DessalinesJul 12, 2025

"They're the same picture"

https://lemmy.ml/post/33064878

Show threadSamsumaJul 12, 2025

“Ah but you see, a long time has passed by! There’s generations [of settler-colonialists] that have already lived through these times, and the people of today have nothing to do with their past!”

Motherfucker, landback means the LAND which is rightfully the Indigenous’ is taken BACK, and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you’re currently a part of.

They’re going to say the exact same shit for Palestine if it’s allowed to be festered long enough by settler-colonialists, as if it already hasn’t been festered.

Show threadbalsoftJul 12, 2025

and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you’re currently a part of.

This would mean that like 99.9% of Earth’s population has to move somewhere. Almost all land was fought over endlessly and changed metaphorical hands multiple times over. Sometimes the people that were displaced don’t even exist anymore.

What “landback” actually means is recognizing the systemic racism that was and still is perpetuated against the indigenous people by means of taking away their ancestral lands, slaughtering and enslaving their ancestors, and destroying their way of life; and addressing that racism by giving jurisdiction and sovereignty over their lands back to them. It doesn’t mean that everyone but the indigenous people have to move out; descendants of colonizers born there are technically natives of that land too. The difference is that they get systemic advantages from their ancestry whereas indigenous people get systemic discrimination. This is the thing that ought to be addressed.

In the case of Israel the difference is that a lot of colonizers are first gen, they are not natives, they do have somewhere to “go back to”, and they are actively perpetuating colonization and genocide rather than simply getting an advantage from their ancestors doing so. In such cases it of course makes sense for the decolonization effort to focus on direct expulsion of invaders.

Show threadHiddenLayer555Jul 12, 2025

This is an extremely white washed version of land back. Pretty sure land back means full control over what happens on that land, including what kind of people can live on it, something that is currently controlled exclusively by the colonial government.

If they’re feeling generous they might give you the option to stay on the condition that you assimilate into their culture.

You know, the thing Europeans forced Indigenous peoples to do. Not saying settlers should be forced through violence to do so, but I think it’s more than fair that if you’re going to stay, you have to assimilate.

But you’re not entitled to even assimilation if they just don’t want you here. And they have plenty of reason not to want you here.

I know that as a 1st gen Chinese immigrant to Canada (I came here as a kid so wasn’t my choice), if all the Indigenous groups where I live unambiguously told me to GTFO. I would in good conscience have to do so and hope I can use my birth certificate to reclaim Chinese citizenship. I’m by every definition a settler so it’s only fair. Whatever struggles I have in China (namely language barrier since I can barely read Chinese) I will have to deal with and it’s not on the Indigenous people to let me stay just because I can’t survive anywhere else.

Where you go back to and what happens to you isn’t the problem of the people you colonized. And by transferring that problem on to them, you are in fact perpetuating colonialism.

Show threadchaosJul 12, 2025
I couldn’t name a single ancestor of mine that wasn’t born in America, so where would I get shipped off to?
Show threadHiddenLayer555Jul 12, 2025
Not the indigenous people’s problem. If they tell you to leave, it’ll be up to you to figure it out.
Show threadchaosJul 12, 2025
I don’t have another country waiting to accept me, and I don’t particularly want to leave the only place I’ve ever lived, so if they want me gone, it is their problem. Are they tossing me in jail because I have the wrong ethnicity? Deporting me to a place I have no connection to?
Show threadHiddenLayer555
I have no right to say what they should do and neither do you.
Jul 12, 2025 at 11:11pmWeb
Show threadchaosJul 12, 2025
I really didn’t think I was being subtle here. I’m going to stop “just asking questions” and instead say that I’m surprised to see, in this of all threads, a sincere argument that there are some circumstances where it is okay for one ethnic group to systemically displace another, despite both groups only having that place to claim as a homeland.
Show threadHiddenLayer555Jul 12, 2025

despite both groups only having that place to claim as a homeland.

Your claim isn’t even close to the magnitude of their claim. They’ve been here for over ten thousand years. They. Own. This. Continent. And. Always. Will.

And again, we displaced them. We are the colonizing class. I am calling for the reversing of what was done to them, which necessarily includes giving them back control over the land. I’m not saying they should displace anyone, but they alone have the choice.

Instead of complaining that indigenous people don’t have the right to remove you, maybe you should focus on contributing to decolonization so they have a reason to let you stay.

Show threadDessalinesJul 12, 2025

where it is okay for one ethnic group to systemically displace another

Ah the old “reverse ethnic cleansing”… all you white supremacists are coming out to play.

The absolute gall of westerners whose ancestors literally did ethnic cleansing, to then yell that at their victims at the hint of returning stolen land back to indigenous sovereignty.

Show threadTheButter_ItSeepsJul 13, 2025
As if indigenous societies never fought wars and claimed land between eachother. Send all of humanity to Africa and let the squirrels and birds take back their land while we’re at it.
Show threadbalsoftJul 13, 2025

I have no right to say what they should do and neither do you.

Do you think all indigenous people can do whatever the fuck they want, as long as they are on their own land, and noone has any right to judge their actions?

1930s germans were indigenous people on their own land, after all.

Show threadHiddenLayer555Jul 13, 2025

The aggressor, in the process of atoning for their atrocities, doesn’t really have a right to say that the recourse proposed by the victim is unreasonable.

We are the colonial aggressors, Indigenous people are the colonized victims. I’m obviously not saying that eye for an eye doing the same to us as we did to Indigenous people is justified, but simply returning the land we stole is more than reasonable. And the logical extreme of returning stolen land is that if the rightful owners then wanted you to leave, you should.

Let’s say a man and a woman live in the same house, and the man hits the woman. If the man is truly seeking to atone for his crime, and the woman tells him to move out because even seeing his face is traumatic for her, would it be reasonable for the man to complain that he has nowhere else to go? To ask the woman where she thinks he should go? To try and guilt the woman into letting him stay? If he does any of those, is he truly sorry for what he did?

You’re right that most Indigenous people don’t want mass expulsion. We should be incredibly grateful for that and it’s a testament of their compassion and desire for equality among all people, even after all we did to them. What we shouldn’t do is tell them that they can’t tell us to leave or that we’d refuse to leave because we have a rightful claim to this land. Doing so is completely unproductive and will only serve to make us less deserving of staying.

Show threadbalsoftJul 15, 2025

First I’d like to say that I’ve never even been to north america, my skin colour is closer to “not ok” in the Family Guy card, and as such I’m more of a neutral observer than an active participant.

That said, the fault with your “man and woman” argument is assuming that all non-indigenous people are direct aggressors, or are directly culpable for heinous crimes against humanity.

A person cannot be culpable, and doesn’t need to atone for, the crimes of their ancestors, people who share their race, or otherwise by unwillful association. The crime of most modern descendants of settlers is that of “illegal” (unjust?) immigration, no more and no less. And I don’t believe it is even a crime, more of an infraction that can be rectified by learning the languages and traditions of the local population and becoming part of the community. There certainly are others who are still engaging in direct and active racism, colonization, even genocide. They deserve their own appropriate punishments, not due to their ancestry but due to their actions.

However, what descendants of colonizers definitely owe everyone else in the land is the generational, systemic wealth (land, money, property, social credit, etc) they accumulated because their ancestors robbed and pillaged it from everyone else. Giving it back doesn’t necessarily mean moving out; it means giving back jurisdiction, sovereignty, and sharing the wealth in a just manner (this would probably require some form of socialism or communism).

What we shouldn’t do is tell them that they can’t tell us to leave or that we’d refuse to leave because we have a rightful claim to this land

I don’t think it’s about a “rightful claim” to the land. I agree that the descendants of settlers have an extremely weak claim to the land, if at all. Rather it is about basic humanity and decency. No person should be forced to move out of what they call home through no fault of their own. On the other hand any person living on someone else’s land must learn the language and the culture. It is for the same reason I believe immigrants deserve help, accommodation, and local language courses rather than rejection.