>>512455102
>Ok you strike me not as someone who engages in bad-faith or trolling on purpose,
Projection.
>Your entire argument hinges on one thing:
>“We reject your definitions, so ours are just as valid.”
Strawmaning my argument. My argument is indigenous people have the right to assert their indigenous rights over their ancestral homeland.
>But that’s not how meaning works. We don’t define words in a vacuum. Language evolves through consensus, application, and context.
>When international bodies, legal frameworks, and centuries of academic discourse all agree on a concept — like indigeneity — that is the standard. You don’t get to ignore it because it makes you uncomfortable.
You keep harping on about muh academia but it's in shambles and totally discredited
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/21504366/science-replication-crisis-peer-review-statistics