• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Your thoughts on Indian reservations

Are you for or against Indian reservations?

  • I voted Hillary. I am for reservations, though they may need improvement.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    12
Of course it matters to you. You wrote that you will be judging all the responses to determine a degree of racism.

I'm just mentioning that, based on what I read, I dont accept your qualifications for that judgement, so decided not to vote.

Understandable. I don't recall coming out and saying that I would judge responses based on degree of racism, but there is probably enough in my posts to suggest that that is the case. Therefore, you are correct. I expect someone who is in favor of governmental segregation based on DNA to defend their position.

Being of Irish descent, I do not qualify genetically for the 'benefits' that the Bureau of Indian Affairs offers. Only certain people, not of their choice, are born with that DNA and thus fall under certain governmental rules apart from the rest of us.

Not many people here are applying The Golden Rule. Would you want a residential area set aside for you by the government based on your race? The answer is easy for me. If I wouldn't want it done to myself or my race, I can't possibly advocate it for other races.
 
Understandable. I don't recall coming out and saying that I would judge responses based on degree of racism, but there is probably enough in my posts to suggest that that is the case. Therefore, you are correct. I expect someone who is in favor of governmental segregation based on DNA to defend their position.

And the bold is the verification that I had speculated correctly...because "you seem to" assume that Native Americans are still forced to live on reservations. There is no forced segregation, Native Americans are also full American citizens and may live where ever they want.
 
And the bold is the verification that I had speculated correctly...because "you seem to" assume that Native Americans are still forced to live on reservations. There is no forced segregation, Native Americans are also full American citizens and may live where ever they want.

Since they are not forced, and they are full American citizens, does this mean that a Bureau of Indian Affairs is just? Only Americans of certain genetics fall under its jurisdiction.
 
Since they are not forced, and they are full American citizens, does this mean that a Bureau of Indian Affairs is just? Only Americans of certain genetics fall under its jurisdiction.

Why would it be 'unjust'? On what legal premise? Native American's do have a different status in the US, a status that's legally recognized and there is a different sovereignty accorded them *on their semi-sovereign* land. We have federal organizations that oversee foreign affairs and foreign persons. The CIA for one.

Are you saying, or exploring, that they should lose this status?
 
Last edited:
Why would it be 'unjust'? On what legal premise? Native American's do have a different status in the US, a status that's legally recognized and there is a different sovereignty accorded them *on their semi-sovereign* land. We have federal organizations that oversee foreign affairs and foreign persons. The CIA for one.

Are you saying, or exploring, that they should lose this status?

Assuming Indians are American citizens, special rules set aside for them based on their genetics violate the 14th Amendment (equal protection under the law) and the Civil Rights Act (discrimination based on race). If their sovereignty dictates different treatment from other American citizens that happen to be of another genetic code (people of Irish descent, for example), then I would argue that Indians are not fully American citizens.
 
My views don't matter, it is your view that I'm interested in. The poll questions are pretty straightforward.

Nope...sorry...doesn't work that way. If your views don't matter, then mine don't matter either.
A proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion?
Why are you using a proxy, and why do your views not matter?

Taking a hard pass after reading that massive attempt at obfuscation.
 
Assuming Indians are American citizens, special rules set aside for them based on their genetics violate the 14th Amendment (equal protection under the law) and the Civil Rights Act (discrimination based on race). If their sovereignty dictates different treatment from other American citizens that happen to be of another genetic code (people of Irish descent, for example), then I would argue that Indians are not fully American citizens.

They have dual citizenship, both as US citizens and of their own sovereign nations as well.
 
I voted for neither of those candidates. I don’t have a dog in the fight but I am of the opinion we should honor our treaties, so the reservations should remain until BOTH parties agree to alter the arrangement.
 
Why is the poll coupled with voting preferences? Are we talking about Indian reservations or electoral candidates?
 
Nope...sorry...doesn't work that way. If your views don't matter, then mine don't matter either.
A proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion?
Why are you using a proxy, and why do your views not matter?

Taking a hard pass after reading that massive attempt at obfuscation.

I use a proxy because it's hard for people to admit they are for the federally mandated legal segregation of Indians based on genetics. A way to realize that injustice is to ask whether one would want their own race to be treated like the Indians under government law, assuming people know the condition of most reservations.

This translates to blacks when we have not so much legal segregation (well, admission standards and the like), but the social segregation of applying different social rules and standards to blacks.
 
my opinion is the American Indian got screwed over big time. They had the whole enchilada. the ones we didn't kill and that was most of them wound up on little parcels of land white men didn't want. You should visit some of the reservations out in colorado, new mexico utah and the rest of the western states. poverty is a huge problem.

if you are really interested in learning about the issue here is a link to start you off

Tribal Governance | NCAI
 
Why is the poll coupled with voting preferences? Are we talking about Indian reservations or electoral candidates?

I'm learning the poll thing. I should have left out the candidates.
 
It is as if people are wanting to do more to what is left of North American Indians. One of the worst genocides in human history, largely ignored by the history books, and here we are debating removal of reservations? How white does this nation need to be to make some of you happy?

It is not even close to the worst genocide in history. And it is not ignored at all.
 
Nope...sorry...doesn't work that way. If your views don't matter, then mine don't matter either.
A proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion?
Why are you using a proxy, and why do your views not matter?

Taking a hard pass after reading that massive attempt at obfuscation.


There's nothing wrong with being undecided on an issue.
 
I'm learning the poll thing. I should have left out the candidates.

Fair enough. In this community when people do that kind of thing, it usually looks like the OP is trying to pigeonhole people into two sides so they can go after their partisan opponents, rather than talk about the topic itself.
 
It is not even close to the worst genocide in history. And it is not ignored at all.

well opinions vary!


when columbus arrived estimates vary but it was roughly 10 million people. by the 1800's the population was reduced by more than 90%.

it was even worse in central and south America.
 
The sovereign status of Indian reservations has allowed casino development and large profits to the Indians that don't gamble. Poetic justice as they pick the pockets of widows, weak-minded, ignoramuses, addicts, and others that live in a dream World. OTOH, if we're not going to return land we stole from them, they have entitlement.
/

All land everywhere was "stolen" in that case. No country anywhere is governed today by its original inhabitants or owners.
 
I often use Indians as a proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion. I have a guess as to what the results will be. I'm very interested in your reasoning behind your choice.

I voted for neither and I'm indifferent about Indian reservations.
 
Fair enough. In this community when people do that kind of thing, it usually looks like the OP is trying to pigeonhole people into two sides so they can go after their partisan opponents, rather than talk about the topic itself.

It's early in the results, but I was expecting more Hillary supporters to also support Indian reservations. From the posts so far, it looks like there is a deep sentiment for well-intended racial segregation of Indians.
 
I voted for neither and I'm indifferent about Indian reservations.

Thanks very much for the input, there are a few that are indifferent.
 
well opinions vary!


when columbus arrived estimates vary but it was roughly 10 million people. by the 1800's the population was reduced by more than 90%.

it was even worse in central and south America.

Entire civilizations have been completely wiped out in human history. Every piece of land that man lives has been conquered and its people killed. It sucks, it is savage, it is horrific, but it is the nature of man. Native tribes were helping wipe each other out, disease ran rampant and it was terrible. However it is the same thing that has happened across human history over and over. It will sound terrible but the Native American tribes should have united and fought the Europeans rather than uniting with them to wipe each other out. Human history is filled with invaders coming in and brutally destroying.
 
All land everywhere was "stolen" in that case. No country anywhere is governed today by its original inhabitants or owners.

Terrible but true. Every place that man lives - another man takes. Land belongs to who takes it. It cannot be stolen - only conquered and defended.
 
Easy to explain, it's government sanctioned oppression of a minority that's been going on in the U.S. for many, many decades. It was Trumps favorite president, Andrew Jackson that decided to round up all the Cherokee tribe, take away all their property East of the Mississippi, and forced them all West by foot in the middle of winter to a remote area of Oklahoma. The 'Trail of Tears' is only one small example of how horrid this country has treated native Americans. Their misery doesn't end with the Trail of Tears either. The treatment of native American Indians is a historic lesson regarding the morality of this country.

Anyone that has traveled to the Navajo Indian reservations in Arizona has seen that the reservations are places where the Navajo were forced to remain in abject poverty, totally forgotten and completely mistreated by history. And yes, the U.S. Government stole everything from them and land was only one, their dignity was another.

View attachment 67240444

How are the 'forced' to remain in abject poverty? Arent they free to do what they like with their land? Are they not free to leave? Plus, it should be pointed out that American indians have always lived in abject poverty. No one put them there, that is how we found them and how they have chosen to remain.
 
I often use Indians as a proxy to get to the root of the black/white racial discussion. I have a guess as to what the results will be. I'm very interested in your reasoning behind your choice.
Why does how we voted have anything to do with Indian reservations?
 
How are the 'forced' to remain in abject poverty? Arent they free to do what they like with their land? Are they not free to leave? Plus, it should be pointed out that American indians have always lived in abject poverty. No one put them there, that is how we found them and how they have chosen to remain.

they are certainly not forced but like many in our inner cities they are trapped by poverty.
 
Back
Top Bottom