ND PC Police

[rgc7]

Lol. Settlers were an invading force on indigenous people's land. That is part of taking land away from people.

Very true ! Here is a question for you ? Since the land that you are living on was confiscated by force
Fron the Native Americans. how can you live on land that was immorally confiscated
From other people ? Does that not implicate you in the crime ? Are you not morally obligated to return the
Property back to its original owner ?

 

[Patriot82]

Down in Texas they had Comanches that were in fact cannibals that caught the Europeans walking across Texas, stripped the skin off of them while alive and roasted them for dinner.

The indians were still savages when the first Europeans arrived and later settled down. Nothing to do with the activist drum beater though.

 

[SALittleGiant513]

Very true ! Here is a question for you ? Since the land that you are living on was confiscated by force
Fron the Native Americans. how can you live on land that was immorally confiscated
From other people ? Does that not implicate you in the crime ? Are you not morally obligated to return the
Property back to its original owner ?

Since laws are constructs of society and no law in our society implicates a crime committed no. Additionally how would I be morally obligated to return something if the concept or legal ownership can only be observed within the context of a legal system which never recognized the ownership of indigenous people?

 

[rgc7]

Since laws are constructs of society and no law in our society implicates a crime committed no. Additionally how would I be morally obligated to return something if the concept or legal ownership can only be observed within the context of a legal system which never recognized the ownership of indigenous people?

Yes there is a higher law that you are holding Columbus and past people to ( they were also working under
The laws and rules of their times and countries ). You are holding them to the MORAL LAW !
My question to you was not about Contractual Laws, since your judgement of other people was based
Upon MORALITY, you were using the MORAL LAW.
While you certainly have contractual rights , since the land was confiscated immorally from the Indian
Tribes, They have the NORAL RIGHT to their land, and MORAL LAW requires you to return their land !

 

[theskibro]

More than 300 students, employees and alumni signed a letter alerting John Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame, they would continue protesting until the Christopher Columbus murals are removed.
So 300 out of 120,000 alumni object to the murals. Once again the minority PC police decide what is good for the majority of the folks.

F them

 

[ivan brunetti]

Down in Texas they had Comanches that were in fact cannibals that caught the Europeans walking across Texas, stripped the skin off of them while alive and roasted them for dinner.

The indians were still savages when the first Europeans arrived and later settled down. Nothing to do with the activist drum beater though.

I have news for you: the first Europeans in North America were also "savages".

 

[ThomasSowell]

Lol. Settlers were an invading force on indigenous people's land. That is part of taking land away from people.

They aren't indigenous to the United States of America
They literally crossed a land bridge
It is geographically and scientifically incorrect to say the Native Inupiats are indigenous
Why isn't this the "mind"set for the anti Israel leftists if you are going to revise linguistics and science
There's no such thing as Palestinian Arabs or Arabic Palestinians
Palestine = Philistine
The Philistines were Greeks from Crete
Not Arabic
At least be philosophically consistent in your revisions
Not to forget which cannibalistic vagabonding group would you say "owns" the *"land of immigrants"
The Cheyenne, the Pueblo ?
Tribes as mentioned above that literally enslaved each other if one was caught on their property, property aquired through non pacifistic aggressive actions.
Or is this only the "land of immigrants" when leftists purposely and mischievously use immigration and illegal immigration interchangeably or as synonyms.

 

[ThomasSowell]

I luv it when "people" or leftists attempt to play the game of moral superiority through euphemisms when it comes to human beings while labeling babies *fetuses to justify their genocide towards the most innocent of innocent human beings

* Fetus = a period of time not the absence of whether or not it's a human being

Sentience is a philosophical term not a scientific term
If sentience was a scientific term used to designate human being status then those with Alzheimers wouldn't be human beings and neither would be countless others with mental disorders

 

[ThomasSowell]

Not shocking jenkins did this
He's always been a coward towards the party and supreme leader/ayatollah hussein al-obama when they collectively attempted to unseat or usurp a democratically elected official = (Prime Minister of Israel) to appease his god Calypso louie farrakhan
We should have seen this coming
jenkins loves sheets when using them to cover statues then paintings to appease the unappeasable

 

[tbonesays]

I have a hard time banging my fists on the table about how “unfair” people are you cathokics and at the same time not feeling any empathy toward indigenous people.

Where is the lack of empathy for anyone or any group ? I clearly state that we honor flawed human beings For outstanding achievements , in Columbus’ Case it was for his being a great Navagator and explorer.
We could devote our time to a whole different argument as to the brutality of Columbus ,the Conquistadors, and all the settlers of North and South America against indigenous people.
While we are at it we can discuss the brutality of the indigenous people toward not only the settlers , but towards one another.
They also enslaved their enemies , burned people at the stake, held human sacrifices, etc, etc.
Two very different debates !

Every fact based account of these things involve the Europeans allying with one faction of the natives who had a grudge with the 'victim' faction. Of course that is a sample of just a few because why ruin a good protest with pesky facts?

 

[NotreDame du Lac]

Let’s just cover up anyone who’s ever done anything to offend someone. That way we won’t have to talk about it. You’re next. Sound good?

 

[SALittleGiant513]

They aren't indigenous to the United States of America
They literally crossed a land bridge
It is geographically and scientifically incorrect to say the Native Inupiats are indigenous
Why isn't this the "mind"set for the anti Israel leftists if you are going to revise linguistics and science
There's no such thing as Palestinian Arabs or Arabic Palestinians
Palestine = Philistine
The Philistines were Greeks from Crete
Not Arabic
At least be philosophically consistent in your revisions
Not to forget which cannibalistic vagabonding group would you say "owns" the *"land of immigrants"
The Cheyenne, the Pueblo ?
Tribes as mentioned above that literally enslaved each other if one was caught on their property, property aquired through non pacifistic aggressive actions.
Or is this only the "land of immigrants" when leftists purposely and mischievously use immigration and illegal immigration interchangeably or as synonyms.

Ok. So if the tribes/societies of individuals in place are not "indigenous" to North America it still doesn't negate the fact that they were settled on the land when settlers came in. Even if they do not have a higher claim of title over the land from an ethical stand point, the reality is from a macro or micro level, if you come and try to "settle" the land where groups of people are living to the exclusion of those people most aren't going to accept you.

 

[SALittleGiant513]

Yes there is a higher law that you are holding Columbus and past people to ( they were also working under
The laws and rules of their times and countries ). You are holding them to the MORAL LAW !
My question to you was not about Contractual Laws, since your judgement of other people was based
Upon MORALITY, you were using the MORAL LAW.
While you certainly have contractual rights , since the land was confiscated immorally from the Indian
Tribes, They have the NORAL RIGHT to their land, and MORAL LAW requires you to return their land !

No. I was laughing at you because you described attacks on European settlers who were trying to take land away from other people as atrocities. I am not sure that moral or ethical systems justify ownership because ownership is inherently a relative concept in that you can only have ownership in relation to others. I am not sure how the concept of ownership can be described from a normative standpoint. Additionally, while normative concepts such as morality apply to all, a groups understanding of morality and its application on society has to be viewed on a sliding scale.

 

[ThomasSowell]

Ok. So if the tribes/societies of individuals in place are not "indigenous" to North America it still doesn't negate the fact that they were settled on the land when settlers came in. Even if they do not have a higher claim of title over the land from an ethical stand point, the reality is from a macro or micro level, if you come and try to "settle" the land where groups of people are living to the exclusion of those people most aren't going to accept you.

So if the tribes/societies of individuals in place are not "indigenous" to North America it still doesn't negate the fact that they were settled on the land when settlers came in.
Which tribe which settlers
When the Hobi were enslaved by the usurping Pueblo or the usurping of the Cheyenne towards the Pueblo
Show me one native Asian tribe just one that didn't enforce their law of the jungle which was conquest onto a weaker unorganized native Asian tribe
Where is your bleeding heart towards these weaker native Asians vs other native Asians
How come you're marginalizing the injustices they had directed towards or on them through force to fit a revisionist narrative through identity politics while ignoring the fact the first enslavement of native Asians was by other native Asians
It is not only fallacious for you to gloss over this fact but intellectually dishonest


"Even if they do not have a higher claim of title over the land from an ethical stand point"

Who is they

What ethics are you referring to through hindsight
That it was not only morally obtuse but also ethically malfeasant for the local tribe from the commandment or direct order of the chief to enslave, murder, and rape other and weaker pacifistic native Asian men women and children
If you are saying it was I agree
But we must be careful when it comes to moral and ethic judgements of the past in the future or now since we are technically engaging in moral presumptuousness

the reality is from a macro or micro level,
I take issue with this consequentialist x+y= potato conundrum or false dichotomy and simple ignorance to the fact it wasn't always x vs y
Peaceful native Asians coexisted with the "settlers"
Your faulty logic or faulty (non) proof of assertion that it was always bloodshed is simply false

come and try to "settle" the land where groups of people are living to the exclusion of those people most aren't going to accept you.

Whom
Whom was "living to the exclusion of"
The Pueblo were living to the exclusion of the Cheyenne or Hopi
Yes of course they were "living to the ex..."
They didn't want to be enslaved raped or murdered

 

[ThomasSowell]

No. I was laughing at you because you described attacks on European settlers who were trying to take land away from other people as atrocities. I am not sure that moral or ethical systems justify ownership because ownership is inherently a relative concept in that you can only have ownership in relation to others. I am not sure how the concept of ownership can be described from a normative standpoint. Additionally, while normative concepts such as morality apply to all, a groups understanding of morality and its application on society has to be viewed on a sliding scale.

Hahaha duh ownership is subjective and a capitalistic swine construct where there is always a duh slave master complex said karl marx while having the all encompassing government enforce copyright laws

If ownership is the harbinger of sorrow or oppression of another
Share your credit card information, password and ssi number

"Anarchist" communalism popularized by hashhead kapo Jew karl marx is so hip unless their ownership is threatened and especially if one ignores he literally called for a dictatorship whether or not it was for the "worker"
Wonder what marx thought of this after the "workers" or reds slaughtered the greens real workers / peasantry before during and after the provisional government

 

[ThomasSowell]

Just stop leftists
The whole video was released
And by defending the We Wuz Kangz ists or "black Hebrews" using homophobic language towards minors just shows us how low the homosexuals are placed or forced on your indentity politics totem pole
Reminds me of the time you labeled George Zimmerman a "white latino"
Or
When you played stupid towards omar mateen's "theocratical" influence in which he engaged in not only a hate crime but mass slaughter

 

[ThomasSowell]

omar mateen = (((not all Muslims)))
micah xavier johnson = (((not all black lies matter cultists)))









Democrat andrew jackson's Trail of Tears and Indian Removal Act = (((all "settlers")))

Democrat franklin rosevelt's imprisonment of not only oriental looking Americans but German and Italian Americans = (((not all Democrats?)))

 

[Walruzz]

 

[hfhmilkman]

Folks should read Guns Germs and Steel. Regardless of the nature of the assimilation, technologically advanced cultures will assimilate less advanced cultures. It is inevitable. For those who do not like what happened, what is your solution. Give the land back? Most of those who declare themselves indigenous would not want to bother living the old ways. Perhaps they would still hunt and sing their songs which is fine. But none would turn their back on technology. Why? Because life in our modern world even with the appearance of inferior spirituality is superior to living on the edge. Life sans our technological toys was short and brutal for most.

 

[SALittleGiant513]

So if the tribes/societies of individuals in place are not "indigenous" to North America it still doesn't negate the fact that they were settled on the land when settlers came in.
Which tribe which settlers
When the Hobi were enslaved by the usurping Pueblo or the usurping of the Cheyenne towards the Pueblo
Show me one native Asian tribe just one that didn't enforce their law of the jungle which was conquest onto a weaker unorganized native Asian tribe
Where is your bleeding heart towards these weaker native Asians vs other native Asians
How come you're marginalizing the injustices they had directed towards or on them through force to fit a revisionist narrative through identity politics while ignoring the fact the first enslavement of native Asians was by other native Asians
It is not only fallacious for you to gloss over this fact but intellectually dishonest


"Even if they do not have a higher claim of title over the land from an ethical stand point"

Who is they

What ethics are you referring to through hindsight
That it was not only morally obtuse but also ethically malfeasant for the local tribe from the commandment or direct order of the chief to enslave, murder, and rape other and weaker pacifistic native Asian men women and children
If you are saying it was I agree
But we must be careful when it comes to moral and ethic judgements of the past in the future or now since we are technically engaging in moral presumptuousness

the reality is from a macro or micro level,
I take issue with this consequentialist x+y= potato conundrum or false dichotomy and simple ignorance to the fact it wasn't always x vs y
Peaceful native Asians coexisted with the "settlers"
Your faulty logic or faulty (non) proof of assertion that it was always bloodshed is simply false

come and try to "settle" the land where groups of people are living to the exclusion of those people most aren't going to accept you.

Whom
Whom was "living to the exclusion of"
The Pueblo were living to the exclusion of the Cheyenne or Hopi
Yes of course they were "living to the ex..."
They didn't want to be enslaved raped or murdered

What are you talking about man? Land and narrative go to the victors. I dont care who was first because there is nothing I can do about it but I am not going to pretend that Europeean settlers deserve a spot as "victims of atrocities" because the people living on the land they invaded fought back.

 

[SALittleGiant513]

Hahaha duh ownership is subjective and a capitalistic swine construct where there is always a duh slave master complex said karl marx while having the all encompassing government enforce copyright laws

If ownership is the harbinger of sorrow or oppression of another
Share your credit card information, password and ssi number

"Anarchist" communalism popularized by hashhead kapo Jew karl marx is so hip unless their ownership is threatened and especially if one ignores he literally called for a dictatorship whether or not it was for the "worker"
Wonder what marx thought of this after the "workers" or reds slaughtered the greens real workers / peasantry before during and after the provisional government

This is dumb and not responsive to anything. Someone is triggered as hell.

 

[d1042]

I have news for you: the first Europeans in North America were also "savages".

There were very few ‘protesters’ prior to the industrial revolution. Rebels, dissidents and/or malcontents rarely had a lenghy public life. It took actual courage and commitment then, unlike now where they alert media and lawyers to be witness to garner as much personal attention as pos#ible.
Example: Sunday Chuck Shumer; a self interested-self righteous scoundrel.

 

[Patrirish]

So should the university take down any American flags also since the US Cavalry killed more native Americans than Columbus did from the 1860's through the 1870's under orders from the American government.

Good point !

 

[rgc7]

No. I was laughing at you because you described attacks on European settlers who were trying to take land away from other people as atrocities. I am not sure that moral or ethical systems justify ownership because ownership is inherently a relative concept in that you can only have ownership in relation to others. I am not sure how the concept of ownership can be described from a normative standpoint. Additionally, while normative concepts such as morality apply to all, a groups understanding of morality and its application on society has to be viewed on a sliding scale.

Morality has to be applied and viewed on a sliding scale ? In other words the laws of Morality are subjective And relative , Rather than absolute ? Interesting concept ! You
Have your Sliding scale and I have mine and everyone in a society has his own Sliding Scale !
Very interesting !
Like W Clinton said “ is is not is “ “ Sex is not sex “ , so there are no absolutes.

 

[ThomasSowell]

What are you talking about man? Land and narrative go to the victors. I dont care who was first because there is nothing I can do about it but I am not going to pretend that Europeean settlers deserve a spot as "victims of atrocities" because the people living on the land they invaded fought back.

What land
What victor
The land the native Asians that was stolen by other native Asians
At least be logically consistent

You are not going to pretend...
Whom is asking you to
Please attack what I said not what you think I said
This is called attacking a straw man
Which is wrong

 

[ThomasSowell]

This is dumb and not responsive to anything. Someone is triggered as hell.

This is dumb = psychological projection
I agree 100% that it is dumb for the hate group We Wuz Kangz/ "Black Hebrews" to use homophobic slurs towards minors while taunting them then turning on the camera to record their reaction to their original unjustifiable macro aggressive behavior to falsely paint them as the aggressor

 

[ThomasSowell]

Their actions is morally and ethically reprehensible
Adopting your micro to macro what have you
The Catholic minors did nothing wrong and were attacked solely for their skin pigmentation

 

[ThomasSowell]

View embedded media

I don't understand this video or how come it was linked
Is this about shotgun joe biden taking a picture opportunity at the MLK Jr celebration with what hillary clinton called "super predators" (((young black men))) while out of one part of his mouth condemning the systematic judicial oppression within mandatory minimum federal sentencing laws yet ignoring the fact he's the orginial sponsor of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
Context is important when attempting to be comedic

 

[8th Man]

Their actions is morally and ethically reprehensible
Adopting your micro to macro what have you
The Catholic minors did nothing wrong and were attacked solely for their skin pigmentation

No way. Those little shits were just as guilty as those with whom they were trading insults.

The Cincinnati Archdiocese has already condemned the teens part in this idiocy.

Only 8chan idiots think they were minding their own business and got jumped by the mean lefties.

 

[8th Man]

This is dumb and not responsive to anything. Someone is triggered as hell.

His using "Jew" as a slur is a dead giveaway.

 

[ThomasSowell]

No way. Those little shits were just as guilty as those with whom they were trading insults.

The Cincinnati Archdiocese has already condemned the teens part in this idiocy.

Only 8chan idiots think they were minding their own business and got jumped by the mean lefties.

Before or after the enitre video was shown McFly

 

[ThomasSowell]

His using "Jew" as a slur is a dead giveaway.

Lol
You moron I am Jewish
I wasn't using it as a slur
I was calling the godless karl marx kapo
Based on this :


kapo marx's own words

"What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.…. Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities…. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange…. The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general."

 

[ThomasSowell]

His using "Jew" as a slur is a dead giveaway.

Thanks for exhibiting the exact same prejudicial behavior you supposedly detest
Maybe next time you should start with
are you Jewish
rather than (((pre judging))) others

 

[BodiTheGreat]

Thomas Sowell has opened a big can of "Whoopass" on our boards leftwingers ! Just like Crazy Horse at the Batlle of Little Big Horn !

 

[BodiTheGreat]

Leftwingers hate Christians and Jews ! And unborn babies ! Damn Cowards !

 

[twalsh]

The Cincinnati Archdiocese has already condemned the teens part in this idiocy.

I believe that was BEFORE the entire video surfaced.

 

[ivan brunetti]

I believe that was BEFORE the entire video surfaced.

Please link to where the archdiocese has retracted their condemnation.

 

[ThomasSowell]

Please link to where the archdiocese has retracted their condemnation.

Please screenshot then upload where he said that or was his argument

 

[SALittleGiant513]

Morality has to be applied and viewed on a sliding scale ? In other words the laws of Morality are subjective And relative , Rather than absolute ? Interesting concept ! You
Have your Sliding scale and I have mine and everyone in a society has his own Sliding Scale !
Very interesting !
Like W Clinton said “ is is not is “ “ Sex is not sex “ , so there are no absolutes.

Sliding scale in the sense that our understanding of morality changes. For example, I am not sure how you apply a standard of morality related to stealing on people who live in a society that do not recognize a principle of individual ownership.

 

[SALittleGiant513]

What land
What victor
The land the native Asians that was stolen by other native Asians
At least be logically consistent

You are not going to pretend...
Whom is asking you to
Please attack what I said not what you think I said
This is called attacking a straw man
Which is wrong

Its rich that you are accusing me of attacking a strawman after you have based 3 to 4 posts of insanity on developing a weird strawman. Nothing I have said is logically inconsistent. I am not making a value judgment as to whether or not Europeans were justified in resettling America.

I used the term Indigenous people because Native American groups have expressed feelings that at time Native Americans/Indians are terms that can carry a negative connotation and because I don't really care its easy for me to say sure I will call your group what you want.

The fact is (and this is the simple point I made in response to RGC which is very narrow and has nothing to do with half the bullshit you have spewed at us off wikipedia) in history there are numerous examples of "Group 1" living on land that "Group 2" wants to take. When "Group 2" invades those communities/societies/groups, and attempts to take possession of that land/territory there are different ways that "Group 1" will react. Because it is a hostile act that involves taking over land/territory however it is silly to think that "Group 2" in some instances, if not most instances, would not fight back.

The comment was made that we should not judge explorers or settlers for their actions against the natives because of the "atrocities" that the natives committed against the settlers. The word "atrocity" to me implies (1) that the victims are innocent and (2) that the actor is not justified. Neither applies here.

As for Columbus... history is history and running from it decreases an ability to learn from it. The guy found North America by accident, was interested in the exotic nature of the people on this land and either committed or was aware of others committing crazy abuses and acts on the people here that had no idea what type of force was coming after Columbus found this land. That being said it happens all the time, if you win the war you get to write the history.