I don't think it's ethical either, we agree on that!
But I do think being a "colonizer" is practically everyone in the last few millennia, excepting the Sentinel Island natives perhaps and other very rare exceptions to the rule.
The Japanese were colonizers of Japan (supplanting the prior native population), Americans were colonizers of North America, Aztecs were colonizers of South America, English were colonizers of the UK, Romans were colonizers of Italy and most of Europe and North Africa, and so on forever
Oh, I get it! By 'use' you mean "no one has ever said this ever', just like by "tankie" you mean "peaceful negotiator"!
Now I'm not sure what you mean by arguments and points... obviously by argument you mean agreement, and by point you mean vague nonsensical claim not reflected anywhere in English ever.
It doesn't mean "peaceful negotiator" etc. in any recorded English literature since the inception of the word... somehow what you call "use" has avoided every English publication ever printed for sixty years.
What if there was a baby sitting and chilling in the snow man? Stay on the road, you dipshit, I recommend property seizure of this man and termination of driving license and perhaps an art course on snowmen and how to avoid driving over adventurous babies by staying on the fucking road and not being a piece of shit.
And $10K fine and put him on the sexual offender registration list.
It's "I am right as reflected by the entire history of the word until its present day, as recorded by Cambridge, Oxford, Webster's, dictionary.com, and every other English dictionary... and you are wrong".
You DO contribute something... a chuckle.
Nothing in any definition about peace, sorry friend.
I'm not claiming that the land wasn't stolen by "us", but I've looked even deeper into history than you, and know that the exact same land that they lived on was stolen from another population. Repeatedly. It was far from a war-free utopia before "our" arrival.
'Us' and 'our' being pronouns to represent the colonizers of most modern countries, not meant to include you or I specifically.
I'm native. My ancestors were very brutal, not as brutal as the Spaniards, but still.
I'm also Spaniard, womp womp
p.s. thank you for book recommendation I am interested! Currently reading about Incans/Aztecs/Mayans etc., just finished Popal Vuh and recommend it
I have made ZERO blind assertions and provided a definition from CAMBRIDGE.
Your points aren't real, if only they were as solid as a brick wall. You have nothing to back you up, I have decades of word usage and published definitions used everywhere English is used.
I'm not even exaggerating, EVERY DAY in my feed repeatedly, not even in English, absolutely zero discernible reason. No Chinese. No Brazilian. No German. It's not even random.
Also, Jesus ads. "He gets us". Why Jesus ads in English AND Hindi Indian subs? It's almost spiteful
No, it's not. Tankie in NO WAY means "people who support peace".
You explained why, true, but your explanation was FALSE. Because words are defined by common use. And common use of the word "tankie" is "authoritarian communist", not "people who support peace".
You saying I've failed proves that I'm right, because you also say "tankie means people who support peace". Your claims are absurdly wrong to a comical degree, you're some kind of bizarro tankie that hates itself.
The "best we've got" are working WITH the white nationalists, our parties are co-dependent AND switch their platform at whim regardless.
For example, Democrat used to mean "labor party". They abandoned labor a long time ago, it was dead by the 1990s. They abandoned labor once they were in power.
Republican used to mean "state's rights". They abandoned State's rights very recently once they were in power.
Both parties have the same "employers" and our "issues" aren't even really issues. We're distracted with gay marriage so we don't actually address international banking cartels controlling our "money" supply, insider trading, asset forfeiture, and so on, endless real issues with tens of millions of citizens robbed blind with no end in sight.
I don't think it's ethical either, we agree on that!
But I do think being a "colonizer" is practically everyone in the last few millennia, excepting the Sentinel Island natives perhaps and other very rare exceptions to the rule.
The Japanese were colonizers of Japan (supplanting the prior native population), Americans were colonizers of North America, Aztecs were colonizers of South America, English were colonizers of the UK, Romans were colonizers of Italy and most of Europe and North Africa, and so on forever