this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
1135 points (99.9% liked)

196

16552 readers
1853 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 50 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It should be given back to the natives, with reparations. I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to remove the faces and attempt to restore it.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (4 children)

We'll start by giving them back your house

[–] [email protected] 73 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Hey, guess what - wanting a historical wrong to be corrected by having a polity live up to its treaty obligations, however belatedly, by ceding a piece of land on which a rather ugly monument exists on and telling the original owners 'do what you want with it' is not the equivalent of volunteering for ethnic cleansing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Might be a cool opportunity to build cohesion even. What if we (in consult with the Lakota whose land it annually is) build in a few cool people from other tribes too (e.g. chief Seattle, and others from all over the country). That could make it feel more like a monument to all of us.

Generally not a fan of defacing nature though. There's a joke in there somewhere but it's too early.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If that's what it takes to make reparations happen I'll gladly give mine. Thankfully that isn't what reparations would require so you just look like a racist asshole.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

Another example of why downvotes are sometimes necessary. All they'll care about is the six people that agreed with them

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

So where would you go?

[–] [email protected] 43 points 3 months ago

I don't see any houses on the mountain