I can’t help but think your framing is a little off. It’s more like someone stole the item, then gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who sold it to someone else, who gave it to their kids. And then asking those kids to give up the item (in this case their property and home?).
So all you need to do to get away with theft is wait and move it around a bunch after the initial theft? And the rightful owner loses their right to it?
Like I feel like your perspective sounds nice and empathetic for about three seconds, then you realize you’re advocating another ethnic cleansing in response to ethnic cleansing. Or not, I guess it’s possible to think ethnic cleansing is good.
No, of course not, don’t change the context of the situation to make a point. That’s really immature.
I haven’t stolen anything is my point. My ancestors moved to USA in the early 1900s, long after the colonization was complete. Am I supposed to give up my property because someone who died 400 years ago was oppressed? I had nothing to do with that, I was just born here.
Are you willing to give up YOUR home if asked? I suspect not, but you didn’t come to be there without violence either, right?
So what you’re saying is that it’s okay to take back the food stolen by a homeless man desperate to feed his kids, right? And if they’ve already eaten, it’s okay to take a scalpel to their stomach to retrieve it.
Yeah but is the kid to blame?
Answer: no, but the kid should recognize inequity and help correct it anyway.
Blame is irrelevant, the kid needs to give back the stolen items.
I can’t help but think your framing is a little off. It’s more like someone stole the item, then gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who sold it to someone else, who gave it to their kids. And then asking those kids to give up the item (in this case their property and home?).
So all you need to do to get away with theft is wait and move it around a bunch after the initial theft? And the rightful owner loses their right to it?
Like I feel like your perspective sounds nice and empathetic for about three seconds, then you realize you’re advocating another ethnic cleansing in response to ethnic cleansing. Or not, I guess it’s possible to think ethnic cleansing is good.
No, of course not, don’t change the context of the situation to make a point. That’s really immature.
I haven’t stolen anything is my point. My ancestors moved to USA in the early 1900s, long after the colonization was complete. Am I supposed to give up my property because someone who died 400 years ago was oppressed? I had nothing to do with that, I was just born here.
Are you willing to give up YOUR home if asked? I suspect not, but you didn’t come to be there without violence either, right?
So what you’re saying is that it’s okay to take back the food stolen by a homeless man desperate to feed his kids, right? And if they’ve already eaten, it’s okay to take a scalpel to their stomach to retrieve it.
Hypocrisy isn’t excusable.