[PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Sounds good to me ;)

Miller, Jeremy JMILLER at ci.albany.or.us
Wed Jun 19 18:19:38 UTC 2002


> > They didn't.  They claimed proprietary dominion over the 
> land that was
> > once common to all living things.
> 
> What is a reservation , a figment of my imagination?

No.  But have you been to many?  They sure as hell not the land they were
claiming as their territory.  They were usually territories incapable of
supporting the people (and considered valuless to the Europeans).  Their
concept of property rights was directly related to the ability of a
territory to sustaining them with its contents, not neccessarily to a patch
of geography of exact dimensions.  Most were willing to share their
territory with others, as long as the capacity for sustenance of said others
was there.  Others weren't.


Now, the willingness of some to share their territory with another doesn't
make it any less their territory.  Nor does it give authority to the sharee
(think "delegation") to take more authority over said territory than they
were granted by the territory holders.  And to kick out the sharer to a
different location.  This did happen.

(Not all were willing to share of course... probably smart, if they were
perceptive of the consequences.  Or perhaps not, considering what they were
up against.)

Their concept of property rights differs from ours in some of its terms, but
that doesn't make them any less property rights.  They most certainly were
violated.  If we value ours, we must recognize the fact that we've lacked
respect for others in the past and attempt to learn from any mistakes.


Notes:

1.  Not all settlements by non-natives were violent or involved mistreatment
of the natives.
2.  Others were.
3.  Not all natives were violent towards non-natives.
4.  Others were.

Both sides had those doing ill, and those trying to do well.  I'll leave it
at that.


> > > > Many native civilizations were destroyed.
> 
> Many weren't. Some were more violent then others.  I would 
> like to see you
> ride across the prairie in a wagon with a rifle and you kids
> pontificationing vapidly with the savages while the skin your 
> entourage.
> They weren't all friendly,  bubba.

These ones might have been interpreted our presence as an uninvited entry
into their territory, and they were defending it.

They weren't all unfriendly, either.  (They tended to get more unfriendly as
they got to know us better.  Can't say I blame them.)

Not saying that I wouldn't have been in that wagon participating in the
invasion myself... I'm just calling a spade a spade, even if it is mine.


> > > Throughout History, not an Evil White Man problem, more of a greed
> > > problem

Agreed.  There've been many Evil Men of many colors.  Whites have no
shortage of them, neither does any other.


> > > Pangea
> >
> > That one word doesn't carry any magical explanation for your
> > ramblings.  Please elucidate.
> 
> You haven't heard?

The word Pangea?  Yes.  Does that narrow anything down?  No.  I've heard
lots.  There's tons of data relating to that word.  Please specify and give
some context, because not all of it could apply to any conversation.


> So how many immigrants have you allowed to illegally enter 
> and remain in
> your private space?
> 
> None.

This doesn't really relate to whether or not the door is locked.  If they
are being allowed in, the door would be unlocked for them, whether it was
normally locked or not.  Allowing entry would remove illegality.  Especially
if allowed to remain there.  I would classify that as an unexpected guest,
and not a criminal.  After all, I let them in... by not locking the door or
otherwise making it clear that entry was not allowed. (As a property owner I
have a right to do that, but I also have the right NOT to if I choose.)  If
the unexpected guest refuses to leave if asked, or otherwise behaves in a
criminal manner... then they are a criminal.  An expected guest doing the
same would be considered the same as well.

I do lock my doors when living in non-rurual settings, to avoid dealing with
that distinction. :)





More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list