| Re: Justice for Indigenous Peoples |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: ImmortalistImmortalist Date: Oct 5, 2007 21:34
On Oct 5, 7:38 am, Michae...@ gmail.com wrote:
>>if i were an absolutist, i would hold that all ye of european ancestry
>>ought to return to europe, and ought to make reparations to the living
>>remnants of native tribes who were conquered
>
> How far back should we take this. Should the Romans repay the
> Carthaginians? Should the Greek repay the Persians? And in like
> manner the Persians repay the Greeks (those who lived in Asian
> Minor)? Should the Arabs repay the phonecians (sp?) (those defeated
> in North Africa and Spain)? Do you have any concept of history? What
> makes one a "native" tribe? It can be fairly certainly stated that
> all of mankind (with the possible exception of one geographical
> location) has migrated from someplace else. Those migrations might
> have been done with force (or the result of force), but trying to re-
> write history to remove that fact is foolish. More to the point with
> what authority do you propose such an idea? By which I mean under
> what standard of rightness would such an idea prove to be "good".
>
> Instead of trying to "correct" history maybe we should be focused on
> fixing the future. Punishing one group of people for the supposed
> sins of their forefathers only perpetuates hatred and bigotry to
> future generations.
If we forget the history of territoriality and defense for a moment,
and imagine two situations; one where a group has lived for thousands
of years without anyone trying to take over their territory, and
another situation where two people's have done what is imagined in the
first example. Make it better than that, lets imagine two peoples who
have an exactly equal claim to a place, but then judge the situation
from the perspective of the justifiactions for one peoples laying
these kinds of claims. Would the conclusions for a clear case of a
peoples being indigenous be the same as the conclusion resulting from
two peoples being indigenous? Why would those conclusions be different
if the justifications for criteria of indigenosity have been met by
both scenarios?
|