Alice Piper fought the law and won

submitted by goobandit from self.IndigenousPeoples

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]goobandit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I have never found an explanation from both sides that agrees on who started it. I know some college natives who say it’s offensive, maybe they’re right?

There’s a famous artist Cheyenne Randall who uses it as his instagram @, I know there was a band Indian Giver, I know other artists who use it, who use wagon burner, the list goes on. I’ve found it’s used in jest more often than not. That’s why I used it here, to make fun of the situation, but the humor doesn’t always translate in text.

There is no doubt a ton of misunderstandings took place, but here we are, regular citizens getting fucked over by the tyrannical practice of “Indian giving” us our “certain unalienable rights” whenever they want.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Some believe the raison d'etre for college students these days is to learn new ways to be offended.

As for "inalienable rights", I've always argued those don't exist - that it's simply a fantasy or wishful thinking. This is mainly because inalienable means "can't be taken away". So if they're taken away, it disproves inalienable.

Same applies if they're called human rights instead. If something can be taken away, it's not a right. Anyway, that's how my logic works.

Racial humor can be pretty funny. What the leftist-scolds are missing is what's left when you force the humor out of it.

[–]goobandit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Academia has been diverted by authoritarian nerds who just want to replicate themselves to serve those in power.

So no one has human rights, so why have any laws at all? It doesn’t matter how wishful the thinking behind it is, we’ve created the system that hinges on rights of individuals. Even those who violate laws have rights as citizens, except in very specific cases, historically. Or recently in broad general cases, for example the NDAA, which should be nullified or amended at the very least.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

so why have any laws at all?

Behavioral standards keep things running smoothly. The fiction of "rights" makes the standards more palatable, and it's useful to at least pretend to believe in them. But watch how rights go right out the window when the chimps throw a chimpout.

https://leakreality.com/video/26245/student-causes-chimpout

"Wearing a costume [a right] is worse than physically assaulting someone [a crime]" - video dindu

NDAA = National Defense Authorization Act?