Land Acknowledgement

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

For the last two years I’ve been living under a rock, or rather under a novel. So it was only recently when Charles III (Seriously. What was Elizabeth thinking when she named him that, anyway?) put on a spectacular show of ignoring history and mouthing platitudes that I became aware of land acknowledgements.

Being me, and therefore naturally altruistic and giving, I thought I’d save all of you the trouble of crafting your won land acknowledgements by giving you a template.

First to explain where I come from on this — and why Charles III was a special kind of brainless pussy when he made that statement — I understand people like the Canadians and the left in America are very fond of “land acknowledgements” for the same reason they’re fond of “Native American” as a designation. Because they think for some bizarre reason that the Amerindian (no, not a perfect designation, but every human on Earth gets called by the name their neighbors/enemies made up) myths are correct, and Amerindians have been here since “the beginning of time.” Bah. No, they haven’t been here forever, and the land is not uniquely theirs. And if it were, there is a better strategy than whining and namy pamby acknowledgements.*

Where I was born and grew up, the land is — at this point — made mostly of people. At least one of the online anthropological sites lists the region in which I was born and raised as the oldest continuously human-occupied area in Western Europe. What that means, in terms of how many people were buried (not to mention pooped) in that area, it means that the dust has human DNA in it.

Which humans? Oh, that’s… I mean, there’s a reason my kids call Portugal the reservoir tip of Europe.

What I was taught in school which completely missed Pre-historic population movements, from Early European Farmers to Yamnaya we: Celts, Carthaginians, Greeks, Romans, Vandals, Alans, Visigoths, Moors, Franks, Spaniards, not counting imports from Africa and India that mixed with the native stock. And not forgetting British and French during the Napoleonic wars; Irish which traded goods and genetics with the North of Portugal since the 4th century BC.

Whose land was it? No one’s. One culture will supersede the other. From the time of the Yamnaya tearing into the Early European Farmers and yeah, probably killing all the men and marrying all the women, that’s how land conveys.

Your title to the land as a people is your ability to occupy the land and keep it. Note, the keep it is important.

*In all the history of displaced people, the one people who instead of whining did something about it and not only that but having gotten their land back made it more fruitful and better than what the occupiers were doing with it is Israel. They bought, they fought for, they have kept the house against all challenges and they have made the desert flower.

Everyone else? Every loser country in the world throws themselves on the floor and screams they’d have been great if only they had “their” land back. And it’s always bullshit. Possibly in the history of bullshit none is worse than La Raza bullshit, who think they are entitled to most of the US, when in fact if they took it, they’d only have more of Mexico, a failed narco state which only survives because of remitances from people coming here to work and get welfare from us because we are not in fact Mexican and don’t operate like a failed narco state.

As for the Amerindian illusions: dudes, there is a reason your tribal elders don’t want you do do DNA tests. You were not only defeated. You got in bed with the enemy. Sometimes when you kidnapped their daughters for the purpose. You are only Native Americans in the sense you were born here. You were genetically swamped. You are — and I mean this in the best sense, so shush — the same American mutts as the rest of us. And in return, almost anyone who has a branch of their family that has been here for two hundred years (a not inconsiderable percentage of Americans) has a bit of you. We took your greatness and added it to our own. (Yes, including my kids. A considerable bit. They are descended from all the best.)

So the land: Your land is our land. Your blood is our blood. We are you. Stop whining about stolen land, and start making something of what you have, living in the best nation in the world.

You want a land of your own? Join us. When we go to the stars, claim your own planet.

Because I’m a giving kind of person, I decided to give you a template land

Land Acknowledgement:

We’re standing on stolen land. Sitting, sleeping and playing rock and roll on stolen land.

All land on Earth has been owned by humans and/or proto humans at some point. Heck, a good amount of the continental shelves that are under water offshore are also stolen land.

Before our ancestors, someone else lived there. And before those people someone else lived there. And before those people someone else lived there.

Because that’s what humans do. They take land, and hold it, and have children and raise fat babies.

That’s called being human.

You want some land no human ever owned? Get us to the stars. That’s it.

End land acknowledgement.

Further note for the deluded bastards of La Raza: This land is OUR land. And what we have, we keep.

We’ve been ignoring you, as we’ve been ignoring a lot of other commie offshoots because we thought you’d grow up. But if you want to square off…. Think about it. What we have, we keep. Don’t start none. You won’t like the results.

PS- Because all this isn’t as eloquent as this single tweet by someone I don’t know:

(tweet link. And xcancel link.)

216 thoughts on “Land Acknowledgement”

      1. Doggerland. Formerly inhabited by gnomes utilizing a glass and ceramic technology. They all died off because with their short legs, they weren’t able to outrun the floodwaters; and hence are only remembered in myths and legends.

        Like

  2. Amen and Hallelujah to every single word! I’m a Euromutt with a smidge of Amerindian (at least according to family stories.) I teach Roman history. In the history of always and everywhere one group of humans has conquered and /or merged with another and territory has been held by those can. Historically, Americans can; will we continue to? I sure hope so.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Will de-lurk to respectfully disagree just a smidge – while Sarah’s illustration regarding Israel as an example of a displaced people who not only won back their land but made it better is accurate, I think Sarah is missing the obvious example of the Reconquista, in which the Visigothic proto-spaniards huddled north of what would someday be Castile and swore (admittedly, the Pelayo quote is almost certainly apocryphal) that the rest of the Iberian peninsula would one day be theirs again as well.

    And then they spent the balance of the next millennium making it happen, oh-by-the-way creating the modern state of Portugal in the process. Ferdinand and Isabella (who oversaw the end of the process) even gave us a good idea of how to deal with recalcitrant Muslims who don’t like being displaced (if you read ‘Palestinians’ there that’s on you), but the admitted excesses of their methods have received most of the attention since, and I doubt we moderns have the stomach (yet) for the path they chose. Well, Bob might. He scares me.

    Now some (if you read ‘Muslims’ there that’s on you again) may argue that the Iberian peninsula was better off under the Umayyads and their successors than the nominally Christian kingdoms who reclaimed the territory. I think that’s a longer conversation, but if I recall correctly it was on this very blog that someone recommended a book titled “The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise,” for which I am grateful, and which I believe neatly dispenses with the objection raised.

    Like

    1. I’m not missing. I just know more about the reconquista than you guys do.
      While it was reconquista by Christians, and if you ever are in same zip with me I have a story about that I’m too tired to type out now.
      The numbers massacred on the conquest were such that the reconquista was by FRANKS. I.e. people of the rough region of France. Not even joking.
      Though there was a population remaining, etc.
      And my people are from the North where most of the population remained. (And stayed spicy.)

      Like

      1. I know that the Iberian Peninsula was considered the budget option for would-be Crusaders. It would be interesting to game out a Crusade option that focused on Spain and North Africa, rather than a direct assault on the Holy Land.

        Like

      2. It’s a great world we live in, isn’t it, that there’s always things we don’t know yet, no matter the subject? I appreciate you taking a moment to expand my knowledge base. I was always under the impression that the Frankish contributions to the Reconquista were more along the lines of stopping the flow northward at Tours and then after retaking southern France, getting their posteriors handed to them at Roncevaux, a rare defeat for Charlemagne – and that was it, at least as far as organized contributions go, until the second crusade took a bit of a detour on the way to the Holy Land. Clearly some large gaps there that I hadn’t connected mentally, considering that Charlemagne still established vassal kingdoms in and south of the Pyrenees, in the form of the Spanish March which continued to exist and grow despite his later setbacks, and it was a Frankish army which retook Barcelona in 801.

        The more I learn, the more there is to learn.

        Like

    1. Sounds good to me – it spends time in our airspace, and we planted a flag. Ever read “The Man Who Sold The Moon”?

      Like

        1. I suspect I read it before Apollo 8 was getting launched, so it wasn’t that far from then-current practice (for values of handwavium). OTOH, it’s not supposed to be a hard-SF novel.

          [Makes mental note to get a fresh e-copy; the paperback is long gone.]

          Like

    3. Well, akshully, because some Americans have ancestry that was once there, the whole of the world is ours, and we should exterminate them and repurpose it for useful things.

      Except for Jeju island, as far as I know.

      But, seriously, our so called allies who liked Harris are freaking morons if they sincerely thought that they had common interests with us. UK politicians in particular.

      Harris was pretty explicitly saying that 90%+ of Americans, inclusive of blacks, should be murdered.

      This is what anti-colonialism means.

      And the PRC, UK, etc., are explicitly not willing to tolerate the customs we are now accustomed to, so we cannot remove ourselves from here alive, without first conquering and overthrowing the governments of those regions. So, they have kinda helped place us in an ‘in death ground’ position, and are surprised that we might fight.

      They should see our respect for them, and our willingness to coexist peacefully, in the fact that we are not moving directly to war and extermination.

      Like

      1. Since the two you mentioned, the PRC and the UK, are both inhabited by “colonialist land thieves”, I see no ethical problem with replacing them, by the “logic” used by the left. Also applies in spades to the ancestral land of The Cameltoe, which creature you also mentioned. And the Zulu, since the Cape was uninhabited when the Voortrekkers arrived. And…and…and…

        So many instances, so little time to list them. (And yes, I understand that’s what Sarah was saying.)

        Like

    4. The US – so far – has agreed to abide by the treaty that says no one can claim the Moon. Suspicions are that one of the reasons why the Chinese are so keen to quickly get to the Moon is because they’re planning to blow off the treaty based on the fact that they’re up there, and no one else is.

      Liked by 1 person

    5. The British ran into the Moon commies a little over a century ago. Someone wrote a book on it.

      Like

      2. And a private-enterprise US family group ran into Moon Nazis about 75 years ago. Stuff’s been going on for a while…😃

        Like

  6. I’m reminded of the story posted on the English Daily Mail a couple of months/years? ago, about how Turkish citizens who had submitted gene samples to one of the services for analysis were utterly shocked to discover that they were in a large part genetically European … with minimal Turkish/Middle Eastern/Asia Minor input. Well, a couple of centuries of forcefully importing European and Slavic female sex slaves and breeding children with them for generations on generations … will dilute the Turkis/ME/AM genetic inheritance.

    Also reminded of reading 18th/19th century travelers to various North African cities (which also had a long legacy of slave-trading, and sexual slavery of captured European women) noting that generally, the inhabitants of those places were very European in appearance, for much the same reason.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Or as John Ringo notes in either The Last Centurion, or one of the Ghost books, the Mongols were not originally Oriental, until they conquered (some of) China and started importing Chinese concubines en masse. Their descendants wound up half Chinese, or more.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The Yuan Dynasty (i.e. the Mongol one) conquered the Southern Song Dynasty in 1279, reuniting China under their rule.

        Like

      2. I remember reading a while ago that Temujin (aka Genghis Khan) was a blue- or green- eyed readhead, not the Fu Manchu sort of various myths. True? Damfino, but stereotypes are frequently inaccurate, and AFAIK the original Mongol invaders were not ethnic Chinese; they were Eurasian steppe nomads.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. It is decent country and is pivotal in trade down towards Syria and Isreal as well as up into Europe and East into India and China. It was conquered by everybody and his brother in the late BC period into Early AD/CE. As usual a lot of them Liked it and stayed. As noted by Ms Hayes they also imported lots of concubines and female slaves who add their genetic additions to the stew. I’d bet most of the Arabic additions are late 7th century far later than the Roman, Greek, Assyrians and Mede (aka Persian) additions.

      Is there Anywhere on this planet short of Olduvai gorge (or Mt Ararat depending on your view of things) where Mankind is not an invader? In the Americas the “Native Americans” are from (one or more, Theories of transfer from Europe during the Ice age and from the Pacific Islanders in parts of South America pop up from time to time). Japan which has one of the more ancient written records of continuous residence, has its “native” Ainu population who seem to be more of the Pacific Islander type than the current main population who are similar to mainland China’s Han population. Various African populations have moved over time for example the Zulu are not Native to the South African region. And the main parts of Europe have gone back and forth many times

      Much of this fondness for the “indigenous” peoples seem’s to come from a fondness for that idiot Rosseau’s “Noble Savage” and the concept that Humans are naturally good rather than Christianity’s view that mankind is naturally fallen and flawed. Probably going back in time and disposing of Rosseau, or making him a marginal figure, would add more value and save more lives than making sure one Herr Shickelgruber got to spend the rest of his life as a marginal artist instead of a politician.

      To anyone with any familiarity with historical populations, it is clear that we are all imports to where we are it’s just a matter of time. The world has been run by conquests since the Dan of Ur and Egypt, and like Humpty Dumpty all the Kings Horses and all the kings men can not put Humpty back together again.

      Like

      1. Western South Africa was apparently completely empty of people when the Boers arrived. The Bushmen were only present in the Eastern portion of what would become the country.

        I suspect a lot of future (i.e. nowadays) trouble would have been avoided if the British had smashed the Zulus in revenge for Islandawana, and then told the Zulus to go away and not come back. Sadly, that didn’t happen.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I disagree. The Zulus aren’t the problem in SA, they’ve been the one group willing to make a stable peace. Because they understand that after the Whites are wiped out, they’re next.

          Like

          1. ?

            The Zulus are the largest ethnic group in the country. I don’t know exactly how many ethnic groups there are, or the exact percentage that’s Zulu. But the info that I’m seeing is that they are the single biggest ethnic block present in South Africa. Even if they’re only a plurality and not a majority, that means that going after them would likely not be anywhere near as easy as going after the whites is.

            Like

    3. Denizens of Algiers are distinctly paler than the rest of Algeria, they imported so many more white slaves.

      Like

  7. -This- land is -my- land.

    ’cause this here gun in hand.

    Get off my lawn, Joe

    ’cause blood makes grass grow.

    Get lost right now, fool

    ’cause I’m quick with e-tool.

    This land is owned by mine and me.

    …

    (short version: SCREEEECH and leap)

    Liked by 1 person

        1. With the proviso that the “short version” is adapted from the Kzinti challenge (“You scream and you leap”)…😉

          Like

          1. I think I watched Mom screech and leap on an intruder -way- before Mr. Niven had his Kzin “scream and leap”.

            But yes, as only claiming the ditty, not the practical approach.

            Like

    2. This land is my land
      and only my land
      If you don’t get off
      I’ll blow your head off
      I’ve got a shotgun
      and you ain’t got none
      This land is private property

      Liked by 1 person

  10. “Skyrim is for the Nords!”

    “Native Americans” get very defensive when multi-thousand year graves containing European featured bodies pop up in the middle of their hallowed lands. Or the Sacred Mountains from the Beginning of Creation were the domain of some other tribe they killed and ate a few hundred years ago.

    Yes Virginia, “The Noble Savage” did the cannibal thing as a ritual and more as late as the 1800’s. Let’s not go into details about the Aztecs, but it’s unlikely they had temples in LA and NYC, let alone any claim on the land north of Brownsville.

    Egyptians and Turks back by the WEF try to block detailed investigations of interesting structures that might upset the modern “science” of archeology. It’s no longer just preventing the British from lootin’ any more, there are serious cracks in the “official” narrative that the elite don’t want any prying eyes looking into. Like anyone cares about 8000 year old DNA vs modern cultural pride when on site, but these people do. Thanks to Netflix everyone knows that historical civilization was just “whitewashed”.

    It’s also interesting to note that the former Secretary of Homeland Security, President of Mexico, and the atheist Marxist couple behind the No Kings Protest Day among other frauds, also have a homeland they are welcome to go back to and fight for instead of destroying the US. I guess they hate their heritage.

    But no, the Aldmeri Dominion has to stamp out the Talos worshippers.  

    Like

    1. Good observations. For Egypt and Turkey, the complaints are from militant islamists. for whom history began c. 670 A.D.

      Like

  11. Note that “Native Americans” has been replaced by “First Nations” in Canada and elsewhere, because “American” is a European notion (unless you’re from outside America, in which case “we’re all Americans”).

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I’d be somewhat interested in making the so-called First Nations Prove that they didn’t steal the land from earlier peoples. [Twisted Grin]

      Like

      1. One does not simply question (or by implication doubt) the Noble Savage, Paul, but even in the western hemisphere we keep pushing the inhabitation dates back. Under Charles’ definition, the presumption that North America was first settled by nomads crossing the Bering from Siberia would give the Russians a pretty strong claim.

        (I wonder if Chucky opens his London speeches by acknowledging the Neanderthals who appear to have preceded the Celtic Britons.)

        Like

        1. Neanderthals were of course also in warmer Portugal, even if only already a vacation spot for cold British Isles Neanderthals – search for “Lagar Velho 1” for one very interesting fossil. What happens on Neanderthal Portuguese vacation stays in Portugal, apparently.

          And re “Neanderthal Acknowledgements”, since one current well supported theory has H. Neanderthalis evolving in Europe from hominids who’d previously escaped their mothers-in-law by walking out of Africa like H. Heidelbergensis, they’d be the ultimate originals to acknowledge.

          Like

              1. Of course that’s dangerous precedent. Imagine the back rent bill when the evolved-space-dinosaurs swing back by and see what’s become of the old place.

                Liked by 1 person

      3. Genetic anthropology shows two separate waves from Alaska to the Rio Grande, and strong indications of a third. So all of those “First Nations” are probably also invaders.

        I haven’t seen much about profiling migrations northward. Academia still seems to be annoyed with Heyerdahl and his Ra rafts.

        Liked by 1 person

        2. One of Poul Anderson’s time travel (Time Patrol?) stories involved a very weak and primitive tribe in the Pacific Northwest which was about to be destroyed by another wave coming down from Siberia. The modern time agent wanted badly to find some way to save them.

          Like

      4. Oh, they did, and they’re quite proud of the fact (s). But those people being not of The People, they weren’t really human so they don’t count.

        The argument amounts to “Our gods have us this land so it doesn’t matter what animals held it first.”

        Like

      5. Anglos took parts of the High Plains and Texas from the Spanish and Comanche, who had ganged up to take it from the Apache (then some Comanche got clobbered by the Spanish and left New Mexico alone. Some Comanche.) The Apache probably took it from the descendants of the so-called Antelope Creek Focus/Buried City/Wolf Creek Focus peoples, who might have chased off earlier, more nomadic groups, but there’s a long period with very sparse evidence thanks to lousy climatic conditions in the region for a few thousand years or so. Then Plainview Culture, Folsom, Clovis, and ?

        So who gets acknowledged?

        Like

        1. There’s places in the Southwest that my grandfather, whom collected arrowheads and such, found multiple different tribes/peoples weapons and tools after a good rain. Probably a few thousand years or more depending on the nearest source of the flint/chert/rocks and water.

          Like

        2. In the same vein:
          Whatever happened to the Adena culture, who built large mounds and settlements all up the Mississippi river, and the Hopewell culture, who followed them?
          The people who were living there at the start of documented history (when the Europeans started writing things down as they came across them) were not them — those people and their language families came from elsewhere, and they didn’t know who built the mounds, the cities or the effigies.
          I abhor the “land acknowledgement” statement that seemingly EVERY leftist institution begins a public address with– they KNOW that it doesn’t mean anything, but they pretend that it’s a step towards redressing past wrongs, and land theft, and all those bad things only European white settlers were capable of.
          If you pretend that the land you are currently on belongs to native group Z, who have been there, they claim, since “time immemorial” (as the phrase goes), what are you doing to tribe Y, and X, and so forth back to 12,000 BC (see the Paisley Caves archaeology)? Whose land was it, at what time?

          Like

          1. *Waves paw* Short version of Hopewell/Adena/Mississippian story is a combination of the worst of the Little Ice Age (1600s) causing major weather problems for farming, and deforestation that led to a cascade of problems that forced the Missippians to abandon Cahokia and the great towns. Then their enemies picked off a few groups, while others relocated, or tried to. The Shawnee seem to have been the last of that culture to remain, if what the Spanish and French observed is correct. The ripple effects of the regional collapse were still going on when Europeans moved up from Florida and the Gulf Coast.

            The long version takes up a lot of shelf space, and is still being argued over.

            Like

            1. Hopewell is pretty much your standard Woodlands tribes genetically, but with a big star religion of some kind.

              When I was in college, we weren’t supposed to call them Hopewell anymore, but I think it is coming back, just because.

              Like

              1. We were just in southwestern VA, and while there I found a rock. It’s gray and shiny, almost metallic, and it has a bit of an edge, though that might be natural. What gets me is how well it fits my hand. If it’s a tool, I have no idea what sort (not an arrowhead and not a spear point. If anything it could be a cutter of some kind. Maybe a scraper?). I’d love to know if this is coincidence or I picked up a bit of history.

                Like

          2. I visited the Toltec Mound State Park in Arkansas. Its centerpiece is a gigantic flat-topped mound. Archeologists tunneled into it, and it’s… a giant pile of dirt. They found the remains of some dilapidated woven baskets, presumably used to carry dirt.

            As to who built it, why, and where they went afterward, the state historians had no clue. Other than some random trash, there were no artifacts other than the mound, which leaves them with nothing solid to work with.

            They’re pretty sure it has nothing to do with the Toltecs, who were thousands of miles away down in the southern part of Mexico, though.

            Like

  12. “In all the history of displaced people, the one people who instead of whining did something about it and not only that but having gotten their land back made it more fruitful and better than what the occupiers were doing with it is Israel.”
    Uh, with the greatest of respect dear, you missed one. I understand why, after all the Portage have this natural loathing for the Spaniard. But I submit that the Reconquista of Spain from the Moor qualifies.
    Odd, it seems like everyone that takes back land and makes it a lot better than the conquerors made it, takes it from Muslims. Hummm, there might be some sort of lesson to be learned here.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. In They Myth of the Andalusian Paradise, the author points out that all the hordes of religious and other treasures that have been found strongly suggest that the Christian Visigoths didn’t survive to come back and rescue/reclaim the items. So that’s the first wave of Berbers/Arabs/whoever cleaning out the populace (711-800 or so).

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Yep. A bunch of people survived in the North, because the climate was inhospitable and my ancestors were stabby. (And defenestraty — totally a word.)

          Like

  13. Snipped while in moderation! That’s what I get for only chipping a comment in once a year or so. In my defense, the wifi down here in Rapture has been spotty.

    Like

    2. Your comment came through, and was a pleasure to read. Would you kindly post more often?

      ;-)

      Like

      1. The flesh is willing, but the spirit is intimidated.

        I’m a prolific reader, with a reader’s pedigree (lived in the same dorm room as Pat Conroy and stalked the same halls as James Rigney, Jr, albeit much later than either gentlemen was present) but a writer I am decidedly not. My writing style trends much more strongly towards “technical document” than “literate,” and as an introvert with no legitimate claim to be an Odd, I don’t often feel I have anything meaningful to contribute. I read nearly every comment section in full, and the intelligentsia here have it covered; additionally, it often feels like I’m vicariously enjoying a close group of friends from a distance, and to interject as a stranger would be intruding.

        On the other hand, I appreciate your encouragement and sense of humor, so I’ll make the attempt.

        Like

        1. “but a writer I am decidedly not. My writing style trends much more strongly towards “technical document” than “literate,” and as an introvert with no legitimate claim to be an Odd, I don’t often feel I have anything meaningful to contribute.“

          –

          1. Not alone. I am not a writer.
          2. Same. Spent over 30 years as a programmer and supporting such. So, tech documents, check. Fiction, “literate” or not? Not a chance.
          3. Introvert? More so than not. Definitely would not be considered an “odd”.
            • Okay, certain circles. But B. Durban would disagree given, by all accounts she, as a female too, rough camps as much or more than I ever have. (As in overhearing other male scouters how their wives thought The Hilton was roughing it. My thought was “Wait? That’s an option?”. FWIW, my parents laughed at me when I mentioned this. Hint, it’s not.) FYI, I grew up rough camping. Only given it up last 5 years (dang ground anyway).
          4. I contribute. You can too.

          Don’t be keyboard shy.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “Odd” is up to the context, to be honest. If you’re surrounded by like-minded people, how would you ever know?

            (As a side note, a friend once said to me that I was “more outgoing than any introvert I know.” I burst out laughing and said, “You think I’m an introvert?” The rest of the table was in similar hilarity. I am probably the most extroverted extrovert that most people know, but he mistook certain practices like reading for introversion signs.)

            Like

  14. “I would like to acknowledge that we stand here tonight on the ancient tribal lands of the amoeba, the great single-cell culture that predates us all.”

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Larry Niven had a story where this extremely old alien remembers visiting Earth where she met the civilization that “originally” owned Earth.

        They were wiped out when Earth’s air started to be “polluted” with oxygen. [Very Big Crazy Grin]

        Liked by 2 people

        1. “The Green Marauder” by Niven. Hal Clement did something similar with “Nitrogen Fix.”

          A number of SF authors have pointed out how Earth is basically a hellworld, with oceans filled with a powerful solvent and an atmosphere containing nontrivial quantities of corrosive oxygen.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. There is a reddit sub HFY as well as several AI narrated story channels that use the Earth as he..world trope.

            Whats funny is in the 70s it was popular in NewWave SF to bash John Campbell amd the old authors for seeing humanity as superior.

            Doubly funny as Philip Jose Farmer had humanity wiped out by aliens and the few survivors were greatful….and he wastargettedfor otherwritings.

            It is alwayz the revolution

            Liked by 1 person

      1. I have heard that argument, Seriously and unironically delivered.
        That the US is successful, and Mexico is not, because we stole the part with the good roads.

        It was an article of faith. There was no arguing with him about it. Just like the black guy I once knew who swore that the Greeks and Egyptians had stolen credit for the feats of his ancestors.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I don’t understand people who NEED their ancestors to have been the font of civilization.

          I’ll freely admit that my ancestors were headhunters and cannibals, practiced human sacrifice, and didn’t kick the tribalism habit until after the Highland Clearances.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. I could argue that of all the current cultures on Earth, the only one that could make a fair claim to not have displaced a prior culture are the High Arctic Inuit. Possibly the Tierra del Fuegans, too, but I’m not as sure of that.

      Like

      1. That is largely because the Inuit were latecomers — arriving somewhen between 6000 BC and 2000 BC. By then all the good places were taken and the Inuit were not tough enough (or not motivated enough) to take them away from the then current inhabitants.

        Like

        1. No argument here. That’s how I understand it, too; they’re possibly the least warlike culture on Earth, which may well be how they were during their original migration. But that doesn’t refute what I posted.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Or, maybe they were just too outnumbered by the locals. “That’s waaay too many. Let’s just mosey on up to the tundra nobody wants to fight over.”

            Like

        1. The interesting thing about British Royal names is that a royal is given several names at birth.

          Those who become the Monarch decided which of those names he/she will reign under.

          So blame QE for “King Charles”.

          He chose to use the Charles name. [Evil Grin]

          Liked by 2 people

          2. Because of the Queen Mum and some of Prince Philip’s ancestors, King Charles is actually a valid Jacobite heir.

            This is one of those things that is Rarely Mentioned Publicly, but it does kinda take care of a lot of potential problems.

            Hence I believe that the names of Charles and Andrew were deliberately chosen, to point this out.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. My sil is named Rosanna. She told me how much she hated hearing that song because people always just HAD to sing it when they met her.

              I said, ” Really you are complaining to ME about people singing a song with your name in it?”

              Like

              1. My wife’s name is the same as yours. Guess which Johnny Cash song she can’t stand…😉

                Like

              3. I once shocked a guy.

                He made one of the standard issue Mary jokes and I gave him the gimlet glare and observed that he should know that it’s impossible to make a joke about anyone’s name that the person in question has not heard often enough to be sick of by the age of ten.

                Like

                1. Went to get an electrocardiogram last Wednesday. Tech came out and called “Diane” … Three of us stood up. Sigh. “Last name?” At least I don’t hear the jokes or the songs.

                  Liked by 2 people

                  1. Same here. Me: “Robert?”; two. My wife: “Susan?”; also two.

                    Fake privacy can be carried too far.

                    Like

            1. My daughter’s name is Daisy: I think that anyone found to be playing “Bicycle Built For Two” for her sake would quickly face a tempest of adolescent psychotic rage.

              Like

          2. I can’t see him getting into a bar fight with his old man over being named, “Sue,” though. Heck, I can’t see him getting into a bar fight for any reason.

            Now, his boys, on the other hand…William strikes me as the type who’d throw down in a heartbeat if you messed with his family (especially his kids). And I would’ve said the same for Harry before Meghan came and removed his balls and his spine.

            Liked by 2 people

  17. a) Muscovites are also sad sacks of whining about how much better they could have managed other populations.
    b) Yeah, I explicitly beleive that taking and holding territory recently, and last few generations peace, are the achievements with priority. b2) I am somewhat of the opinion that the so called Palestinians ought to be exterminated, largely because of starting wars, losing them, and waging them unethically.
    c) I acknowledge that land grant universities appropriated land from the ‘public trust’ in exchange for performing certain tasks, and displacing liberal arts in favor of teaching critical theory is probably a violation of those terms.
    d) Behavioral academic fields use office space, course enrollments, and administrative overhead and other funding, that probably ‘rightfully’ belong to the applied maths.

    e) more seriously, the public private partnerships of government grant sponsored government propaganda, and the government buying the fraudulent academic ‘justification’ for whatever stupid government policy, is sufficient violation that if it wasn’t them making a living, and bearing the blame, academic behavioralists would be whining for the government to do ‘anti-colonialism’. By their own thinking, it is machete time for academia. That is part of why it is right and good that Americans will address the injustices of academia without listening to the recommendations of academics.

    f) defunding academia to a significant degree is a much better outcome for butthurt students than other traditional ways of responding to such motivations as the academics have inflicted on America recently. Just about any culture premechanization of agriculture, that had such a bad self inflicted economic hit, would have had significant deaths from famine, and a bunch of lynching. It is likewise also a civilized remedy compared to the civil wars with a bunch of mass murders.

    g) if anyone in academia had a good idea, then supporting Biden and Harris was about the stupidest possible marketing scheme for that idea

    h) I acknowledge that I am an asshole, and probably more unstable than is really desireable. I am angry, over academia spending my adult life on economically destructive frauds, and over my own lack of steady income. One of the crippling decisions I have made is lack of communication. Or in some cases accurately communicating that I am an arrogant jerk. Nobody with my sort of potentially profitable skills is successful in applying those when they are failing to communicate with their potential business partners.

    I) Human behavior is complicated. Human theories of behavior are complicated. It is difficult to put accurate theories together in correct synthesis of every relevant factor. When you do, you can see that academics have done massive damage to the fundamentals of the academic business, and in some cases to the business of specific professions.

    j) I acknowledge that communists have taken academic office space that belongs to militant anti-communists who understand how Austrian economics demonstrates that academia should minimize its economic impact on the public.

    Like

    1. starting wars, losing them, and waging them unethically.

      —

      You don’t need to fap around with ethics when your cause is just, your heart is pure, and your diety told you to do it.

      Unfortunately, like JFK pulling the air cover at the Bay of Pigs, dieties often fail to follow through, and the Faithful wind up doing yet another faceplant.

      Like

    2. My reading of the above leads me to believe that you have mischaracterized yourself with your chosen “nom de post”. Possibly a change from “RegisteredFool” to “UnheraldedSage” would be better.

      Like

  18. Our Hostess said

    and why Charles III was a special kind of brainless pussy when he made that statement

    Madam, Orange kitties everywhere are deeply offended by your comparison of them to Charles III (and Yes, 50% of the previous Charles’ of England ended up as part of the Headless Hunt at Hogwarts). You will be hearing from their lawyer with a defamation suit as soon as they can keep the shared brain cell in one physical manifestation (I.E. orange cat) Long enough to retain one.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Reminds me of the genealogy joke where a mortgage company requested “more information” about a house title. Going back 7-10 owners wasn’t enough.

    The title company lawyer then proceeded to trace it back all the way to “Thomas Jefferson bought it from Napoleon, who got it from the Spaniards, who took it from the tribes”.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. My Dad bought a small piece of property in rural Arkansas. The deed assignments had been recorded since shortly after statehood, when someone bought the land from “an Indian” (who apparently had no name or tribal affiliation, at least that the county registrar cared about) in the 1840s.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Used to work for a Title Company in California.

      It was quite common to run title reports back to the Ranchos; in NorCal most of those went to General Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo. (Well, geographically ‘Central’ California)

      That was as far as anyone cared to wrestle with the title.

      Like

      1. Vallejo is an interesting character. He didn’t seem to hold grudges at all. He lost a lot over his lifetime, and his response was along the lines of, “well, things happen.”

        Like

        1. Great great great grandma was General Vallejo’s wife’s sister . So a distant relative by marriage.

          All the squatters stole the land. But they don’t mention this actual theft, in violation of the treaty, when we stole California from Mexico, after Mexico stole it from Spain, after the Pope gave the Spanish King everything west of the line. So the original title comes from God thru the pope. The title companies just legalize the previous thefts.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. There is this take from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, S4, Episode 8, “Pangs”

            Spike : You won. All right? You came in and you killed them and you took their land. That’s what conquering nations do. It’s what Caesar did, and he’s not going around saying, “I came, I conquered, I felt really bad about it.” The history of the world isn’t people making friends. You had better weapons, and you massacred them. End of story.

            Buffy : Well, I think the Spaniards actually did a lot of– Not that I don’t like Spaniards.

            Liked by 1 person

  20. In Marion Harmon’s Joyeuse Guard, his main character Hope/Astra gives a nice lecture to a reporter concerning “Who’s land is Whose”.

    Short version, everybody living in a certain country has stolen the land from others and none of them were “innocent”.

    Oh, the reporter had wondered why Hope’s super-hero team didn’t “end the war”.

    Oh, Hope’s job was to protect a refugee camp and to get the refugees out of the country.

    Like

  21. If the f-er in the tweet wants that land back he can damn well conquer it by force of arms and then pay the people he conquered it off of to keep it.

    Just like we did.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Australia does this a lot. A lot. I traveled there several years ago and was amazed when I saw the many apologias to the Aboriginal tribes (“Acknowledgement of Country” is a common phrase used).

    Liked by 1 person

  23. That reminds me of the old Smith Barney add with John Houseman where he claimed Smith Barney <Insert Boston Brahmin accent>”Made money the old fashioned way, they earned it.

    Well most every one in History got Land the old-fashioned way: they stole it

    Like

    1. “We acknowledge that the land we built out great civilization on used to belong to other people before we arrived, but who couldn’t be bothered to built a great civilization on it.

      We acknowledge the we conquered it and them, but we think their descendants should be more grateful about that – had anyone else conquered the place, or had we been the vile and despotic conquerors they like to pretend we were, none of those descendants would have been born to complain about us.”

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sounds about right. I remember an alternate-timeline story in which Gandhi and his followers had to deal with Germans instead of Brits. It did not go well for them.

        Like

      2. Europeans developed navigation and built ships capable of sailing across the Atlantic Ocean; the ‘Native Americans’ did not.

        Because humans are not native to this continent. All of them migrated here from somewhere else. Looks like the first bunch got here some time between 40,000 and 35,000 years ago.

        Like

        1. Yep. It’s amazing how fast that gets moved back in time; when I was in school (and even well after) it was “settled science” <spit> that the first nomads to enter the Americas arrived no more than 13,000 years ago, near the end of the Wisconsin glaciation.

          Like

        2. AFAIK, 35KYA to 45KYA is still pretty controversial but 20KYA+ is well supported. Since the modern Amerindians appear to be descended from Clovis migrants, the evidence of pre-Clovis settlements in South America is also evidence there were probably humans here when the ancestors of the Amerinds arrived.

          Like

    2. I really have to figure out a way to word a description of the partition of Poland into a commentary to Europeans, because “we acknowledge that this land belonged to others” is a little more apropos for them in the 19th century.

      For those who don’t know, Poland tried to put a version of democracy into practice in the 1770s, which led to the 1772 partition of it into neighboring countries who said “You can’t DO that!” This is why they were such noted soldiers under Napoleon and other armies; they wanted their country back. And then they finally got it after WWI, only to be shoved behind the Iron Curtain after WWII.

      This may be why they’re the ones arming up right now. You get tired of getting shoved around…

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Also, when Poland ended up behind the Iron Curtain, *both* of its borders were moved east.

        On the other hand, there was the “Danzig Corridor” weirdness after WWI. And the Kaliningrad strangeness today.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I mean both of Poland’s borders were moved *WEST*.

          Gah!

          The USSR took a chunk of land from Poland (probably the land that had been fought over during the inter-war period) at the end of World War 2, and compensated Poland by giving it some of Germany’s territory.

          Like

  25. Also, the whole concept of a Native American people is a very recent thing. They never considered themselves a single people, and just like the English and the French hating each other, they warred with each other and “stole” each other’s land. I live in a region that was once dominated by the Algonquins but they got pushed out by the Iriquois

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Back when Russell Means was

      running for President on the Libertarian ticket, he addressed our state convention. He asked if we were all born in the US. She answered in the affirmative, he greeted us as brother and sister native Americans, then stated, “I am an American Indian.”

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Of course he would have used the American Indian label. After all, his faction of “the Revolution” was called the American Indian Movement. And not all the corpses they left in their wake have ever been acknowledged.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Younger son and younger DIL both have significant Cherokee ancestry. They joke that if they could identify their actual ancestors, they’re probably at blood feud with each other, even though they’re both Eastern band.

      Like

      1. I’ve got three separate Viking tribes in my bloodline. Explains the bersker rage that I channeled in sports and military on occasion.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I am friends with a brother-sister pair of registered Cherokee. Fun part is that they have direct descent from a Cherokee so significant that his house is now a state park in Georgia.

        And I really want to take the brother there in period costume, and have him do some tour guide stuff through there. Seriously, he has a close resemblance to the portraits, it would be hilarious, and we could probably get the parks staff on board as well.

        Like

  26. Also, the whole concept of a Native American people is a very recent thing. They never considered themselves a single people, and just like the English and the French hating each other, they warred with each other and “stole” each other’s land. I live in a region that was once dominated by the Algonquins but they got pushed out by the Iriquois

    Like

    1. I think few do today – sure, some of the more indoctrinated and rabblerousey community organizer types might say that stuff, but the actual tribes think of themselves within their respective nations, and then there’s everybody else.

      Like

      2. Dude! It’s almost summer. Use iced tea. OTOH, too much lemon and you’re back where you started.

        Like

  28. #ChuckieCheeze and his land acknowledgement. [head, desk]

    Sorry. I can’t even.

    I will only note that while land acknowledgements are lies told by Leftists in the United States, in Canada they are now official government policy handed down by the King.

    Which matters in a monarchy, you know? The King said it. That makes it real. It’s a freaking Royal Proclamation, not some Commie professor of basket weaving mouthing platitudes at a local cow college.

    [muted swearing and kicking]

    Like

    1. Welllll … the speech was written for King Charles by the ruling party in Canada, which is to say the Liberals. The Crown, or whoever was doing the Crown’s thinking for him/it, merely accepted the text as handed over. Yes, this means King Charles was Mark Carney’s sock puppet. Now to figure out whose hand is up Carney …

      One likes to think Queen Elizabeth II would have shown more sense. (No guarantee, but one hopes.) It’s little wonder there was such an outpouring for Elizabeth’s funeral. Everyone knew something was passing that would never come again. (That, and the British do public ceremony better than anybody on Earth.)

      Republica restituendae, et, Hamas delenda est.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Carney belongs to the WEF and the Euro-Elite banksters.

        Anglo-Zionist-Marxist-Cthulhuian Lizard puppet if rumours are to be believed. Need to consult my deep source in the City of London to be sure.

        Like

          1. I believe Larry was speaking of Mark Carney. If Carney is British royalty, then greetings, I’m the owner of the Philadelphia Phillies. Charles … I won’t get started on him. Others may employ the clown hammer at leisure.

            The WEF is the most likely muppetizer of Carney, but don’t sleep on the PRC. They had a big enough piece of Trudeau, and may have taken out an option on Carney as a hedge. And of course, we Americans can’t laugh too much at another Western nation being ruled by a Xi Jinping sock monkey. It hasn’t been that long since the Autopen was disconnected.

            Republica restituendae, et, Hamas delenda est.

            Like

      2. The King (or the previous Queen) has no choice in the matter. A King’s (UK)/Throne (other Commonwealth Realms) Speech is the statement of the Government’s legislative agenda. The King must read it verbatim as he is bound to act on the advice of his ministers when stating Government policy. Had the Tories won the election, he would have read a radically different speech.

        I should also note that King’s/Throne speeches are matters of confidence and their failure to pass a vote in the House of Commons would bring down the Government.

        Like

    2. The proclamations of a king carry as much weight with me as those of the professor of underwater basket weaving.

      Especially since said “king” doesn’t even have the legitimacy of having had a watery tart throw a sword at him.

      Liked by 2 people

    3. There’s a slightly contentious interpretation that this is Carney completely reversing his previous claims to protect the sovereignty over Canada from the Americans.

      Windsors abandon their sovereignty over the Commonwealth, leaving the USA a sovereign claim to administer the entire Commonwealth as territories.

      The would mean that that Albanese, Carney and Starmer must next dissolve their governments and hold general elections, so that the next Parliaments can vote to nominate the President’s ministers.

      If this is correct, than Henry Charles’ son being in American hands is a little bit spicey.

      This potentially also could open the EU up for incorporation into American territories.

      I kinda doubt that Charlie Ilrede was actually ill-advised enough to bind these polities in that way.

      Charles is clearly not fully cognizant, and does not speak for the next true king, Arholger Barbarossa.

      Liked by 1 person

  29. Well, you have to admit Charles III has a personal interest in the concept of property ownership. His personal real estate portfolio is impressive, and with his monarch hat on, he controls all Crown properties, which are… extensive.

    Like

  30. The “extended” Applegate Clan, both those who emigrated further west to the Pacific in 1843 (the ones that had they gone any further they’d met up with the ones who didn’t emigrate across the Atlantic in 1528 to N. America, and those who stayed behind on the east coast, are planning a huge get together party, on the east coast. At least trying to. After 450 years, the odds of no “native” intermix of blood (although no “Cherokee Princesses” rumors, mostly because Cherokee’s didn’t have “princesses”) is zip to none. That isn’t counting the maternal line, also here since before the American revolution, but don’t have as much history from that side. Given that more than a few of the relatives, including dad, uncles, and son, can get stopped at the southern border because of their black hair and tanned complexions, does not surprise me at all. Then too paternal grandfather was Caucasian dark (by pictures) and we know even less about his historical family origins (other than he and his siblings were second generation Oregonians).

    What I do know is we don’t have any acknowledge native bloodlines “Land Acknowledgement” to get any of those payouts from tribal doles/casinos.

    American Mutts. This is us.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. One thing to bear in mind about the Canadian land acknowledgement issue is that it was passed into official policy in 2021 as a gesture in response to the Tk’emlups clan’s claim that they had used ground-penetrating radar to detect 215 previously unknown children’s graves on the site of a formal residential school. (Over 80 churches, most Roman Catholic, were subsequently burned by arson in reaction to this declaration.) The residential school system, wherein First Nation kids were taken away from their families and taught the languages, literacy and skills considered necessary to prosper in modern society — or at least in principle were intended as such but in practice were reported to have been hotbeds of abuse, humiliation and cultural erasure — is considered one of the great shames of our nation and frequently described as a “cultural genocide”, so the land acknowledgement ritual is essentially a nation-wide, politically mandated expiation of collective guilt.

    However, putting aside the argument over whether the schools themselves were actually the horror they’re frequently described as (many children did die there, but of tuberculosis cases which the underfunded schools couldn’t afford to treat or prevent, and much of the black legend of “midnight burials” derives from the unfounded tall tales of a single defrocked United Church minister named Kevin Annett), the fundamental problem with this claim is this: Not a single set of human remains, or even a detectible DNA portion thereof, has ever been turned up at the Kamloops Residential School site. Not one. The Tk’emlups clan won’t even let exploratory excavations be carried out. The whole gesture, in other words, is a hollow ritual designed to justify a lie and gaslight the rest of us. (It has, unfortunately, worked.)

    If I am lucky I’ll live long enough to watch this fad burn out and go away. But I’ve lost any faith that the people of my country are smart or moral enough not to fall for another one.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. They are the purest example of CS Lewis’ “Omnipotent Moral Busybodies” in the modern world, I think.

        certainly there were abuses, because the people in charge KNEW what was right

        Like

  32. Over the last dcade or so we’ve visited most of the counry and spent time In pretty much every region you’d want to name. My beloved has developed a theory concerning “native” tribes. I think it may be a bit oversimplified, but there’s still a lot of truth in it.

    Thinking of examples, like the Southern Cheyenne cardiac care nurse in Oklahoma who looked after him. (She was very clear about being southern Cheyenne). Or the good people of Talequah, OK, capital of the Cherokee Nation. Or the stocky, cheerful young ladies in deerskin at the Cultural Center in Talequah, who spoke of the Five Civilized Tribes and implied all was sweetness and light. The other couple in our group nodded, while my beloved commented you don’t put a 12-foot palisade around the village to keep out bears. Note the young ladies insisted on our staying long enough to get a photo with them, which suggests they were pulling the other, terribly serious, couple’s leg. Or the cultural centers which spoke of how, ah, enthusiastically the Cherokee adopted European farming techniques and intermarried. Also noting that the husbands of Cherokee wives who discovered their spouse and children were off on the Trail of Tears tended to join them, as did a number of ministers who felt compelled to go with their congregations. My beloved takes considerable pleasure imagining the ’49ers on their way to California after the Georgia gold ran out, having to buy supplies from Cherokee grocers in Oklahoma….or as I put it, there’s more than one way to scalp an Anglo.

    Then you have the Crow, up on the reservation near the Little Big Horn. Both nearby Hardin and the reservation hold reenactments….using virtually the same script, which definitely favors the Crow POV. My beloved had a bit of a go-round with a Crow author, who was holding forth about the high levels of alcoholism, divorce rates and general wretchedness of male life on the reservation, and how it’s all the white man’s fault.

    He believes the big difference among tribes is the ones which adapted, and particularly the ones that accepted the idea of private property, have prospered, while the tribes that maintain tribal property and group consensus have not. It’s interesting to learn one tribesman went to his tribal elders after the great buffalo slaughter and told them he had a vision of rescuing orphaned calves….and they forbade him, so he didn’t. Fortunately either he or his sons finally got permission and there were still calves to rescue, which is part of the reason we still have bison today. Along with rich and influential whites also involved. The tribe adapted, to the point they went for the contract to manage the bison herd on the range in Montana and proved they could do it.

    Which makes the whole situation tragic. Those who adapt are more likely to thrive. Those who refuse….don’t.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I agree, and you also have to keep in mind intra-tribal politics. I would suspect a great deal of what causes the dire conditions on the Dakota/Lakota tribal lands in the Dakotas and Nebraska comes from a combination of horrible conflicts within the bands, as well as between the bands, and the refusal to chuck those parts of their culture that don’t work in the modern world.

      I jokingly call the Comanche (and Japanese, and a few others) Velcro™ cultures, because they latch onto whatever works or seems neat from other cultures. The Comanche reinvented themselves twice. Once from being Great Basin gatherer-hunters, and once from being nomadic buffalo hunters (and raiders, and …). It drove later generations and ethnographers crazy, because the generation of the late 1800s said, in effect, “The old ways didn’t work, so don’t waste time on them. Learn what we need to survive now.” The current Comanche are trying to reverse engineer things from artifacts. (The current generation also said, “Need to be able to care for ancient stuff before we can have it? Can do.” Last I heard they were starting an anthropology and museum curation program in one of their tribal community-colleges.)

      Like

      1. Intra-tribal conflicts along with the situation where we have three tribes (Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin) lumped together as the “Klamath Tribes”. Considering that the Modoc war was related to a conflict between them and the Klamath, it’s amazing that the “cooperative” setup still runs. Sort of.

        The tribes were terminated in 1954 by a federal act (later restored in 1986), and members had the option to stay in the tribe (without federal supervision or a reservation) or to get a payout. I see the effects to this day. Our $TINY_TOWN is relatively poor, while the next town over has a bunch of well off Indian ranchers. (Not sure how inter-tribe affects this. The Modoc have a lot less political power than the Klamath.)

        Like

  33. The thing about Israel is that even they aren’t ‘native’ they took it from the Canaanites. They not only conquered the land long ago, but lost it. Then got it back.

    ____________________________________________________________

    I recently did the math and I can draw a line back to an ancestor who entered the US in 1635. I’m about to celebrate 400 years of my family being here. (One reason I love Eric Flints Ring of Fire series since I can name an ancestor who would have heard about the ring of fire)

    Liked by 1 person

      2. Basically, this is an area where archeology and anthropology seems to have deliberately screwed things up.

        Two hundred years can be ten generations, which is literally up to a bit over a thousand possible unique ancestors.

        There’s some sort of expiration period, or a window that should be taken over the most recent generations, and considering levels of peace within that.

        Basically, either we allow tenuous claims over an absurd number of generations, and therefore I can have casus belli for going in and exterminating almost any arbitrary population, or we can discard some of the situations where the academics are screwing us over with probable frauds.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Yeah – Do the descendants of groups that left A and conquered B in prehistory, replacing and/or absorbing all the prior B-ians, have claim rights to both A and B? How about groups descended from slaves taken from A to B?

          Or, assuming the multiple-waves-out-of-Africa theory continues to hold up, does that mean all of us Hominids can assert claim to any individual parcel of land on that continent?

          It all just ends up trolleying along ad absurdam.

          Liked by 1 person

  34. IIRC, there’s a lot of evidence that the current set of Native American tribes displaced (and possibly killed) earlier waves of migrants across the Bering Land Bridge. Note that the current North American tribes don’t seem to have a religion anything like that of the Aztecs or Maya – no human sacrifice.

    Like

    1. *wags paw* The Pawnee did, the Morning Star Girl ceremony. That’s one we know about. IIRc some of the Pacific Coast people seem to have sacrificed slaves for some things, although that’s shakier ground as far as evidence. There’s a lot we’re not allowed, or no longer allowed, to know about American Indian tribal practices that might paint the Ancestors in a less-than worshipful light. (Like the Southwest tribes being cannibals prior to the 1300s, or 1400s, or at least practicing cannibalism. Can’t talk about that, pretend it didn’t happen and that the evidence isn’t what it obviously is.)

      Like

        1. I was really fortunate (although I didn’t think so at the time) to take 1.5 grad classes on American Indian history, with two different but intellectually honest profs. H. Zinn’s book had been introduced into some of the public schools in Flat State, and the profs wanted us TAs to learn what we would be colliding with. So we got all the tribal politics as well as academic stuff.

          It was a slog to read at the time, but that plus learning about Southwest archaeology before it got taken over by the turquoise clutchers (like pearl clutchers but more regional) means I tend to question stuff. We had to read about the Morning Star ritual the week we focused on Plains Indian warfare and later disputes between the tribes.

          Like

    2. In all likelihood the ancestors of modern Amerindians wiped out the remnants of the Clovis who were the people in North America prior to them (a sudden ice age after the end of a prior one and aborted inter-glacial had reduced the Clovis population to near extinction prior to that).

      Of course schools would have you believe that it the “great horse culture” of the Sioux had been going on for centuries until Europeans arrived, never mind the fact that the great horse culture would never have existed but for Europeans re-introducing horses which had gone extinct in the Americas.

      Of course what this shows is that cultures and people generally throughout human existence have blended and borrowed from other cultures, have intermarried, etc., and so forth and so on, even those that have strict rules on marrying within the group (for instance Orthodox Jews).

      Jews of course have lived in Israel for over 3000 years, which is longer than many of the people that the left recites its land acknowledgements about, yet somehow Jews, who have lived in what is now modern Israel, including Judea and Samaria, who built Jerusalem, and who lived in the Old City continuously except for the years between 1948 and 1967 when Jordan ethnically cleansed the Old City and made it Judenfrei, are the one indigenous people (using the left’s terminology) who the left is adamant has no right to their historic homeland. Funny how the left always finds ways to demonize Jews and justify mass murder of Jews.

      As with most things, the purpose of land acknowledgments is not what is stated in them, but is for the “revolution” by which the left seeks to dismantle Western Civilization and replace it with their Marxist “paradise” (never mind that Marx and his ilk are Europeans whose ideology is derived from Western Civilization-no one ever said that the left was intelligent).

      Like

      1. Jews aren’t the only one. They’re the only ones that can currently be *expelled* (or otherwise removed) from their homeland. Europeans also don’t have the right to their own homeland, though they can’t (yet) be evicted from the location that they have historical ties to. Instead, Europeans are duty-bound to allow massive numbers of foreigners who have nothing in common with the local culture, and have little to no interest in learning about the local culture. This will continue until the Europeans are a minority in the lands that they have ancestral ties to, at which point, well…

        Liked by 1 person

        1. This. Ask UK authorities about plans for special efforts needed to preserve and support aboriginal cultures on those islands and prepare to be arrested for hate speech.

          Like

  35. On an unrelated note (or perhaps not so unrelated) Happy Portugal Day to our host and to all who celebrate.

    Like

  36. Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » IT’S ALL STOLEN FROM DINOSAURS, ANYWAY:  Land Acknowledgement.

  39. You don’t like King Charles’ name? Fine. What would YOU have named him?

    Edward? After Edward VIII, that name’s got bad juju.

    George? They’ve had a bunch of those—maybe Liz thought it was time for a change.

    William? Not a bad choice, but they didn’t pick it.

    John? RIGHT out!

    Henry? Endless choruses of “I’m Henery the Ninth, I am” provide an answer?

    Richard? While as a fan of R3 I like it, they’d call him “King Dick.”

    My best-beloved, poor wretch, says she opposes monarchy because it’s not fair to the monarch. I would never want to live my life under the kind of microscope the royals have.

    Like

Comments are closed.