The Scam of Land Acknowledgments
Land Acknowledgments seem to be all the rage on the left. Here is an example from my own alma mater:
Let's start with the passive voice. This land was stolen from them. Why do you not want to address who exactly stole the land? Is it that if you also acknowledge who stole the land, it would make it more clear who has the ability to return it?
Well we know who stole it, right? Our ancestors, most often through the workings of our government.
So here's my next question: If you believe that this land was stolen (like this acknowledgment plainly states) and you are a good person, why not give it back? Surely we could give some of it back? I mean, Nevada is over eighty percent owned by the federal government. Utah, Idaho, and Alaska all have over sixty percent federal ownership. California? Over forty-five percent. Oregon? Over fifty percent. And how much land do state governments control?
So if you really meant it, at least some land could be returned.
Or maybe you are not a good person? Because you have no intention of giving the land back to its rightful owners. This is simply a performance to make you feel better about yourself and how virtuous you are. Or how virtuous your intentions are anyway.
But even your intentions are not virtuous. You have no intention of returning anything. You just want, somehow, for Native Americans to believe that you have these intentions. And to believe that, the Indians would have to be as dumb as you think they are.
Well, they're not.
Even if you do claim to recognize and respect their brilliance, gifts, and contributions past, present, and future. They are a living legacy because as you acknowledge, their actual legacy was stolen. You really believe that they are too stupid to recognize your condescension?
Unless you truly intend to return the land to its rightful inheritors, do not patronize our Native American brothers and sisters with this absurd and meaningless statement.
So what should be said instead? Well I am not at all sure that anything can be said or even should be said. Certainly nothing said is going to make the situation any better.
Don't say, do. That is, give the land back. Seriously? Well, not really. The above acknowledgment is from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Are the good people of North Carolina going to give the land that that campus occupies back to the above listed Native American tribes?
There is just no chance of that.
So I am not sure anything should be said whatsoever.
And given the long history and the long chain of promises made and promises broken, is there anything short of a large-scale land return that would suffice? Short of land return, what are you going to do? Promise better education and jobs on the reservations? Tax credits?
Stop talking about stolen land. Move on to something, anything, more realistic.
Or, pray be silent.