Its called “English (traditional)” as opposed to the yanks who use “English (simplified)”. Remind me again what you Americans did to your native population? Three words pot kettle black.
Imagine assuming I’m part of the British minority who did the colonising and not the majority who got colonised and also learned proper English. I mean I’m neither so ur point is even more idiotic.
Nah I assumed you were an aussie from “munted” and the s you keep putting in colonizer; hence “convict settler”. Not like either one deserves enough respect to be demarcated distinct from one another, but that’s a whole different kettle of catfish.
20-25% of current Aussies have convict ancestors and 40-45% have coloniser ancestors. I’m not even going to engage in ur stupidity of blaming the people of the present for shit that happened over 100years ago.
The fact that you think it is speaks to how comfortable your life is lmfao. For my people, a hundred years changed fucking nothing. Schools, jobs, living districts, third spaces, the fact that we still get lynched by cops and fed into prison slavery if we’re lucky enough to survive a cop run-in; all still segregated in ways that are just nebulous enough to get a veneer of plausible deniability from the settlers thanks to the efforts of assimilationist tokens. Y’know, the artifice that lets you say “a hundred years is a long time and everything is different now”. I couldn’t be paid to believe your situation is any different-- just where you sit on the pecking order.
But this is all a waste of time. Even if you read what I’m saying-- which I doubt-- you’d never internalize it. You’re physically incapable of seeing how your sausage is made; otherwise, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Considering you spelled “colonizer” with an ‘s’, you are really not doing yourself any favors
Its called “English (traditional)” as opposed to the yanks who use “English (simplified)”. Remind me again what you Americans did to your native population? Three words pot kettle black.
“what […] Americans did to [their] native population” you mean continuing the genocide that the British colonists enthusiastically started?
and wow promoting that unhinged naming scheme for US/UK English, really another incredible echelon of coloniser-brain
Neither I or my ancestors are colonisers my hands are as clean as yours.
Imagine asking a Black guy what crackers did to the natives. Exactly what they
didare still doing to us, peckerwood.Imagine assuming I’m part of the British minority who did the colonising and not the majority who got colonised and also learned proper English. I mean I’m neither so ur point is even more idiotic.
Nah I assumed you were an aussie from “munted” and the s you keep putting in colonizer; hence “convict settler”. Not like either one deserves enough respect to be demarcated distinct from one another, but that’s a whole different kettle of catfish.
20-25% of current Aussies have convict ancestors and 40-45% have coloniser ancestors. I’m not even going to engage in ur stupidity of blaming the people of the present for shit that happened over 100years ago.
Imagine splitting the difference when convicts were still used for settler-colonialism, yawn. Are you still going, peck?
No. I’m separating the fact that the entire events of colonisation happened over a hundred years ago. That’s a lot of goddamn time.
The fact that you think it is speaks to how comfortable your life is lmfao. For my people, a hundred years changed fucking nothing. Schools, jobs, living districts, third spaces, the fact that we still get lynched by cops and fed into prison slavery if we’re lucky enough to survive a cop run-in; all still segregated in ways that are just nebulous enough to get a veneer of plausible deniability from the settlers thanks to the efforts of assimilationist tokens. Y’know, the artifice that lets you say “a hundred years is a long time and everything is different now”. I couldn’t be paid to believe your situation is any different-- just where you sit on the pecking order.
But this is all a waste of time. Even if you read what I’m saying-- which I doubt-- you’d never internalize it. You’re physically incapable of seeing how your sausage is made; otherwise, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.