This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Here is a post just for BG, gonna have blacks, China and liberal paternalism. — Brooklynian

Here is a post just for BG, gonna have blacks, China and liberal paternalism.

armchair_warrior
armchair_warrior
edited November -1 in Brooklyn Politics

So should the Cherokee nation be allow to do what they want, they are technically still a sovereign nation within a nation. Or liberals know better and should force them to accept liberal views?

Or should they pull a play out of European and American playbook on creating chaos around the world. Like China(Tibet) or Iraq(Kurdistan)or now Kosovo from Serbia or Darfur etc...

Yet liberal western democracies wouldn't grant independence to their own colonies.

France and uk still has them. US still has tons of sovereign nations.

Maybe they should go to China or Russia and seek training and funding for arms or money and media support etc..

A federal order for one of the nation's largest American Indian tribes to restore voting rights and benefits to about 2,800 descendants of members' former slaves threw plans for a special election for a new chief into turmoil Tuesday.

The federal government sent the sternly-worded letter to the Cherokee Nation after it sent letters last week kicking the descendants out of the tribe and stripping them of benefits including medical care, food stipends and assistance for low-income homeowners.

http://news.yahoo.com/cherokees-told-back-slaves-descendants-193054698.html

Comments

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    What?

  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior

    suddenly developing reading comprehension, I know my grammar is bad but lol come on!! this thread is made just for you. it got it all!!!

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    I honestly have no idea what your point is.

  • homeowner
    homeowner

    I think what AW is asking is:

    1) Do you accept that a soverign nation has the right to determine who is a member of that nation and who is not?

    2) If you do accept that fact, then do you believe that the US has the right to threaten a nation for undertaking its soverign rights?

    3) If you do believe that the US has the right, then doesn't that run counter to the US fundamental beliefs in soverignty?

    4) Finally,isn't this all only an issue because we are talking about the decendants of slaves?

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    I don't have strong thoughts on our political relationship to the people we genocide-ed, dispossessed and then penned in on some of the most worthless land in the country, 1000s of miles from their original home.

    Also, I am deeply against American imperialism, whether cultural, economic or military.

    Also, Armchair is yet again peddling high school level geopolitical insight and treating it like he's exposing hypocrisy I can't see.

  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior

    a fish in the pond claiming he sees the world oceans.

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    Wow! The West is hypocritical!

    Next you're going to tell me the Iraq War wasn't about freedom.

  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior

    dogma constrains the mind, of both the left and right.

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    Centrism and false equivalencies are tempting ways to fool one's self into righteousness.

  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior

    always semantics and antics with you.

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    Haha. This coming from the guy who just mentioned dogma?

    It's not semantics when someone disagrees with you. Just FYI.

  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior


  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    I just saw that you quit on this thread too.

    Is there any observation you have that you're willing to defend?

  • armchair_warrior
    armchair_warrior

    you are right you won.

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    Semantics!

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    It think AW is willing to accept your opinion of him.

    ...it appears to me that your opinion has been deemed unimportant.

    (I suspect the feeling is mutual)

  • boygabriel
    boygabriel

    No, if it was unimportant he wouldn't respond (prior to, um, "going fishing").

    Instead he tries to label my responses ("ignorant, semantics, blah blah) in an effort to justify not responding.

    I'm not the only one who sees how he posts stuff up and then doesn't engage.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories