Settler/colonizer views

Post Reply New Topic

Why do the types of people who hold settler/colonizer type views try to gaslight others when their worldviews are challenged? They become extremely defensive.

If you are born in the country you live in, you can't be a settler by definition. Impossible.

Yet when you point this out to these types, it triggers them. It's funny.

Beware NT mentality can be hazardous to everyones health, I think ..? Especially if they decide your land is not deserved by you. Regardless if you have lived there 30 years or 1 year. or even days , If legally obtained .

This isn't just Europe but Western countries that are sheltered, don't know history or current evils against natives. In other words forced removal off land, rape, forced labour. This is exactly the argument with my brother because Israel committed war crimes, yet question Muslim immigrants in other countries. Let's be fair, I'm white and I'm, they haven't done to us what we did, yet whites are outraged. Same with Feminism women haven't done same to men, to same extent.

If news showed truth about army tactics during war, then people should surely realise we still hide behind our white skins, war crimes hidden from view.

'If you are born in the country you live in, you can't be a settler by definition. Impossible.'
Well actually it's generally accepted if you are black man then you descendent from Africa, no? The land mass is more than America, settlers of same nationality own Australia and reside in South Africa. But Trump wants to deport people, people who he views are encroaching on land taken from Indians. Being Jewish I do have bit of intelligence, so probably best for Indians to go to Brazil, since living on reserve camp is unsustainable life, it's just better for them. The same knowledge applied is that it must suit people enough and financially benefit before case is fully recognised by ICJ, a united nations was created but similar question of who is going to enforce the laws?

This is my autistic way of thinking, it's not that don't switch off on language, I get it, you going to take a shower where? So my spectrum is that I notice things said don't comply with laws. But suppose it's whether lawyer wants to create desired outcome or if can prove true justice was served.

Gaslighting you how now? They're not gaslighting by saying you're a settler. In settler/colonizer states, settler/colonizer refers to non-natives, specifically those who the settler state exists to benefit. That's why they call you a settler. They're not actually suggesting that you came over in 1850 and built a log cabin on the frontier.

I'm a white American, and this just struck me as stating the obvious. Many more whites, especially NTs, get REALLY defensive when you casts doubt on their sunshine-and-rainbows view of history and their frequent beliefs that their country/civilization/culture/race is a Special Snowflake. To those who hate being called settlers or colonizers, it is an unacceptable affront to their belief that their country is virtuous. Their existence in their just nation is just! Theie country is virtuous and righteous!
People attach far too much self-worth to their belief in the superiority of the country they live in. Governments encourage people to think this so they will be more obedient and less likely to question the morality or justice of the state itself.

People need to stop engaging in hero worship of their countries and their national myths. In my experience, a Christian who has just been told the Bible is a bunch of lies gets much less angry than an American nationalist who has just been told the Constitution is an irrelevant piece of paper. Self-proclaimed freethinking, government-skeptical Americans have grown extremely uncomfortable with how younger Americans don't believe the sunshine-and-rainbows version of history that the government has been selling for over 200 years.
Nationalism has become so threatened, that now they've tried to flip the script and say that hating nationalism is the REAL conformity. Conservatives and nationalists have been doing this a lot lately. It's like if the NY Yankees or Chelsea FC suddenly started losing constantly and then tried to rebrand themselves as plucky underdogs, and then millions of people were gullible enough to buy it.

Wait, which one of you was triggered exactly?

In my experience settlers are very thin-skinned about their status as guests on stolen land.

This isn't really an NT vs. ND issue, it's much more of a settler vs. indigenous issue.

If your nation was founded through theft of land at no point does the land become not stolen.

I'm not a settler and I don't live on stolen land.

This is an example of gaslighting.

I can't comment on you personally, but when engaging with white Canadians that trend seems to consistently demonstrate itself.

Of course, it also seems like your definition of settler probably doesn't match the one used by the people who are describing you as a settler. One could make the case that you're the one engaged in gaslighting, at least if you're refusing to acknowledge their definition of settler and insisting that only your definition has any legitimacy.

Why are you trying to argue with me? I made myself clear. I don't need to conform to labels.
You sound bigoted when you start mentioning skin colours.

Let's talk about the actual definition of 'settler' rather than what you perceive mine or someone else's to be.

a person who moves with a group of others to live in a new country or area.

I was born in Canada. I do not fit the definition.

No, I am not engaged in gaslighting. You can look up this word to get a better understanding of it.

I am pretty much finished discussing this.

I appreciate you demonstrating what I mean.

You've cherry-picked a definition that suits your agenda and you're acting like no other valid definition exists and got butthurt when your BS was (gently) addressed.

I feel pretty confident concluding that you're the one who got triggered, which explains why you rushed on here to seek sympathy and then got triggered again when you didn't receive the response you imagined you would.

If I'm dealing with someone who doesn't understand the word settler or wants to twist the meaning of it,
it doesn't bother me. I think they sound crazy, but I don't have to engage with them.

If they think I'm on stolen land, it doesn't bother me because
their belief isn't based in reality. It's just your BS to satisfy your feelings.
If I truly was trespassing on private property which is what you are implying,
then what is being done about it? Nothing. Your words have no value in the face of reality.

You think that millions of Canadians are going to give up their property because in your opinion they are on stolen land?

That's very funny, let's see how far you go with that.

I don't think settlers are going to leave, I don't think they have any obligation to leave. That doesn't alter that Canada contains stolen land that was taken without any treaty or that those treaties weren't really fairly entered into.

If I steal your car, when does it become my car? Never. It isn't more legitimate if I take it by force (aka conquest) either.

You not liking a valid definition of settler doesn't invalidate it, speaking of BS to satisfy your feelings. You're literally engaging in BS to satisfy your feelings.

I'm trying to hold you accountable for what you believe.
If I'm on stolen land, what are you going to do about it?

I'm very, very comfortable on the land I live on. I don't expect you to change that at all.

I don't care what your definition of settler is. The one that works for me is what matters.

That's nice. A definition you don't like isn't gaslighting and you embarrass yourself when you claim otherwise. It's pretty clear who was triggered because you were still demonstrating it in this thread. Good deployment of coping mechanisms (finally) but besides gloating about justice not existing you haven't actually addressed the argument that hurt your feelings in a meaningful way.

Well, nothing has really hurt my feelings. This discussion has run it's course.
Unless you want to continue to insist that I'm triggered.
If that makes you feel productive, go for it.
I'll sit out the remainder of this thread. All the best.

I acknowledge that I am an invader and I reside on land stolen from the Kulin nation.
I further believe the only reason first nations people's still exist is because of an incompetently executed genocide, and the innate skills and resilience of the indigenous inhabitants.
I have no respect for the royal family of the United Kingdom who declared Australia "Terra Nullius" in much the same way they handed Palestine to the Zionists.
I do, however, owe respect to the understanding, forgiveness and tolerance of first nations people's and their connection to country.
I was very disappointed with the result of the referendum to give indigenous peoples a voice in parliament and believe what white society truly needs the spirit of connectedness this voice could have inculcated.
I apologise for the sins of my culture and offer my respects to the elders of the Dja Dja Wurrung and the Taungurung Peoples of the Kulin Nation, those who have gone before, those here, and those still to come.