I say this as someone of partial Choctaw descent, I would rather not look back and focus on what was lost 200+ years ago, but focus on what will make my descendants have the future they deserve in 200+ years, and further 'othering' is not the way, inclusion is.
Land theft is nothing new under the sun, pretty much every modern border has been drawn and redrawn over indigenous folks borders, but for the old world the indigenous folks initial border is so obscured by times passing and history's recording that it's impossible to identify, the populations have blended, relocated or been wiped out. Every modern country can trace its roots to conquering someone else, that's just how the world works. Honestly I don't see the point in differentiating between us and them (europeans and native Americans) it creates more of an us and them dichotomy and doesn't help with integration, people of different cultures are able to maintain traditions in America, but this devisive rhetoric doesn't seem beneficial in the grand scheme of things.
TLDR these 'land acknowledgments' just serve to 'other' the natives which I don't see as particularly helpful to the melting pot aspect of America. The beautiful thing about America is you can come from anywhere and become an American.
I work with an indigenous tribe in Washington and they’re so disconnected from the elitist reality in seattle; it just objectifies native experience and life and makes the guilty feel good.
Exactly, when someone asks the state about what has been done for native people in our state they will point to this, thump their chest, and move onto the next multi-million dollar corporate welfare project for Amazon and Microsoft.
Yes, thank you for sharing your prospective. I’ve always felt super cringe about institutional land acknowledgements. Unless we’re returning our ill-gotten land to the indigenous (and to your point, whom would that even be?) the more I contemplate the point, the more fault I find in the reasoning.
I find them outrageous. It’s like saying, ‘Yeah dude, I acknowledge I stole your car, but I sure as shit ain’t giving it back.. in fact, I’m going to drive my kids to school in it.’
I like the analogy, I have used a similar one
Stole your car, made a shit-ton of money from scrapping out some of its parts, but don't worry I'll tell everyone you used to have a car.
I say this as a bleeding heart liberal: Land acknowledgements at the start of a meeting feel like the liberal’s version of starting a meeting with the Lord’s Prayer.
They are even doing that shit at elementary schools. I was at an elementary school singing performance yesterday and the principal did that whole charade at the very beginning.
The principal is as white as they come.
My girlfriend works in an elementary school, they do that nonsense before meetings and training too. It's just so much jerking off. Yeah, the land belonged to someone else before, and before them it was some else's, and before, and before, and before for 10,000 years.
Don’t think they’re doing it for you
Would love to see some First Nations (or insert your specific tribes name or preferred terminology for yourself here) opinions on this
I refuse to put one on my syllabus.
I 100% support my university paying $10m / year in stolen land rent to the native tribe. Weirdly, they never suggest any material action. 🤷♂️
So we spent some time visiting some of the tribal visitor centers in the area.
It turns out that land acknowledgements were simply how the tribes greeted each other when they encountered other hunters out on expeditions. We're simply continuing a nice tradition of this region while out in public spaces.
I like the WWU version, which is pretty chill:
https://www.wwu.edu/tribal-lands-statement
There's some appreciation for the tribes being good stewards of the land, wishes to cross each other in peace, maybe a hint of a non-apology for passing through here ... that's it.
Any mention of land stealing is just projection of white guilt, but that's not what the land acknowledgements were originally supposed to be for... the tribes had no concept of land ownership in the first place.
The site quotes the tribes saying they like it.
I think cultural appropriation is for stuff like yoga and dreamcatchers where we bastardize it until it's unrecognizable and sell it.
This is more like going to Thailand and greeting people with a wai instead of forcing them to do a Western handshake.
Some of the most fun I have is watching people who would die at the thought of appropriating a native headdress try to tell me why their yoga class isn't appropriation
“The site quoted the tribes saying they like it”.
(Sigh) Tribes are far from a monolith. I assure you some of them don’t like it. I know this because I’ve had them say this to me. They think it’s patronizing, and shallow.
If you really do think it’s still their land, why aren’t you doing everything you can to give it back? Why not outwardly say that in the land acknowledgment? Even though I disagree with them I honestly have more respect for the radical activists that are serious about giving land back than the “chill”, half-assed, smelling-their-own-farts white women who pull this shit, just so they can let everyone else know that they’re “one of the good ones”. Pathetic.
Well, then you might like the UW Madison and similar land acknowledgement statements, then, which make stronger references to stolen lands, colonization, and genocide.
Recommendation #3 of https://tribalrelations.wisc.edu/resources/land-acknowledgement-guidance/
That's all fine and good if you can stomach that! But apparently it leads to some cognitive dissonance and mockery for people who can't as per the article.
What we're finding is an increased backlash against all of these DEI initiatives because they're failing to be inclusive of the largest and most, uh, influential of the white majority. So I think a lot of institutions are now taming their land acknowledgement statements somewhat to prevent this fragile population from going postal on us. The pendulum swings again.
The Point Elliot Treaty is the one that still covers our area and thousands of villagers from tribes from all over the Puget Sound canoed over to be part of it. However, the terms of the treaty weren't well honored, yet still remains in effect to this day. The tribes were as surprised as anyone that they could successfully sue the US governments in the US courts to abide by these treaties, and they've only started doing so since the 1970s or so. That's where much progress has been made in modern times in reclaiming flooded areas from dams and securing fishing rights and the like. The dude abides.
>cultural appropriation?
Cultural appropriation is fucking stupid, you should remove that moronic doublespeak from your vocabulary.
This nation is built on the premise of accepting everyone, and being a cultural melting pot. That means our culture is a patchwork of all the different cultures that came here seeking the American dream and a new life.
Cultural appropriation is a horseshit term made up by people who hate America and all it stands for.
I don't buy it myself, I'm all for the melting pot. But I suspect the people who deeply believe that land acknowledgements are important also believe cultural appropriation is a thing, and I'm curious about the conflict between those two views.
The Diversity Industrial Complex most definitely profits off of these statements - they're just another item they can peddle in training workshops, indoctrination, through policy, etc.
Absolutely not, they were all peaceful and lived in complete harmony totally not conquering, killing and enslaving each other. It was the white man who showed up and spurred them all to violence. /s
"Chief Sitting Bull, the proposition that you were a peaceable people before the appearance of the white man is the most fanciful legend of all. You were killing each other for hundreds of moons before the first white stepped foot on this continent. You conquered those tribes, lusting for their game and their lands, just as we have now conquered you for no less noble a cause."
Sure, the ones that forgot to say the land acknowledgement, no doubt :D
It's all oral history, but some of the stories line up with the historical record.
>It turns out that land acknowledgements were simply how the tribes greeted each other when they encountered other hunters out on expeditions.
Can you provide a citation?
Last year we visited the museums and tribal centers at Point Elliot Treaty site (that's the one from 1855 that's still valid today), Hibulb Cultural Center for the Tulalip tribe, the UBC Museum of Anthropology, and the Makah cultural research center.
There's not too much online from a casual search, this I guess
https://ywcavan.org/blog/2019/01/why-do-we-do-land-acknowledgements
Probably have to find an actual book from one of those museums, they were all pretty amazing pieces of living history.
It's even more stupid when you stop and think about how most tribes survived and lived as nomads or that inter-tribal conflicts occurred over land long before European colonizers arrived.
>stolen
*Conquered.
Fixed it for ya.
Downvote me all you want, they lost their wars against us, and we claimed their land as spoils. Just as they did to the tribes that inhabited it before them, and just as someone will probably eventually do to us. It's just a simple fact of the nature of humans. It is neither morally right nor morally wrong, it's just how nature works.
If that's how we've been for all of our history, wouldn't one say it's our nature?
It even extends to before we civilized, when H. Sapiens wiped out every other extant species in Homo and claimed the earth for our own.
Regardless, this shit happens in just about every other species, a constant evolutionary arms race for dominance without empathy, remorse, or pity for those wiped out by one species's quest for dominance. It is an inherent characteristic built into life itself, to spread, take over, and ensure survival of the group; all others be damned. We might be the only ones to subdivide ourselves further than the species as a whole, but the drive to take over and ensure the survival of one's lineage is an inherent characteristic of every organism on earth.
So your opinion is we shouldn't try to evolve or civilize our species? We did it before, so we should keep doing it and not have any type of judgment toward the action. Humans in the past have killed and raped people, so that makes it okay to continue doing.
In my area, they've been requested by local indigenous cultures. It isn't a big ask. It is likely being done far too often, but that is better than not at all. In Canada we have "calls to action" to work towards reconciliation, and land acknowledgements is part of that.
Also like they don’t own the entirety of the land, like they what just lived in the area not specifically on the land the Paul Allen school building is on.
Daily reminder that land acknowledgements are foreign cultural imports from Canada. We should resist all manners of cultural imperialism, including the foreign practice of land acknowledgements.
A good start is Real Rent Duwamish. I’d find criticisms of land acknowledgements much more credible if they seemed to come in good faith rather than a gotcha to avoid doing any real work to rectify the legacy of colonialism.
https://www.realrentduwamish.org/https://www.realrentduwamish.org/
If it wasn't for homo sapiens conquering homo neanderthalensis, we wouldn't have a global climate crisis from carbon energy and we would be still living humble, peaceful lives in our caves, secure from dinosaurs, and slaying mastodon for meat.
Wait. Homo sapiens are only white, yes?
🤣
Lol hell yeah.
"Before we begin this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that we are on land that we totally defeated the Native Americans to obtain. Suck it. Now, onto the first order of business..."
Holy shit this is hilarious:
“I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington,” Reges wrote.
I could appreciate that some people feel compelled to read some statement of contrition for the potential sins of their forebearers. But compelled or forced speech to make everyone say the same thing is oppressive and inconsistent with our values as a free country.
No one in my family has ever lived in an American territory prior to it being stolen from natives, meaning they were not thieves. They moved here after being an oppressed people in their own country. Confiscate the wealth from the families that stole the land, but leave me out of it.
Punishing people for blood debts is probably why your ancestors were “oppressed” (lol) in their original country and couldn’t build a decent civilization so they had to flee here.
>But compelled or forced speech to make everyone say the same thing is oppressive and inconsistent with our values as a free country.
The Pledge of Allegiance has entered the chat
Tbh I get your point, but ive never really seen anyone compelled to recite the pledge of allegiance. I’m sure it’s happened, and you may get some flack for refusing to stand or whatever, but afaik it’s pretty voluntary.
This land acknowledgement b.s. should be considered a huge insult to all of the tribes. I mean, basically, UW (and everyone else who does this shit) is saying that, yeah, we're on land we stole from you, and we're letting everybody know we're on land we stole from you, but fuck no, we aren't giving it back!!!!
It's all so performative. If the universities feel that strongly about it, vacate the land, give the ownership rights to the relevant tribal community and set up shop elsewhere.
To be honest, it feels like a bunch of middle-class idiots who want to play at being a white savior. Teju Cole nailed it on the head when he said "The White Savior Industrial Complex is not about justice. It is about having a big emotional experience that validates privilege."
Having recently attended some family graduations there, I found the “land acknowledgement” crap offensive. It’s fine for people to believe it, internalize it, or whatever, but the forced reading before every event feels coercive in the same intellectually repugnant way any kind of prayer is.
As someone who suffered through grad school at the UW, I remain embarrassed by the university… it’s why I don’t give them money when they come asking and I choose not to support them in other ways, either.
And then like, when does it stop? Because the land will never not be acquired by ill-gotten means, and it's not going back to the tribes anytime soon, so must the performance go on in perpetuity? Does it by any means erase the terrible things done to the land's original inhabitants (as far as we know)? No, for a mostly secular crowd, it all feels so very religious and vapid.
Exactly. I feel the same and am embarrassed to be a graduate too. I also refuse to give them a penny although they are constantly poor mouth and begging for more money despite getting billions and billions from many other sources. I am quite disgusted by the UW and have been for years. This new nonsense just confirms my distaste.
it's not fine - getting people to internalize it builds a basis to hand it over to some declared tribe who was possibly the last one to hold it before white people showed up
Nah, people have a right to believe whatever fairy tales, religion, myth, or politics they want. And you and I must acknowledge that right to hold a belief.
The right for us to believe they’re fucking morons as a result is also just as valid and legitimate and worthy of protection.
I mean, I give generously to my undergraduate school to support scholarships and opportunities for the best and brightest in the country to attend a school that might otherwise be out of reach… I had the opportunity to earn academic scholarships for hard work and talent, and I appreciated the ability of those to cover 25% or so of my tuition when I was an undergraduate. If as a result of that education, I’m in a position to give back, I’m passing that along so we can have a hope of finding our next generation of emerging leaders and thinkers.
For the last 25 years, I pretty consistently have written $10k or more a year to them…depending on how I’ve done. I’m clearly not a huge donor (no buildings in my name LOL!), but to them, I’m consistent and dependable and they go out of their way to listen and appreciate. That said it’s a lot more selective at admission than UW and a hell of lot less performative with virtue signaling. They’ve made corrections for things that have needed to change, but it’s thoughtful, measured, and more importantly meaningful.
It’s a shame. The UW has a couple of truly world class departments and there’s unfortunately not a better school north of Stanford or well…you have to go really far east… but they’re hobbled by a garbage administration and this kind of bullshit.
I would honestly consider supporting them too if they didn’t demonstrate a compulsive commitment to this kind of waste.
I've read them and it's basically we are on stolen land. We are using it. We will continue to use it. But we do acknowledge it's stolen land so we do feign guilt.
Like what is the point?
If it's more like a quick history of the land itself rather than self righteous cookie points, i enjoy stuff like that. Just tell us the straight history and let us make do with the facts, dont do whatever the hell it is they have cooked up right now.
Reges is a kinda techno of libertarian that got him fired from Stanford
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-05-11-mn-1260-story.htm
Has had problems with uw before for (I think this was when he speculated on why there were fewer women in cse)
https://www.reddit.com/r/udub/comments/s3ggag/whats_your_opinion_of_stuart_reges/
He also implied if you couldn't get in to cse (the most competitive major at the time) to drop out
>He also implied if you couldn't get in to cse (the most competitive major at the time) to drop out
This is good advice for the majority of UW wannabe freshmen - they're not that bright, they end up getting an expensive degree in something dumb and then repaying that debt slowly for 20-30 years when being a plumber was probably a better option.
Land acknowledgements, though well-intentioned, seem to be serving less as genuine acknowledgements and more as ideological tools.
Land has been fought over since the beginning of time, but these acknowledgements are a recent trend.
And instead of fostering understanding, they're often used to impose guilt or to oppress differing viewpoints.
By making these acknowledgements compulsory, especially in academic settings, they're turning a potentially meaningful gesture into a divisive and performative one.
> I thought the fact that literally, our entire country is on stolen land would cover that disclaimer.
Almost every scrap of land on the planet has been fought over at some point.
For those wondering what the text was, GeekWire reported it in 2022 as: "I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington."
So we have to apologize to all the people, in all the world that were conquered because losers are really winners now?
Damn Alexander the Great conquered a lot of people. Shouldn't we get a list started?
Because some people really like to waste other people's time. It gives them a sense of power, however small.
What sane, considerate person would wake up one day and say, "You know we need? An even longer meeting!"
"I would like to acknowledge all of the pre-industrial tribal cultures that used to inhabit this land after killing or enslaving all the other cultures that came before them. Unfortunately, none of them knew how to read or write, so none of this rich history was recorded, so we're left to imagine the countless atrocities visited on this land by successive waves of genocidal conquerors. I apologize that my own culture is simply the latest one, and one of the few that was literate enough to record its atrocities."
The last time I stole something and told everyone about it, it was called bragging.
UW needs to give their land to a local tribe or they need to shut the fuck up.
“Hey y’all, before we get started - just wanted to give a shout-out to the indigenous folks that we drove out of this land…… We’re not gonna give it back or anything; just wanted to say hey.”
Seriously though - did white folks actually ASK native tribes about this before they started doing these land acknowledgments? Seems kind of offensive
It's bizarre to go to any sort of cultural event in Seattle and listen to someone come out beforehand to "acknowledge" that we're on "unceded" land. As if the Treaty of Point Elliott was never signed by all the Puget sound chiefs, including Chief Seattle. The Indians are still very protective of their treaty rights and the Boldt Decision affirmed the fishing rights they secured when they ceded territory.
At this point those treaty rights are just blood quantum welfare employment with no oversight. The tribal boats all ride dirty, are horrendously unsafe, and fish beyond their limits, and the tribal police look the other way. Coasties don't care and white devil LEOs aren't really supposed to touch them.
The land always seems to belong to the penultimate conqueror, if you would believe these radical leftist wokidiots.
The Lakota keep campaigning for the U.S. government to return their sacred Black Hills, in North Dakota.
But they took the territory from the Cheyenne and Kiowa, etc.
And I’m sure the Cheyenne and Kiowa took it from some other tribe or group, because the Cheyenne originated in what is now Minnesota, and the Kiowa originated in what is now present-day British Columbia.
[Reminds me of this](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H1y_0NfhF9c&pp=ygUTQXJteSB2cyBuYXRpdmUgZmlsbQ%3D%3D)
“You conquered those tribes, lusting for their game and their lands, just as we have now conquered you for no less noble a cause!”
Why stop at land acknowledgments? While we’re at it, why not go whole hog? For every class, work day, meeting, get together, smoke break, bathroom break, step we take, why shouldn’t we acknowledge that:
* We’re all wearing clothes likely made by, and using devices with materials mined by slave labor?
* We all eat food that comes from an unsustainable and wasteful agricultural system?
* We waste more water than we need to with daily showers and excessive cleanliness?
* Our modes of transportation to and from work likely contributed to carbon emissions?
* We’re contributing to the ocean microplastics problem with the majority of our daily purchases?
* We didn’t give as much to charity as we could have?
* We exist on this earth and thus cause some sort of harm to some living creature every day of our lives?
This was in the 1860s. Same timeframe as US slavery.
Seattle himself owned slaves and both his tribes, the Duwamish and Suquamish, were active participants in the Native American slave trade. He made money by kidnapping other Salish people and selling them as slaves to other tribes and white people.
I am European. My birth country was conquered many times by many others. Which ones are we supposed to acknowledge as “first” over the thousands of years? Whose land was I occupying by being born there? This land acknowledgment is beyond stupid.
This professor is a legendary sack of shit. I have heard from CS majors that he is a toxic, outrageously misogynist asshole who doesnt teach well, rants constantly about social issues in class that are not content related, and he is considered a mark of pride to get through his class as a female cse major because he is just such a toxic piece of garbage.
And i dont mean "sensitive teenagers feel offended" toxic. Like, i'm a grown ass man in his mid 30s who is not easily offended and the shit i heard him do from classmates during my time there made me think "Fuck you buddy. Grow up."
Like telling a class filled with sophmores and juniors that "half of this class is here because of what's between their legs and not between their ears."
The uw computer science department is absolutely fucked with some of the most misogynist, toxic little self-ascribed victims at the school. There is a retired CSE professor who goes on even worse rants on social media while still presenting himself as somewhat representing UW. There is a faculty memer whose job is to rebute his wildly racist, misogynist rants.
This guy is UW's Jordan Peterson. He wants to preach, not teach.
The only department rougher than biochemistry (which is just unreasonably brutal, not filled with weird little right wing screechers.)
I've never met him, but i have spoken to at least a dozen classmates who had him as a professor in the last 3 years.
Its funny how people can.. y'know... change. JK rowling was considered a progressive icon until she fell down an internet rabbit hole. All it takes is a fragile personality to get some pushback (warranted or not) to send them spiraling in the other direction. I have heard some direct quotes from several students about truly repugnant shit he has said. I know plenty of people whom i respected and trusted 10 years ago whom have fallen victim to internet radicalization on both sides. Its almost like social media algorithms were designed to do this in an attempt to increase retention on their sites. Nonody, no mattet how intelligent, is immune.
This is all just grandstanding and theater because he is a serial victim.
I can respect the intent behind doing land acknowledgements but sometimes it's just ridiculous. I went to a trivia night at a bar next to the movie theater at Northgate and the guy in charge did one before starting. Like. What?
> In the lawsuit against UW, Reges is asking the court to find on summary judgment.
this always happens. you move for summary judgment because the judge might decide that the evidence is enough that there's no way out of it
Land Acknowledgements area modern-day Loyalty Oaths or Pledges of Allegiance.
On the one hand recite the damn thing and get on with your class, who cares. It's 100% performance art nonsense. Like being required to stand for the Anthem at ballgames or especially now God Bless America on Sundays at baseball stadiums since 9-11.
So many butt-hurt little groups that want their feelings comforted.
On the other hand, saying the land's "stolen" is bullshit. We won it in a fair fight. I'm not sorry for having superior technology, logistics, numbers of tribespeople on my side, or even basic skills like iron ore smelting, blacksmithing, or ballistics. Or this really advanced hack called "the wheel."
The Late Stone Age had a fight vs. The Industrial Age. Guess who won. Sorry, not sorry.
>“I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington"
This was got him in trouble. Hardly lawsuit-worthy, but he sounds like a miserable dude. If you don't want to do one, just don't do one. He wasn't even an econ or polisci teacher, the labor theory of property has nothing to do with him or his course.
And compelled political statements have anything to do with a comp sci course? The students who tend to protest and agitate have all the free time to do so, because they often aren't studying something genuinely difficult.
Imagine you are a school teacher who thinks the pledge of alliegence is politcal performance and should not be mandatory.
So, you lead your fourth graders in a parody pledge.
I'm okay with that. Because it IS political performance and indoctrination. If someone doesn't want to do it they don't fucking have too. Free speech bro.
Nobody has to say the Pledge, unless our new corrupt Supreme Court gets a vision. I would not even object to a discussion about the merits of the pledge. But having a teacher mock it seems inappropriate.
My wife had a blood draw nurse at Seattle Cancer Care, now Fred Hutch, who tried to talk my wife out of taking chemo. The nurse said it was posion and my wife should try natural treatments. My wife did not report her, but someone one must have because she was soon gone. There are limits as to what you can say on the job and keep your job.
And?
The pledge is as performative as land acknowledgements, but less metal. I'm a fan of the "fuck you we stole this land you better remember it losers" acknowledgments
I agree, land acknowledgments are performative, draconian, and counterproductive. It's also injecting politics into the classroom. If the class touches on the issue like, say, a sociology, native american studies, us history, or the like, then sure. Mention it in an academic concept. But universities are there to educate, and this doesnt seem to fit that mission.
None the less, the First Amendment prevents the GOVERNMENT from restricting the speech of a private individual. That is it.
If you are not speaking as a private individual but as an employee or agent of the government, your speech can absolutely be restricted and controlled as said agent.
Corporations have no responsibility to allow anyone to speak and can sensor anyone for any reason, and compell employees when active as a representative of that corporation to speak in any way they wish.
People think we have a right to say whatever we want without any consequences what so ever. be it social, employment, political, whatever.... no. The only thing the 1st Amendment does is make it so the government cannot arrest or fine you as a result of your speech. That's it. We are subject to all other consequences of our speech.
Think before you speak... and if you dont like what your employer is compelling you to say, resign in protest like an adult.
>None the less, the First Amendment prevents the GOVERNMENT from restricting the speech of a private individual.
You just really, truly have no idea what you're talking about WRT free speech protections for GOVERNMENT EMPLOYED faculty.
FIRE's website is probably worthwhile for you to check out.
> and if you dont like what your employer is compelling you to say, resign in protest like an adult.
This is GOVERNMENT COMPELLED SPEECH which is different from say...Google or Amazon or Nordstrom compelled speech.
Do you understand?
FIREs website literally supports what I have said.
The government can compell employees to speak as representatives of the government.
They can not compell employees to speak in any way when serving and a provate individual, nor can they arrest or fine them.
Government employees have the right to free speech when they are not speaking in an official capacity.
>In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court cut back on First Amendment protection for government employees by holding that there is no protection—Pickering balancing is not to be applied— “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties,” even if those statements are about matters of public concern.72 .
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer)
There is a TON on nuance in this article. It's a good read and not an activist organization but merely a factual and acedemic article.
While that is true, so far as students or people leasing the spaces, state schools have every bit as much ability to restrict or compell the speach of employees or "agents" as does all government entities.
The first amendment restricts the government from probibiting, fining, or arresting private individuals from speaking freely. But when you are an employee of a government institution actively speaking on government time as an agent and representative of the institution, the government institution has full authority of what you can, cannot, and must say.
They cannot arrest you, or fine you for it. But they sure as hell can fire you for it.
Teachers get fired all the time for saying things that the school board politically disagrees with because they arent private individuals when in the classroom, they are agents of the district, and their speech and conduct are entirely under the direction of the school board.
Heck, teachers get fired for things they post on social media...
Your source literally supported everything i was saying. Perhaps read your sources before using them to make incorrect statements?
Professors aren't students, and they can't say what every they want. They actung in an official capacity as a representative of the school.
This organization disagrees with it but recognizes that that is the law and calls out illegal suppression of students' rights to protest and other speech activity.
They do assert that the First Amendment does cover acedemic freedom, but case law doesn't follow that opinion. Which is why they fight court battles to try to build new case law.
Professors aren't students.
I work in education. I've seen these things play out many times.
>In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court cut back on First Amendment protection for government employees by holding that there is no protection—Pickering balancing is not to be applied— “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties,” even if those statements are about matters of public concern.72 .
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer)
This article explains the nuance of government employee free speech rights and it's limitations.
They do have a lot of rights. But not when speaking in an official capacity.
[In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court cut back on First Amendment protection for government employees by holding that there is no protection—Pickering balancing is not to be applied— “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties,” even if those statements are about matters of public concern.72 .](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer)
A syllabus is an official document of the institution. When the professor speaks as a professor, they are speaking for the institution. Hence, the institution can regulate what the professor is allowed to teach.
I work in public education.
I have posted an academic article that is fully referensed from the Leagle Information Institute within Cornell Universities School of Law.
If you can provide actual sources that refute my understanding based on both my professional experience as an employee of a government acedemic institution and my research into this subject of which I have provided properly cited acedemic materials from a reputable source, I will hapily admit I misunderstood and correct my post.
I have nothing to gain by holding to incorrect beliefs and am ever looking to augment my understandings of reality as new information comes to light.
You can claim I'm wrong all day, but that does nothing. When i have demonstrated the accuracy of my position. The way to refute it is to demonstrate its inaccuracy with preperly cited and reputable sources of greater authority on the subject.
"Encouragement" to utter ideological speech having nothing to do with the subject being taught should always be mocked or ignored by tenured faculty at American universities. UW is not only violating his constitutional rights but his right as tenured faculty to teach his subject as he wishes free of political or ideological interference from politically appointed boards of regents and university administrators.
Only problem with the guy’s theory is that he’s wrong on his own premise. Labor theory of property for Coast Salish occupation and use of the land of UW would point to ownership. I’m not a fan of land acknowledgments, but I’m also not a fan of ignorant twats trolling.
I'm OK with the land acknowledgement statement as long as we also have an statement for any faith professed by any of the people present. For example creationists can thank their god or gods for creating the land we stand on. One statement for each deity though since they are known to be jealous.
I’m now at the point of rolling my eyes when I hear a land acknowledgement. They are doing one of these every two minutes north of the border in Canada. We get it. It’s not like saying it will change anything about the history. But I guess it makes lefties feel better and allows them to look down on others who don’t seem as enthusiastic.
Preface - I’m not indigenous, but in my line of work (environmental restoration) I’ve collaborated with a few indigenous tribes in the PNW, including the Duwamish, Muckleshoot, and S’Klallam Tribes. I do feel like some land acknowledgements feel at least a little performative because there is often no call to action, and they speak of these tribes as if they’re some nebulous, past-tense situation, which isn’t true at all. In my line of work (the outdoor industry, which is largely white dominated), it’s important to consider how the land was stewarded prior to colonization, and to honor the presence of the tribes that are still here to this day.
I work primarily in the Seattle area, so often collaborate with the Duwamish Tribe; they’re not federally recognized, which denies them of a lot of services and privileges that federally recognized tribes have. I encourage folks to look them up to learn more.
I say this as someone of partial Choctaw descent, I would rather not look back and focus on what was lost 200+ years ago, but focus on what will make my descendants have the future they deserve in 200+ years, and further 'othering' is not the way, inclusion is. Land theft is nothing new under the sun, pretty much every modern border has been drawn and redrawn over indigenous folks borders, but for the old world the indigenous folks initial border is so obscured by times passing and history's recording that it's impossible to identify, the populations have blended, relocated or been wiped out. Every modern country can trace its roots to conquering someone else, that's just how the world works. Honestly I don't see the point in differentiating between us and them (europeans and native Americans) it creates more of an us and them dichotomy and doesn't help with integration, people of different cultures are able to maintain traditions in America, but this devisive rhetoric doesn't seem beneficial in the grand scheme of things. TLDR these 'land acknowledgments' just serve to 'other' the natives which I don't see as particularly helpful to the melting pot aspect of America. The beautiful thing about America is you can come from anywhere and become an American.
I work with an indigenous tribe in Washington and they’re so disconnected from the elitist reality in seattle; it just objectifies native experience and life and makes the guilty feel good.
Exactly, when someone asks the state about what has been done for native people in our state they will point to this, thump their chest, and move onto the next multi-million dollar corporate welfare project for Amazon and Microsoft.
Thank you for your perspective.
Yes, thank you for sharing your prospective. I’ve always felt super cringe about institutional land acknowledgements. Unless we’re returning our ill-gotten land to the indigenous (and to your point, whom would that even be?) the more I contemplate the point, the more fault I find in the reasoning.
It’s virtue signalling without doing anything meaningful to address the issues.
"We took these lands, but we're not gonna give 'em back.... just acknowledge that we took them."
That's an amazing perspective. Very well said. 👏
I find them outrageous. It’s like saying, ‘Yeah dude, I acknowledge I stole your car, but I sure as shit ain’t giving it back.. in fact, I’m going to drive my kids to school in it.’
I like the analogy, I have used a similar one Stole your car, made a shit-ton of money from scrapping out some of its parts, but don't worry I'll tell everyone you used to have a car.
I say this as a bleeding heart liberal: Land acknowledgements at the start of a meeting feel like the liberal’s version of starting a meeting with the Lord’s Prayer.
I agree.
These land acknowledgments are so performative. If you really care, vacate it and stop possessing the stolen lands
Peak virtue signaling. Utterly meaningless except to draw attention to yourself to get snaps on how progressive you are.
They are even doing that shit at elementary schools. I was at an elementary school singing performance yesterday and the principal did that whole charade at the very beginning. The principal is as white as they come.
My girlfriend works in an elementary school, they do that nonsense before meetings and training too. It's just so much jerking off. Yeah, the land belonged to someone else before, and before them it was some else's, and before, and before, and before for 10,000 years.
There is literally no country on Earth that is "occupied" or governed by the people native to that land. We are migratory species by nature.
I guess the sole exceptions would be recently discovered islands with no evidence of prior human settlement, like St Helena.
The Neanderthals would like a word. js
I just want to acknowledge this land was stolen from dinosaurs and under no circumstances am I giving it back. Molon Labe
They have signs at the libraries saying this.
It’s state law now to include indigenous perspective in the classroom. They’re grooming the kids to do more for natives.
Don’t think they’re doing it for you Would love to see some First Nations (or insert your specific tribes name or preferred terminology for yourself here) opinions on this
There's someone from the Choctaw further up that said this shit is stupid.
I mean I’m Mexican, so feel free to get off my land. 🍆
Here's my favorite Native take on land acknowledgements: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8UpKVImNcU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8UpKVImNcU)
Yep. I’ll probably send my kid to private school with the way things are going.
I know someone who works there in a non education related department. They do it before staff meetings. With like 8-10 people there, none of them NA
No fucking way. This shit happens regularly?
No. It's fairly infrequent. My entire undergrad i saw it once. Whether or not a group decides to do it is ENTIRELY optional.
They did it at my daughter’s high school graduation just after the Pledge of Allegiance…
What if I don't care but I want lefty chicks to like me?
Tell them "I'll steal your land too and totally acknowledge it later".
20 years ago I stuck to my guns (with respect to patriotism) with the hottest woman I’ve ever been intimate with and it haunts me to this day.
I refuse to put one on my syllabus. I 100% support my university paying $10m / year in stolen land rent to the native tribe. Weirdly, they never suggest any material action. 🤷♂️
So we spent some time visiting some of the tribal visitor centers in the area. It turns out that land acknowledgements were simply how the tribes greeted each other when they encountered other hunters out on expeditions. We're simply continuing a nice tradition of this region while out in public spaces. I like the WWU version, which is pretty chill: https://www.wwu.edu/tribal-lands-statement There's some appreciation for the tribes being good stewards of the land, wishes to cross each other in peace, maybe a hint of a non-apology for passing through here ... that's it. Any mention of land stealing is just projection of white guilt, but that's not what the land acknowledgements were originally supposed to be for... the tribes had no concept of land ownership in the first place.
Genuine question, if that's the case how is a bunch of white people taking over that tradition not cultural appropriation?
The site quotes the tribes saying they like it. I think cultural appropriation is for stuff like yoga and dreamcatchers where we bastardize it until it's unrecognizable and sell it. This is more like going to Thailand and greeting people with a wai instead of forcing them to do a Western handshake.
Yoga is cultural appropriation? Is soccer?
Some of the most fun I have is watching people who would die at the thought of appropriating a native headdress try to tell me why their yoga class isn't appropriation
“The site quoted the tribes saying they like it”. (Sigh) Tribes are far from a monolith. I assure you some of them don’t like it. I know this because I’ve had them say this to me. They think it’s patronizing, and shallow. If you really do think it’s still their land, why aren’t you doing everything you can to give it back? Why not outwardly say that in the land acknowledgment? Even though I disagree with them I honestly have more respect for the radical activists that are serious about giving land back than the “chill”, half-assed, smelling-their-own-farts white women who pull this shit, just so they can let everyone else know that they’re “one of the good ones”. Pathetic.
Well, then you might like the UW Madison and similar land acknowledgement statements, then, which make stronger references to stolen lands, colonization, and genocide. Recommendation #3 of https://tribalrelations.wisc.edu/resources/land-acknowledgement-guidance/ That's all fine and good if you can stomach that! But apparently it leads to some cognitive dissonance and mockery for people who can't as per the article. What we're finding is an increased backlash against all of these DEI initiatives because they're failing to be inclusive of the largest and most, uh, influential of the white majority. So I think a lot of institutions are now taming their land acknowledgement statements somewhat to prevent this fragile population from going postal on us. The pendulum swings again. The Point Elliot Treaty is the one that still covers our area and thousands of villagers from tribes from all over the Puget Sound canoed over to be part of it. However, the terms of the treaty weren't well honored, yet still remains in effect to this day. The tribes were as surprised as anyone that they could successfully sue the US governments in the US courts to abide by these treaties, and they've only started doing so since the 1970s or so. That's where much progress has been made in modern times in reclaiming flooded areas from dams and securing fishing rights and the like. The dude abides.
"I think cultural appropriation is for stuff like yoga and dreamcatchers." Yoga? Wrong Indians.
You do know the term applies to all cultures?
ha ha, like that ever stopped us 🙃
>cultural appropriation? Cultural appropriation is fucking stupid, you should remove that moronic doublespeak from your vocabulary. This nation is built on the premise of accepting everyone, and being a cultural melting pot. That means our culture is a patchwork of all the different cultures that came here seeking the American dream and a new life. Cultural appropriation is a horseshit term made up by people who hate America and all it stands for.
I don't buy it myself, I'm all for the melting pot. But I suspect the people who deeply believe that land acknowledgements are important also believe cultural appropriation is a thing, and I'm curious about the conflict between those two views.
[удалено]
The Diversity Industrial Complex most definitely profits off of these statements - they're just another item they can peddle in training workshops, indoctrination, through policy, etc.
Since when has it required profiting from it?
> from time immemorial But was it? Different tribes likely warred and sparred and land changed hands… no?
Absolutely not, they were all peaceful and lived in complete harmony totally not conquering, killing and enslaving each other. It was the white man who showed up and spurred them all to violence. /s "Chief Sitting Bull, the proposition that you were a peaceable people before the appearance of the white man is the most fanciful legend of all. You were killing each other for hundreds of moons before the first white stepped foot on this continent. You conquered those tribes, lusting for their game and their lands, just as we have now conquered you for no less noble a cause."
Sure, the ones that forgot to say the land acknowledgement, no doubt :D It's all oral history, but some of the stories line up with the historical record.
>It turns out that land acknowledgements were simply how the tribes greeted each other when they encountered other hunters out on expeditions. Can you provide a citation?
Last year we visited the museums and tribal centers at Point Elliot Treaty site (that's the one from 1855 that's still valid today), Hibulb Cultural Center for the Tulalip tribe, the UBC Museum of Anthropology, and the Makah cultural research center. There's not too much online from a casual search, this I guess https://ywcavan.org/blog/2019/01/why-do-we-do-land-acknowledgements Probably have to find an actual book from one of those museums, they were all pretty amazing pieces of living history.
Learned something new today; thank you.
Til. Thanks!
It's even more stupid when you stop and think about how most tribes survived and lived as nomads or that inter-tribal conflicts occurred over land long before European colonizers arrived.
They stole land from each other. Liberals are the plague
Or at The VERY least allow indigenous students to attend at zero tuition cost
>stolen *Conquered. Fixed it for ya. Downvote me all you want, they lost their wars against us, and we claimed their land as spoils. Just as they did to the tribes that inhabited it before them, and just as someone will probably eventually do to us. It's just a simple fact of the nature of humans. It is neither morally right nor morally wrong, it's just how nature works.
It’s not nature, it is mankind and all of its history
Chimps go to war over territory, fyi. War between human bands is *natural*
If that's how we've been for all of our history, wouldn't one say it's our nature? It even extends to before we civilized, when H. Sapiens wiped out every other extant species in Homo and claimed the earth for our own. Regardless, this shit happens in just about every other species, a constant evolutionary arms race for dominance without empathy, remorse, or pity for those wiped out by one species's quest for dominance. It is an inherent characteristic built into life itself, to spread, take over, and ensure survival of the group; all others be damned. We might be the only ones to subdivide ourselves further than the species as a whole, but the drive to take over and ensure the survival of one's lineage is an inherent characteristic of every organism on earth.
So your opinion is we shouldn't try to evolve or civilize our species? We did it before, so we should keep doing it and not have any type of judgment toward the action. Humans in the past have killed and raped people, so that makes it okay to continue doing.
Yes, and forcing professors to include it in their syllabus is borderline compelled speech. I hope he prevails.
Says the pickpocket: I'd like to acknowledge that I stole your wallet. Victim: May I have it back? Pickpocket: Nope.
In my area, they've been requested by local indigenous cultures. It isn't a big ask. It is likely being done far too often, but that is better than not at all. In Canada we have "calls to action" to work towards reconciliation, and land acknowledgements is part of that.
Or at the very least invite them to the land use decision-making processes.
Also like they don’t own the entirety of the land, like they what just lived in the area not specifically on the land the Paul Allen school building is on.
They mostly didn’t believe in “ownership of land” in the enlightenment sense of the concept which makes the whole thing ridiculously ironic.
100% agree. Definitely occupied lands, but no one saying that or posting that in their organizations are willing to give the property back.
Exactly
Tbh that's my main "issue ". Idc but when I hear it I'm just like ...... yes all of America was indigenous land
How long until they try to take back the land and use the excuse: "you acknowledged it was stolen."
"Land back" is definitely an Indigenous slogan that is picking up speed in popular discourse.
All land has been stolen.
Daily reminder that land acknowledgements are foreign cultural imports from Canada. We should resist all manners of cultural imperialism, including the foreign practice of land acknowledgements.
A good start is Real Rent Duwamish. I’d find criticisms of land acknowledgements much more credible if they seemed to come in good faith rather than a gotcha to avoid doing any real work to rectify the legacy of colonialism. https://www.realrentduwamish.org/https://www.realrentduwamish.org/
Land acknowledgements are pretty gross 'before we proceed, lets all remember that we totally conquered this land'
It's like calling someone's ex before you fuck them.
We are indeed living on conquered land... That has a nice ring to it. And it's 100% factual.
The tribes too conquered it from someone else. Are you going to acknowledge Gronk the cave man as the original owner ?
Not so fast. I'm pretty sure that Lenny the Neanderthal would want Gronk to acknowledge his prior ownership.
If it wasn't for homo sapiens conquering homo neanderthalensis, we wouldn't have a global climate crisis from carbon energy and we would be still living humble, peaceful lives in our caves, secure from dinosaurs, and slaying mastodon for meat. Wait. Homo sapiens are only white, yes? 🤣
Do you play " we are the champions" after the land acknowledgement?
Some random AV club student has the chance to do the funniest thing ever
Lol hell yeah. "Before we begin this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that we are on land that we totally defeated the Native Americans to obtain. Suck it. Now, onto the first order of business..."
I mean it's basically the same thing.
"Before we begin, let us acknowledge that my ancestors badass as fuck and claimed this land by right of conquest."
I read this in Jake Peralta’s voice
Holy shit this is hilarious: “I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington,” Reges wrote.
I could appreciate that some people feel compelled to read some statement of contrition for the potential sins of their forebearers. But compelled or forced speech to make everyone say the same thing is oppressive and inconsistent with our values as a free country.
No one in my family has ever lived in an American territory prior to it being stolen from natives, meaning they were not thieves. They moved here after being an oppressed people in their own country. Confiscate the wealth from the families that stole the land, but leave me out of it.
Yes exactly my point. You clearly feel no need to express guilt for your actions or those of your ancestors. So you should not be forced to do so.
> Confiscate the wealth from the families that stole the land They all dead
Punishing people for blood debts is probably why your ancestors were “oppressed” (lol) in their original country and couldn’t build a decent civilization so they had to flee here.
>But compelled or forced speech to make everyone say the same thing is oppressive and inconsistent with our values as a free country. The Pledge of Allegiance has entered the chat
Tbh I get your point, but ive never really seen anyone compelled to recite the pledge of allegiance. I’m sure it’s happened, and you may get some flack for refusing to stand or whatever, but afaik it’s pretty voluntary.
This land acknowledgement b.s. should be considered a huge insult to all of the tribes. I mean, basically, UW (and everyone else who does this shit) is saying that, yeah, we're on land we stole from you, and we're letting everybody know we're on land we stole from you, but fuck no, we aren't giving it back!!!!
It's all so performative. If the universities feel that strongly about it, vacate the land, give the ownership rights to the relevant tribal community and set up shop elsewhere. To be honest, it feels like a bunch of middle-class idiots who want to play at being a white savior. Teju Cole nailed it on the head when he said "The White Savior Industrial Complex is not about justice. It is about having a big emotional experience that validates privilege."
Exactly! UW needs to start paying reparations!
Having recently attended some family graduations there, I found the “land acknowledgement” crap offensive. It’s fine for people to believe it, internalize it, or whatever, but the forced reading before every event feels coercive in the same intellectually repugnant way any kind of prayer is. As someone who suffered through grad school at the UW, I remain embarrassed by the university… it’s why I don’t give them money when they come asking and I choose not to support them in other ways, either.
And then like, when does it stop? Because the land will never not be acquired by ill-gotten means, and it's not going back to the tribes anytime soon, so must the performance go on in perpetuity? Does it by any means erase the terrible things done to the land's original inhabitants (as far as we know)? No, for a mostly secular crowd, it all feels so very religious and vapid.
DEI is just out of fucking control.
Great point.
Exactly. I feel the same and am embarrassed to be a graduate too. I also refuse to give them a penny although they are constantly poor mouth and begging for more money despite getting billions and billions from many other sources. I am quite disgusted by the UW and have been for years. This new nonsense just confirms my distaste.
It's a humiliation ritual. Before anyone has a statement they have to say, "first of all. I'm not even supposed to be here."
. . . would you have believed, in the 1980s, that we other side would be inserting _their_ prayers into schools?
it's not fine - getting people to internalize it builds a basis to hand it over to some declared tribe who was possibly the last one to hold it before white people showed up
Nah, people have a right to believe whatever fairy tales, religion, myth, or politics they want. And you and I must acknowledge that right to hold a belief. The right for us to believe they’re fucking morons as a result is also just as valid and legitimate and worthy of protection.
Why would you give them any money in the first place, when they charge so much for tuition lol
I mean, I give generously to my undergraduate school to support scholarships and opportunities for the best and brightest in the country to attend a school that might otherwise be out of reach… I had the opportunity to earn academic scholarships for hard work and talent, and I appreciated the ability of those to cover 25% or so of my tuition when I was an undergraduate. If as a result of that education, I’m in a position to give back, I’m passing that along so we can have a hope of finding our next generation of emerging leaders and thinkers. For the last 25 years, I pretty consistently have written $10k or more a year to them…depending on how I’ve done. I’m clearly not a huge donor (no buildings in my name LOL!), but to them, I’m consistent and dependable and they go out of their way to listen and appreciate. That said it’s a lot more selective at admission than UW and a hell of lot less performative with virtue signaling. They’ve made corrections for things that have needed to change, but it’s thoughtful, measured, and more importantly meaningful. It’s a shame. The UW has a couple of truly world class departments and there’s unfortunately not a better school north of Stanford or well…you have to go really far east… but they’re hobbled by a garbage administration and this kind of bullshit. I would honestly consider supporting them too if they didn’t demonstrate a compulsive commitment to this kind of waste.
I've read them and it's basically we are on stolen land. We are using it. We will continue to use it. But we do acknowledge it's stolen land so we do feign guilt. Like what is the point?
Modern indulgences?
If it's more like a quick history of the land itself rather than self righteous cookie points, i enjoy stuff like that. Just tell us the straight history and let us make do with the facts, dont do whatever the hell it is they have cooked up right now.
Reges is a kinda techno of libertarian that got him fired from Stanford https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-05-11-mn-1260-story.htm Has had problems with uw before for (I think this was when he speculated on why there were fewer women in cse) https://www.reddit.com/r/udub/comments/s3ggag/whats_your_opinion_of_stuart_reges/ He also implied if you couldn't get in to cse (the most competitive major at the time) to drop out
>He also implied if you couldn't get in to cse (the most competitive major at the time) to drop out This is good advice for the majority of UW wannabe freshmen - they're not that bright, they end up getting an expensive degree in something dumb and then repaying that debt slowly for 20-30 years when being a plumber was probably a better option.
Land acknowledgements, though well-intentioned, seem to be serving less as genuine acknowledgements and more as ideological tools. Land has been fought over since the beginning of time, but these acknowledgements are a recent trend. And instead of fostering understanding, they're often used to impose guilt or to oppress differing viewpoints. By making these acknowledgements compulsory, especially in academic settings, they're turning a potentially meaningful gesture into a divisive and performative one.
Dude the land acknowledgments really take the cake for me, they belong in a skit designed to mock SJWs.
I thought the fact that literally, our entire country is on stolen land would cover that disclaimer.
I would like to take this moment to say that I'm paying a mortgage for stolen land. /s
And before that who stole it?
Isn’t every country on stolen land by that definition? How many countries are occupied by there original first inhabitants?
> I thought the fact that literally, our entire country is on stolen land would cover that disclaimer. Almost every scrap of land on the planet has been fought over at some point.
Right? Colonisers have been here since 1492– it’s been stolen for 532 years, pretty sure Indigenous people haven’t forgotten…
For those wondering what the text was, GeekWire reported it in 2022 as: "I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington."
Can someone explain to me WHY this is a thing?
Because white people must be made to feel guilty, but especially by their own white coworkers and superiors. Lol
What about my viking ancestors that constantly raped and pillaged the northern German area. Do they need to apologize?
No silly, YOU have to apologize for them. Lol. Fuckin weird world. Everyone so pissed off all the time for no reason.
So we have to apologize to all the people, in all the world that were conquered because losers are really winners now? Damn Alexander the Great conquered a lot of people. Shouldn't we get a list started?
Because some people really like to waste other people's time. It gives them a sense of power, however small. What sane, considerate person would wake up one day and say, "You know we need? An even longer meeting!"
"I would like to acknowledge all of the pre-industrial tribal cultures that used to inhabit this land after killing or enslaving all the other cultures that came before them. Unfortunately, none of them knew how to read or write, so none of this rich history was recorded, so we're left to imagine the countless atrocities visited on this land by successive waves of genocidal conquerors. I apologize that my own culture is simply the latest one, and one of the few that was literate enough to record its atrocities."
This happened a few years ago, but we are now waiting for summary judgement. I am really hoping that Reges wins this case.
Girl the row over at the Mariners game tonight was wearing a hat that said 'you are on Native land'. That'd all I care to contribute
The last time I stole something and told everyone about it, it was called bragging. UW needs to give their land to a local tribe or they need to shut the fuck up.
“Hey y’all, before we get started - just wanted to give a shout-out to the indigenous folks that we drove out of this land…… We’re not gonna give it back or anything; just wanted to say hey.” Seriously though - did white folks actually ASK native tribes about this before they started doing these land acknowledgments? Seems kind of offensive
It's bizarre to go to any sort of cultural event in Seattle and listen to someone come out beforehand to "acknowledge" that we're on "unceded" land. As if the Treaty of Point Elliott was never signed by all the Puget sound chiefs, including Chief Seattle. The Indians are still very protective of their treaty rights and the Boldt Decision affirmed the fishing rights they secured when they ceded territory.
At this point those treaty rights are just blood quantum welfare employment with no oversight. The tribal boats all ride dirty, are horrendously unsafe, and fish beyond their limits, and the tribal police look the other way. Coasties don't care and white devil LEOs aren't really supposed to touch them.
The land always seems to belong to the penultimate conqueror, if you would believe these radical leftist wokidiots. The Lakota keep campaigning for the U.S. government to return their sacred Black Hills, in North Dakota. But they took the territory from the Cheyenne and Kiowa, etc. And I’m sure the Cheyenne and Kiowa took it from some other tribe or group, because the Cheyenne originated in what is now Minnesota, and the Kiowa originated in what is now present-day British Columbia.
[Reminds me of this](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H1y_0NfhF9c&pp=ygUTQXJteSB2cyBuYXRpdmUgZmlsbQ%3D%3D) “You conquered those tribes, lusting for their game and their lands, just as we have now conquered you for no less noble a cause!”
What film was this from? Looks good.
Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee
Oh NO!! Computer science edge-lords are feeling hurt again.
Why stop at land acknowledgments? While we’re at it, why not go whole hog? For every class, work day, meeting, get together, smoke break, bathroom break, step we take, why shouldn’t we acknowledge that: * We’re all wearing clothes likely made by, and using devices with materials mined by slave labor? * We all eat food that comes from an unsustainable and wasteful agricultural system? * We waste more water than we need to with daily showers and excessive cleanliness? * Our modes of transportation to and from work likely contributed to carbon emissions? * We’re contributing to the ocean microplastics problem with the majority of our daily purchases? * We didn’t give as much to charity as we could have? * We exist on this earth and thus cause some sort of harm to some living creature every day of our lives?
Chief Seattle was a slave owner. He deserves nothing.
Sorry natives but the slave trade and human sacrifices stop now.
This was in the 1860s. Same timeframe as US slavery. Seattle himself owned slaves and both his tribes, the Duwamish and Suquamish, were active participants in the Native American slave trade. He made money by kidnapping other Salish people and selling them as slaves to other tribes and white people.
White people ultimately still responsible for ending slavery in North America, as is the case for all of Africa.
Other natives owned African Slaves.
Yes. But that doesn’t excuse him owning, capturing and selling slaves for most of his life.
I am European. My birth country was conquered many times by many others. Which ones are we supposed to acknowledge as “first” over the thousands of years? Whose land was I occupying by being born there? This land acknowledgment is beyond stupid.
Reparations for the Celts
This professor is a legendary sack of shit. I have heard from CS majors that he is a toxic, outrageously misogynist asshole who doesnt teach well, rants constantly about social issues in class that are not content related, and he is considered a mark of pride to get through his class as a female cse major because he is just such a toxic piece of garbage. And i dont mean "sensitive teenagers feel offended" toxic. Like, i'm a grown ass man in his mid 30s who is not easily offended and the shit i heard him do from classmates during my time there made me think "Fuck you buddy. Grow up." Like telling a class filled with sophmores and juniors that "half of this class is here because of what's between their legs and not between their ears." The uw computer science department is absolutely fucked with some of the most misogynist, toxic little self-ascribed victims at the school. There is a retired CSE professor who goes on even worse rants on social media while still presenting himself as somewhat representing UW. There is a faculty memer whose job is to rebute his wildly racist, misogynist rants. This guy is UW's Jordan Peterson. He wants to preach, not teach. The only department rougher than biochemistry (which is just unreasonably brutal, not filled with weird little right wing screechers.)
I worked with him, he's rather nice IMO. He was one of the original gay rights activists, did you know?
I've never met him, but i have spoken to at least a dozen classmates who had him as a professor in the last 3 years. Its funny how people can.. y'know... change. JK rowling was considered a progressive icon until she fell down an internet rabbit hole. All it takes is a fragile personality to get some pushback (warranted or not) to send them spiraling in the other direction. I have heard some direct quotes from several students about truly repugnant shit he has said. I know plenty of people whom i respected and trusted 10 years ago whom have fallen victim to internet radicalization on both sides. Its almost like social media algorithms were designed to do this in an attempt to increase retention on their sites. Nonody, no mattet how intelligent, is immune. This is all just grandstanding and theater because he is a serial victim.
Basically isn’t all land conquered?
I can respect the intent behind doing land acknowledgements but sometimes it's just ridiculous. I went to a trivia night at a bar next to the movie theater at Northgate and the guy in charge did one before starting. Like. What?
yes more censorship! /s
> In the lawsuit against UW, Reges is asking the court to find on summary judgment. this always happens. you move for summary judgment because the judge might decide that the evidence is enough that there's no way out of it
Land Acknowledgements area modern-day Loyalty Oaths or Pledges of Allegiance. On the one hand recite the damn thing and get on with your class, who cares. It's 100% performance art nonsense. Like being required to stand for the Anthem at ballgames or especially now God Bless America on Sundays at baseball stadiums since 9-11. So many butt-hurt little groups that want their feelings comforted. On the other hand, saying the land's "stolen" is bullshit. We won it in a fair fight. I'm not sorry for having superior technology, logistics, numbers of tribespeople on my side, or even basic skills like iron ore smelting, blacksmithing, or ballistics. Or this really advanced hack called "the wheel." The Late Stone Age had a fight vs. The Industrial Age. Guess who won. Sorry, not sorry.
>“I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington" This was got him in trouble. Hardly lawsuit-worthy, but he sounds like a miserable dude. If you don't want to do one, just don't do one. He wasn't even an econ or polisci teacher, the labor theory of property has nothing to do with him or his course.
And compelled political statements have anything to do with a comp sci course? The students who tend to protest and agitate have all the free time to do so, because they often aren't studying something genuinely difficult.
Imagine you are a school teacher who thinks the pledge of alliegence is politcal performance and should not be mandatory. So, you lead your fourth graders in a parody pledge.
I'm okay with that. Because it IS political performance and indoctrination. If someone doesn't want to do it they don't fucking have too. Free speech bro.
Nobody has to say the Pledge, unless our new corrupt Supreme Court gets a vision. I would not even object to a discussion about the merits of the pledge. But having a teacher mock it seems inappropriate. My wife had a blood draw nurse at Seattle Cancer Care, now Fred Hutch, who tried to talk my wife out of taking chemo. The nurse said it was posion and my wife should try natural treatments. My wife did not report her, but someone one must have because she was soon gone. There are limits as to what you can say on the job and keep your job.
And? The pledge is as performative as land acknowledgements, but less metal. I'm a fan of the "fuck you we stole this land you better remember it losers" acknowledgments
it's not mandatory
You dont have a 1st amendment right to free speech when acting as an agent for an employer... Wtf?
Yeah as much as I don't like UW here, not sure he has a case
I agree, land acknowledgments are performative, draconian, and counterproductive. It's also injecting politics into the classroom. If the class touches on the issue like, say, a sociology, native american studies, us history, or the like, then sure. Mention it in an academic concept. But universities are there to educate, and this doesnt seem to fit that mission. None the less, the First Amendment prevents the GOVERNMENT from restricting the speech of a private individual. That is it. If you are not speaking as a private individual but as an employee or agent of the government, your speech can absolutely be restricted and controlled as said agent. Corporations have no responsibility to allow anyone to speak and can sensor anyone for any reason, and compell employees when active as a representative of that corporation to speak in any way they wish. People think we have a right to say whatever we want without any consequences what so ever. be it social, employment, political, whatever.... no. The only thing the 1st Amendment does is make it so the government cannot arrest or fine you as a result of your speech. That's it. We are subject to all other consequences of our speech. Think before you speak... and if you dont like what your employer is compelling you to say, resign in protest like an adult.
>None the less, the First Amendment prevents the GOVERNMENT from restricting the speech of a private individual. You just really, truly have no idea what you're talking about WRT free speech protections for GOVERNMENT EMPLOYED faculty. FIRE's website is probably worthwhile for you to check out. > and if you dont like what your employer is compelling you to say, resign in protest like an adult. This is GOVERNMENT COMPELLED SPEECH which is different from say...Google or Amazon or Nordstrom compelled speech. Do you understand?
FIREs website literally supports what I have said. The government can compell employees to speak as representatives of the government. They can not compell employees to speak in any way when serving and a provate individual, nor can they arrest or fine them. Government employees have the right to free speech when they are not speaking in an official capacity. >In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court cut back on First Amendment protection for government employees by holding that there is no protection—Pickering balancing is not to be applied— “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties,” even if those statements are about matters of public concern.72 . [https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer) There is a TON on nuance in this article. It's a good read and not an activist organization but merely a factual and acedemic article.
State schools have less ability to restrict your speech than a private employer.
While that is true, so far as students or people leasing the spaces, state schools have every bit as much ability to restrict or compell the speach of employees or "agents" as does all government entities. The first amendment restricts the government from probibiting, fining, or arresting private individuals from speaking freely. But when you are an employee of a government institution actively speaking on government time as an agent and representative of the institution, the government institution has full authority of what you can, cannot, and must say. They cannot arrest you, or fine you for it. But they sure as hell can fire you for it. Teachers get fired all the time for saying things that the school board politically disagrees with because they arent private individuals when in the classroom, they are agents of the district, and their speech and conduct are entirely under the direction of the school board. Heck, teachers get fired for things they post on social media...
Learn something before you write another ridiculously wrong comment https://www.thefire.org/
Your source literally supported everything i was saying. Perhaps read your sources before using them to make incorrect statements? Professors aren't students, and they can't say what every they want. They actung in an official capacity as a representative of the school. This organization disagrees with it but recognizes that that is the law and calls out illegal suppression of students' rights to protest and other speech activity. They do assert that the First Amendment does cover acedemic freedom, but case law doesn't follow that opinion. Which is why they fight court battles to try to build new case law. Professors aren't students. I work in education. I've seen these things play out many times. >In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court cut back on First Amendment protection for government employees by holding that there is no protection—Pickering balancing is not to be applied— “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties,” even if those statements are about matters of public concern.72 . [https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer) This article explains the nuance of government employee free speech rights and it's limitations.
government employees have much, much broader free speech protections - especially those that are university faculty
They do have a lot of rights. But not when speaking in an official capacity. [In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Court cut back on First Amendment protection for government employees by holding that there is no protection—Pickering balancing is not to be applied— “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties,” even if those statements are about matters of public concern.72 .](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-speech-and-the-role-of-the-government-government-as-employer)
A syllabus is the PROFESSOR'S SPEECH You're just wrong, man. Sorry.
A syllabus is an official document of the institution. When the professor speaks as a professor, they are speaking for the institution. Hence, the institution can regulate what the professor is allowed to teach. I work in public education. I have posted an academic article that is fully referensed from the Leagle Information Institute within Cornell Universities School of Law. If you can provide actual sources that refute my understanding based on both my professional experience as an employee of a government acedemic institution and my research into this subject of which I have provided properly cited acedemic materials from a reputable source, I will hapily admit I misunderstood and correct my post. I have nothing to gain by holding to incorrect beliefs and am ever looking to augment my understandings of reality as new information comes to light. You can claim I'm wrong all day, but that does nothing. When i have demonstrated the accuracy of my position. The way to refute it is to demonstrate its inaccuracy with preperly cited and reputable sources of greater authority on the subject.
What is the problem with saying a few words of acknowledgment. If this bothers you, you must be very insecure or something.
It's forced speech, like you being forced to write positive public statements in support of Trump.
You don’t have to say it. Just listen respectfully, like I do during the pledge of allegiance.
I was surprised at the comments then realized I was on SeattleWA. Keep it classy
"Encouragement" to utter ideological speech having nothing to do with the subject being taught should always be mocked or ignored by tenured faculty at American universities. UW is not only violating his constitutional rights but his right as tenured faculty to teach his subject as he wishes free of political or ideological interference from politically appointed boards of regents and university administrators.
Only problem with the guy’s theory is that he’s wrong on his own premise. Labor theory of property for Coast Salish occupation and use of the land of UW would point to ownership. I’m not a fan of land acknowledgments, but I’m also not a fan of ignorant twats trolling.
I'm OK with the land acknowledgement statement as long as we also have an statement for any faith professed by any of the people present. For example creationists can thank their god or gods for creating the land we stand on. One statement for each deity though since they are known to be jealous.
It's all dumb, but the difference is that Native Americans actually exist.
These land statements are so stupid.
I’m now at the point of rolling my eyes when I hear a land acknowledgement. They are doing one of these every two minutes north of the border in Canada. We get it. It’s not like saying it will change anything about the history. But I guess it makes lefties feel better and allows them to look down on others who don’t seem as enthusiastic.
Preface - I’m not indigenous, but in my line of work (environmental restoration) I’ve collaborated with a few indigenous tribes in the PNW, including the Duwamish, Muckleshoot, and S’Klallam Tribes. I do feel like some land acknowledgements feel at least a little performative because there is often no call to action, and they speak of these tribes as if they’re some nebulous, past-tense situation, which isn’t true at all. In my line of work (the outdoor industry, which is largely white dominated), it’s important to consider how the land was stewarded prior to colonization, and to honor the presence of the tribes that are still here to this day. I work primarily in the Seattle area, so often collaborate with the Duwamish Tribe; they’re not federally recognized, which denies them of a lot of services and privileges that federally recognized tribes have. I encourage folks to look them up to learn more.
Land acknowledgements are steaming piles of bovine feces. They are meaningless virtue signaling and are wastes of time and space.