this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
973 points (96.1% liked)

Comic Strips

12585 readers
3247 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I knew some kids from the reservations and I’ll never forget how casually they’d say with every blast they’re reminded that they’re occupied.

wouldnt this technically be more of a form of pseudo occupation, since they also get benefits from being a US citizen, and also protection, from these same planes as well.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

When we do it, it's only a "pseudo-occupation"

When Nazi Germany occupied France, was it only a "pseudo-occupation" because the Panzers then "protected" the occupied territory from the British? What a ridiculous line of logic.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

wait i'm sorry modern day native americans in the US are equivalent to french people living in france under the military control of nazi germany?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It is a negotiated treaty from the 1800s, though it took until the 1970s to get clarity on a big part of their rights. But they're still on reservations and their ancestral lands are partitioned up. They've acquired some of those lands back through various ways: legal battles and just plain buying it back.

Though mind you I'm relating something I remember as a teenager, from teenagers with politically active parents.

But more importantly my point was to highlight a lens into a different perspective. They knew they would have been just like the Kurdish villager in the comic had those planes been invented back then. I had never considered that viewpoint at the time.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

yeah, which i why i consider the use of pseudo occupation, as opposed to like, settlement or something. There aspects of occupation, but up to the current modern day, there are natives in positions of power within the US government, and those with sovereign control over their own land as well.

Although to be fair, most people didn't have very many rights until the 1970s lmao.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I think those 'aspects of occupation' are quite relevant. The treaties weren't respected and Americans would just remove the people, bury tribal lands in fill material and build on top.

For example, emphasis mine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tse-whit-zen

This village site, which includes longhouse areas, ceremonial areas, places for fish and clam drying, was** occupied by the Klallam until the 1930s.[4] During the early 20th century, businesses owned by European Americans built a number of lumber mills on top of the village site** at the waterfront during the expansion of the lumber industry. Because the ground was covered with 15 to 30 feet (4.6 to 9.1 m) of fill, the village and cemetery site was preserved through this period.[3]

Notice that timeline: 'occupied until 1930s' and 'Early 20th century.' The people were removed and they buried everything until 2004 when they started excavating skeletons. This isn't all ancient history and it hasn't really been... amicable.