[In response to discussions about acknowledging the dark side of colonist/Native American relations when celebrating Thanksgiving]
Conquering people has been the norm for thousands of years and has only now gone out of style. No need to be guilty about it.
I don’t give a shit about what happened 300 years ago to the poopoo peepee tribe.
10 comments
Right!
Who cares about the past?!
Oh, but “Remember the Alamo” and “The Confederacy Lives!” etc. are important!
Nothing raises the level of discourse for a conversation like calling someone a member of the "poopoo peepee tribe."
What are you, 12?
Mow, while the early Europeans who came to the country have a lot, and I mean a LOT of blood on their hands, modern Thanksgiving is detached enough I'd not really worry about it. Especially if we also educate people on proper history.
It's not like the Pilgrim Thanksgiving is the first, or only one from that time period, and thanking each other for what we can achieve by working with others is certainly nice.
@Tilver & @Chloe
I agree that Thanksgiving can be re-claimed. Also, while what happened not long afterwards was terrible, the general “First Thanksgiving Myth” symbolizes the USA at its best a tale of survival and intercultural friendship and exchange.
Also, Thanksgiving doesn’t necessarily have to commemorate a single event “Harvest Home” - type big meal celebrations have been practiced by many cultures (including the Americas and Europe) throughout history. Also, Thanksgiving as a National Holiday in the States became a thing LONG after the 17th Century and it was more tied with the end of the Civil War and WWII or whatever.
Thanksgiving is simply a Fall Harvest festival where families and communities give thanks for their blessings, it doesn’t even need to commemorate a historical event. It can be divorced from the “’Pilgrims & Indians’ Story” if one wishes.
****
The OP’s argument is also crap: “Conquering other Nations because it has always been done” is a stupid excuse. There’s no reason why conquerors couldn’t just have peacefully traded with others if resources were so scare or goods so wanted or needed. Nope; Conquering is just childish actions by weak (but physically strong) rulers with a Deity complex… it’s all about status and power… y’know… REAL weakness. Spain could’ve had a nice gold trade with the Mesoamericans. Europe could’ve had a nice trade in rubber, minerals or whatever with Africa. Britain could’ve had a nice peaceful trade in spices, tea, etc. with India, etc. Genghis Khan didn’t need to take over most of the “Old World” and could have traded with and worked with China and neighboring Dominions as the Khan of Mongolia.
There’s never a “need” to conquer. It’s also bullying and an ego trip. “That’s how it was always done” is not an excuse.
First, Thanksgiving was basically a harvest festival by the earliest Pilgrims, and could be reinterpretated in the same way formerly “pagan” festivities were done by Christians.
Second, as for your point about the eternity of conquests, humans should always strive to improve themselves, whether as individuals or as groups.
What happened not 300 years ago: but nary one year ago in the Capitol Building.
More civilised human beings - pun extremely intended - don't give a shit about what happened to the Sharter in the Mart tribe after 6th January 2021.
And therefore to the white right as a whole.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
