this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
36 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22675 readers
417 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try [email protected] if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It'd all have to be given back to them, since they were here first and it was all stolen from them and we forced them all into worthless land in the desert. Where would everyone in the US go? The reaction against that would be... something else. It would make all the low intensity warfare during Reconstruction look like a picnic.
I think the US and states would need to give back state and nationally owned land, as well as purchase (or use eminent domain) land near where their original tribes lived, and give them the resources for decades, to develop themselves. This too may still cause a huge backlash.
I think the least that should be done, is, where the reservations AREN'T on worthless desert land that we forced them onto, we should have to invest as much as is required to make the reservations WAY better, until a longer term restorative solution is found.....
Which, I doubt would be allowed.
landback isn't about kicking white people out, in most interpretations. it's about collective tribal ownership of land, which, around socialist principles would promote preservation at the expense of private industry. it's not a proposal to have indigenous people come in and just take over the capitalist machinery at the expense of whites, it'll in theory be better for everyone and probably in practice much like the minority SRs of the USSR---russian settlers remained and had political rights, the formerly colonized just got a bit more.
No, it's not, but you know that's how reactionaries would frame it. And it would work.
if reactionaries had free press, but any large scale implementation necessitates a socialist order that wouldnt allow that
How are you going to stop it? They are already primed for that narrative. You can't just wish away the backlash that WILL happen
By not having a free press would be the easiest solution.