• NegativeInf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Did you not read the article?

    American citizenship was not an aspiration for the first peoples of the United States, whose primary political allegiance was to their own nations.

    Meanwhile, as I’ve covered in my research and teaching on federal Indian law, the Indian Citizenship Act was not a gift or benefit to Native Americans. It was part of a coercive larger effort to assimilate Native Americans into U.S. society.

    From nation to assimilation For centuries after Europeans colonized North America in the 16th century, Native Americans sought to remain separate and distinct from the settlers.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      I can just imagine what the news articles would be if natives were not given citizenship and voting rights and limited to independent tribal areas. This is funny because someone just said something about this with palestinians in the reverse but of course if it happened then israel would have to formally become one state the way the US is one state.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        You should approach the beliefs of foreign cultures which you don’t understand with curiousity and open-mindedness, not debate.

        • acockworkorange
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          They are not mutually exclusive, and respectful debate benefits everyone. The debate being whether federal U.S. citizenship for natives is a net positive or negative.

          In the current political scenario, I don’t see anyone arguing it’s a net negative.