, just pointing out the obvious. The native americans obtained land by stealing it from other tribes. Plunder and conquest---as I said this was the state of the world back then. They were no less guilty than the europeans as far as obtaining land by conquest. So to say they were the 'rightful owners' of the land is not exactly historically accurate. Peace and restitution were made and yet still people want to dredge up one-sided ancient history to make it seem like the concept of plunder and land-grabbing began and ended with the Spanish and Portuguese's arrival here in 1492.
I have a difficult time understanding what the conquest events pre-Columbus, or Spanish, etc., have to do with the current US government honoring treaties it wrote and signed, especially when they did the coercing of signatures.
As to human trafficking, the fact it has been around a long time makes it OK? Slavery existed for a long time and is still around today, so should we embrace it? Small pox? Robbery and murder back to biblical times. Not quite sure I get you point on that.
As to human trafficking, the fact it has been around a long time makes it OK? Slavery existed for a long time and is still around today, so should we embrace it? Small pox? Robbery and murder back to biblical times. Not quite sure I get you point on that.
Theft requires that someone legitimately owns something so that it is possible for someone to illegitimately take it. If I steal your tv and it turns out it wasn't your tv to begin with because you stole it from someone else yourself...yes I have committed theft, but not against YOU, but the person that actually OWNS the tv.
Getting the picture? It's a complex topic because to begin with---the native indians had no concept of property rights. Their idea was that no one actuall;y OWNS land---that land was the common property of ALL.
Getting the picture? It's a complex topic because to begin with---the native indians had no concept of property rights. Their idea was that no one actuall;y OWNS land---that land was the common property of ALL.
. Wow you really are a fox News groupie huh?? People have been enslaving people since before the Egyptian times.
However the Native Americans taking land from each other is one thing. They are from here. It's like The Aztecs and Mayans fighting over a land that is near them or theirs. The British coming from a far away land and stealing it via diseases spread and brute force is a whole different type of land stealing.
It is what it is. Europe has been doing this since Rome. This is how they have most of their wealth. However let's not act like Indegenous people fighting amonsgt themselves is the same as Europeans coming in and stealing from other countries.
Whitey is the original gangster. It would be nice if he just admitted it smh.
However the Native Americans taking land from each other is one thing. They are from here. It's like The Aztecs and Mayans fighting over a land that is near them or theirs. The British coming from a far away land and stealing it via diseases spread and brute force is a whole different type of land stealing.
It is what it is. Europe has been doing this since Rome. This is how they have most of their wealth. However let's not act like Indegenous people fighting amonsgt themselves is the same as Europeans coming in and stealing from other countries.
Whitey is the original gangster. It would be nice if he just admitted it smh.
The truth has nothing to do with whether Fox News exists or not. It's a cute strawman, but has nothing to do with anything.
You really think Europe and Europe alone specialized in the conquest ethic? Historically there are examples to the contrary all over the place. Learn some history and you will find out native Indians of the america's were no different in this regard. Theft is theft.
You really think Europe and Europe alone specialized in the conquest ethic? Historically there are examples to the contrary all over the place. Learn some history and you will find out native Indians of the america's were no different in this regard. Theft is theft.
Koon, you are so predictable and so utterly a RWW.
Let me translate your whole argument:
1. Nothing was legal until a White Redneck (preferably male) took it.
2. From that moment on, it is legally his no matter what happened before. "It's mine! I got it! Game over!"
3. Any theft, threats, violence or murder used by him to acquire it is absolved of any guilt--because those other guys he took it from didn't have proper legal documents written in a European language. Taking it from an Injin isn't theft. Germ warfare isn't wrong so long as your side uses it. A paper signed at gunpoint so that women an children will be allowed to have the food back that they grew is a proper negotiating tactic.
There is little sense in trying to discuss the topic with you because you truly don't see anything wrong with wiping out up to 95% of a population and kicking the remainder off their lands because you want it.
And anyone who disagrees with your world view is called a White liberal, whether they are or not.
Why should I be surprised by your positions?
PS: You still have not addressed why you think the US government has any moral right not to abide by treaties they signed without being coerced.
Let me translate your whole argument:
1. Nothing was legal until a White Redneck (preferably male) took it.
2. From that moment on, it is legally his no matter what happened before. "It's mine! I got it! Game over!"
3. Any theft, threats, violence or murder used by him to acquire it is absolved of any guilt--because those other guys he took it from didn't have proper legal documents written in a European language. Taking it from an Injin isn't theft. Germ warfare isn't wrong so long as your side uses it. A paper signed at gunpoint so that women an children will be allowed to have the food back that they grew is a proper negotiating tactic.
There is little sense in trying to discuss the topic with you because you truly don't see anything wrong with wiping out up to 95% of a population and kicking the remainder off their lands because you want it.
And anyone who disagrees with your world view is called a White liberal, whether they are or not.
Why should I be surprised by your positions?
PS: You still have not addressed why you think the US government has any moral right not to abide by treaties they signed without being coerced.
Beg to differ here. Almost all First World countries (including the US, UK, France, Germany, and Japan) have their wealth because of their laws, work ethic and intellectual property (e.g., stuff they invented). Having all three of these (the Big Three) is far more important than precious metals, fertile land or other natural resources. Japan is a textbook example here: they are very rich, yet has close to zilch in terms of natural resources. Countries in Africa and South America have tons of natural resources and are poor. The Saudis are currently rich because of their oil. Once their oil runs out, I give them 20-50 years before they piss away their wealth. Other countries like Russia, China and India have plenty of brain power, but are fundamentally corrupt and can't effectively leverage it. You can also say that the Big Three enabled a country like Britain to conquer most of the known world with a tiny fraction of the population.
Yes the wealth countries such as the USA and England have is because of what you say. However many European countries helped increase their wealth and have a good head start of other countries because of the natural resources and land they took from other countries.
Agreed England is a tiny country compared to other larger countries. It is impressive what they accomplished. That being said they were one of the most evil countries and empires ever.
Agreed England is a tiny country compared to other larger countries. It is impressive what they accomplished. That being said they were one of the most evil countries and empires ever.
The English just like the Spaniards when they came to America all of America North and South brought with them diseases that the Native Americans had never encountered and it killed many of the Native Americans.
Lol you clearly didn't read when i said since before Egyptian times a nod to Egypt having slaves. However European countries captured land far more than them. Only comparison is the Mongolians besides them no other country comes close to the land grabbing and natural resources stealing the Europeans specialized in.
Lol you clearly didn't read when i said since before Egyptian times a nod to Egypt having slaves. However European countries captured land far more than them. Only comparison is the Mongolians besides them no other country comes close to the land grabbing and natural resources stealing the Europeans specialized in.
- Status