https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/si4e6p/aita_for_being_hawaiian_and_having_my_dad_talk_to/ link because the AITA op was a coward and deleted their account
This is sorta random, but one of the comments is talking about the Bering Land Bridge thing being controversial. I've heard other native people talk about it being controversial, and how it's used as some kind of excuse for genocide because of how supposedly recent the migration would have been.
Apparently some research is showing much much earlier migrations.
My question is, what gave this social importance? There's no way Europeans would have turned around and said "whoops! 80,000 years? I thought you were here for only 10,000 years, sorry, have your land back, we're sailing back to York"
But the fact that it's controversial tells me there is some greater context I don't know about, like maybe some dorky ass 19th century white people consciously using it as a justification for recent concentration camps and residential schools or something.
I've never heard of it being controversial, but I know that from the 1950s or so to now the estimated migration date has been pushed back from 10,000 years ago to 20,000 years ago. We're pretty definitively sure that the people who first settled the Americas came from Asia, whether it was over land or by boat seems like splitting hairs to me.
I heard a native guy complaining about the Bering strait theory on a podcast. If it's simply a religious thing (some religions hold that the indigenous people here were originally formed with the Earth) then I wouldn't be a New-Atheist-style dick about it but I also wouldn't really care. But maybe that theory has some hidden genocidal history, wouldn't be the first time.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/si4e6p/aita_for_being_hawaiian_and_having_my_dad_talk_to/ link because the AITA op was a coward and deleted their account
:wojak-nooo: i'm native to south africa, stop calling me apartheid andy
This is sorta random, but one of the comments is talking about the Bering Land Bridge thing being controversial. I've heard other native people talk about it being controversial, and how it's used as some kind of excuse for genocide because of how supposedly recent the migration would have been.
Apparently some research is showing much much earlier migrations.
My question is, what gave this social importance? There's no way Europeans would have turned around and said "whoops! 80,000 years? I thought you were here for only 10,000 years, sorry, have your land back, we're sailing back to York"
But the fact that it's controversial tells me there is some greater context I don't know about, like maybe some dorky ass 19th century white people consciously using it as a justification for recent concentration camps and residential schools or something.
Anyone know more?
I've never heard of it being controversial, but I know that from the 1950s or so to now the estimated migration date has been pushed back from 10,000 years ago to 20,000 years ago. We're pretty definitively sure that the people who first settled the Americas came from Asia, whether it was over land or by boat seems like splitting hairs to me.
Yeah it seems that way to me too.
I heard a native guy complaining about the Bering strait theory on a podcast. If it's simply a religious thing (some religions hold that the indigenous people here were originally formed with the Earth) then I wouldn't be a New-Atheist-style dick about it but I also wouldn't really care. But maybe that theory has some hidden genocidal history, wouldn't be the first time.