United States Public Law 103-150 of 1993 (known as the Apology Resolution), acknowledged that "the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi occurred with the active participation of agents and citizens of the United States" and also "that the Native Hawaiian people never directly relinquished to the United States their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people over their national lands, either through the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi or through a plebiscite or referendum." Hawaiian Kingdom
Yesterday I saw five posts in a row that were either about wanting to commit murder in the future or celebrating past murders. Which is fine but gets cringe in excess especially from people who will never do anything. Then there was this post that looked like it was about something else but then he tied it back into murder again with comedic timing.
The esteem which the islanders nevertheless held for Cook caused them to retain his body. Following their practice of the time, they prepared his body with funerary rituals usually reserved for the chiefs and highest elders of the society. The body was disemboweled and baked to facilitate removal of the flesh, and the bones were carefully cleaned for preservation as religious icons in a fashion somewhat reminiscent of the treatment of European saints in the Middle Ages. Some of Cook's remains, thus preserved, were eventually returned to his crew for a formal burial at sea. (on Wikipeda )
Cook was an explorer and worthy of respect. It's not like it's a casual jaunt to the other side of the world, it was an arduous task and a remarkable feat.
Unfortunately Cook's arrival heralded that age's colonialism, itself a mixed blessing.
It's only now, with the wealth of the world's history at our fingertips and an objective view of the past up to the present that lets us judge the effects of past events.
Not sure what your point is, assuming the theory that Homo sapiens wiped out homo neanderthalensis it was before you could really argue there was such a thing as colonialism.
Most of us like to think we've grown ethically over time. Slaves were commonplace throughout history. Now we see that as unethical, societies improved.
Ah, argument from nature. Word to the wise: I used to find that fallacy compelling too, until I realized I with picking and choosing which parts of "nature" sounded right to me.
Kropotkin did it, and so do the momfluencers, and manosphere talking heads,. Even though they have widely contradictory takes.
It's not a good pillar for reason. It's another misty ideology, that only obscures your sources.
