The history of Hawaiian is a sad, but should the Federal government move to recognize them as a Native tribe and with it give them the ability to reclaim lost land taken by the government and self govern trait Native tribes within the continental U.S have.
1 Like
Interesting…Yes I think they should, a native tribe is a native tribe. Location shouldn’t make a difference
1 Like
Cool. Should the UK give people of native British descent give preference over descendants of immigrants from other parts of the world?
Do British meet the requirements of a native tribe/indigenous people?
Did an army of immigrants come to Britain and force anyone from their land through threat of violence?
I’m guessing this comparison made sense to you somehow.
Yes. Yes an army in fact did. Several in fact. Many stayed William the Conqueror. i agree with your overall point
No. There are no native tribes or indigenous peoples in Britian.
The Welsh are arguably the closest cultural and genetic descendants of the ancient Britons who lived in England before the invasion of the Anglo-Saxons.
Do they a qualify as an indigenous tribe? Or are they too pale to qualify?
The Anglo-Saxons arrived 1600 years ago. How far back to we go to establish who is really indigenous?
I’m not sure. I suppose that would be up to the residents of each nation to decide based on the circumstances of each specific case.
Why do I feel like you want this to be about brown people?
My observation is that different groups of Europeans are called “nationalities”, while non-Europeans are frequently called “tribes” or indigenous people.
The fighting that occurred in Northern Ireland during the troubles would have been called tribal warfare if it had occurred in some other part of the world.
Is the different terminology a form of racism?
For example consider these two recent news stories.
Do Druids in Britain have a right to interfere with renovations at Stonehenge?
Do Hawaiian protestors have a right to prevent construction of a new telescope on a mountain top?
Both groups claim the sites are sacred ground.
Yes. They did exactly that. Check your history.
That was actually the point. Bill seems to have been going for a brownish/sandish invasion replacing the indigenous pale people. But those pale people were also invaders who displaced the previous inhabitants.
I believe ethnic conflict is the term used.
Repeatedly, and often successfully.
Indigenous peoples are considered to be in a place “naturally” which is obviously open to interpretation. Invasion and occupation generally won’t qualify.
The paleness of the skin crack is just an insult that squelches any chance at serious discussion.
I didn’t see anything about brownish in Bills post. Why would it make a difference?
