• lohky@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    132
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    That’s not weird. That’s how functional societies reconcile when they aren’t subjected to endless propaganda and fear mongering.

  • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Migration leading to mixed cultures instead of genocide and colonization. Americans: “This is so weird!”

    • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      “In this here melting pot, we burn away all our differences until we’re left with only the pure white flame of Christian nationalism.”

      I had to put the statement in quotes because while being hyperbole, it’s not too far from how some people think, and I don’t want to be confused with those folks.

  • m0darn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t think jewelry wearing is compatible with the Amish conception of propriety and modesty but I’m not going to say it wouldn’t happen.

    • Fosheze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      3 months ago

      My grandpa rents some of his fields out to an amish guy who also rents a lot of other fields in the area. The amish in our area are known to be pretty loose with their rules so my grandpa wasn’t surprised when the guy showed up with combine harvester but he was kind of surprised with how new it was. My grandpa asked him how he could drive a combine when they weren’t allowed to drive cars. To which the amish guy responded, “Well, I don’t actually drive the combine; it drives itself. I just sit in it.”

      • NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sounds like the Amish would be ok with a robotic vacuum as long as it charged itself from a solar panel.

        • spicy pancake@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Quite possibly. A lot of their electricity aversion stems from avoidance of relying on an electric grid owned and maintained by outsiders.

          (Which to be fair is also pretty based)

    • jqubed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Maybe it depends on the branch of Amish. I’ve heard the ones in the Midwest are a little more relaxed than the ones in Pennsylvania.

      • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The Amish around where I live (Midwest) run a bunch of great little stores (which is most of the contact I have with them personally, but my partners mom has friends in their community who come to visit now and then.) The stores all take credit cards and have refrigerators for the cheeses/dairy, and many of them do use machinery for farm work. Some even use cell phones.

        I haven’t noticed any jewelry (haven’t paid attention), but they really do seem to pick and choose which portions to adhere strongly to.

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          My understanding is the faith has exclusions to the rules for when its necessary for work, so an Amish IT Administrator wouldn’t be impossible!

    • bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      The “rules” the Amish live by are determined by the Elders of that group. They can be quite strict or fairly loose. And can vary by a fair bit from colony to colony even as neighbors. Cell phones can be fine for one group and be forbidden for the next.

      Like some much in life, the rules are open to interpretation.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I saw some Amish or similar community teens freaking out in a Sheetz over the touch screens. They were having so much fun.

        • spicy pancake@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I remember freaking out over the first touch screen I ever encountered (at mom’s bank ATM when I was a kid). It really is magical until it’s mundane lol

      • m0darn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Right I get that, but the underlying value that the prohibitions are designed around is promoting humility and preventing vanity.

        • angrystego@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          But they’re people. People can revisit and reconsider the values they live by. They can change things despite the tradition they were born into or even the tradition they helped establish. That allows the society to progress and survive changing conditions. Let’s support it.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well no, the Amish were settlers too. They’re just working with the Indians instead of in spite of the Indians.

        • dubious@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          they were all born there. we need to stop considering ancestors and consider the living.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            We can stop when we actually give them the same opportunities and protections white people get. You don’t get to oppress a population for 500 years and then just act like nothing happened.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 months ago

                Civil Asset Forfeiture, fleeing felon rule, subjective reasons for searches, qualified immunity…

                Pretty much everything that allows for selective enforcement of laws.

            • dubious@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              2 months ago

              did the current, living Amish oppress them? did I? did you? who is the “you” in your sentence?

    • bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      As a father who raised 4 daughters, you try and stop a young woman from wearing jewelry, perfumes, and even makeup. That’s a fight you WILL lose every time.

      You should see the dating scene. A young Amish boy holding hands with a young Native walking down a hallway, (or vice versa). It ain’t right I tell you.

  • Donebrach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is local politics in action. In a federation this is protected. In a federation this could also be forced on all federated states or banned. In a federal system it is also allowed that damaging actions are outlawed or embraced and cherished by the state. It is all imperfect but the entire idea is the hope that all the various levels of legal authority check and balance themselves for the benefit of the people and are accountable to wrote law.

    I am just writing this for people to maybe remember that this is how a federation (see: The United States of America) is fundamentally supposed to function.

    • BougieBirdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      My native american father in law prefers to call himself an Indian.

      From his point of view he wouldn’t call himself a “native american” because he belongs to an actual nation and indigenous people aren’t a homogenous group.

      He prefers Indian because it makes white people look bad. Incredibly based

      • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        A sentiment I’ve heard a bunch is “oh, so you called us Indians and now you’re uncomfortable with that label? Well fuck you, you don’t get to keep unilaterally changing what’s acceptable. If thinking about colonialism makes you uncomfortable, then great! Start sitting with that discomfort and recognising the crumb of self determination that we express by identifying as Indians. You gave us that label, and it’s ours now.”

        • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          So the people trying to make the term more accurate are the same ones that started calling then Indian in the first place? In other words, all white people are the same? That’s one hell of an advanced Reverse UNO

      • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Me, Native American (heh): Indigenous to where? lmfao

        Indigenous [Continent/general area here] would be the closest all-round. Indigenous North American just too many syllables though. Trying to fucking get away from the fucking whirlwind of every 10 years Anishinaabe, Algonquin, Ojibwe, Chippewa, Native American, Indian, Injun shit please. The fewer syllables the better, and nothing people already have please. And no stupid fucking people first word semantics dumb shit when you’re literally using the same words but it’s better in THIS order not the other…

        I swear people just pick the worst words to describe people sometimes when going down the slippery slope for PC language. It’s all so arbitrary lol.

        People first language literally creates more in-groups and out-groups who have to jump literal semantic hoops, usually just to make the in group feel a little better labeling someone because people turn a blind eye to racists.

        I have rarely, and I mean very, very rarely seen new language originate from minority or out-groups being used by their own people first then co-opted by the in-group. There’s some random language here and there, but anything race/ethnicity related, it’s almost always the in-group getting too racist to call people by what they used for the out-group before, and they have to start calling them something else or fear being branded a racist… Rather than, you know, ostracizing people for being fucking racist.

        Maybe I’m just too mixed or too ND to care, but for the same reason why if you get the pronunciation of my name close enough and know you’re referring to me.

        TBH, I wish Injun made a comebock.

        I like Namen/Nnamen. (Native North American, human, man, woman, his noodly appendage) too. No, I don’t care if you say Nay-men or Nah-men.

        You’re wrong if you pronounce GIF as JIF though.

    • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      My understanding is they call themselves Indians and it’s only dipshitty non-indians tripping over themselves to be publicly offended on others’ behalf who say it’s bad.

      I don’t know for certain but that certainly seems to be the consensus.

      • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        There’s actually a diverse opinion even within the indigenous community, Indian can be a uniting identifier, but it can also be representative of everything wrong with colonism.

        While I’m not American, my understanding from my grandfather who was warded to a government school in Canada (though it’s never been clear if he is first nations, he was documented as such but his cultural experience once he joined the army and moved countries to has been white, and I am white, so I can not truly speak to any of this), whether an individual or a tribal group are more comfortable with the label Indian or Native American, or indigenous, or first nations, tends to depend on the relationship between the person/group and reservations and government programs that historically used the terminology of Indian.

        My grandfather for example would use First Nation’s/Indigenous (though he used to say that he was “treated like first nations” rather than he “is” first nations, because even he had no idea if he actually was or not), he couldn’t bring himself to say “Indian” because that’s what he was labelled as while subjected to the abuse of the educational system at the time, it’s a traumatic term for him. Meanwhile some of the men he knew from that time united under the label “Indian” to claim it back from those that used it to oppress them, it’s a point of pride for them.

      • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s been my impression too.

        Whole thing sounds like the people who call every black person everywhere an African American.

    • ADTJ@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I was reading it and genuinely thought it meant South Asian Indian at first

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        “Indigenous” seems to be acceptable most people. When you know them personally, use their nation or tribal affiliation. Like if your friend was Korean, and you only referred to them as “Asian,” it might feel like you don’t care about the difference.

        • Taniwha420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’ve had members of the Métis community tell me to use “indigenous” with a mixed group because in Canada the Métis and the Inuit don’t fall under the Indian Act.

  • Navarian@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Are there actually Amish people in India?

    I can’t tell if this is real or not.

    • BowtiesAreCool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Many people refer to the people who were living in North America before Europeans as “Indians” and there’s even a good portion of those people that use it to self identify as well, even if “Native American” is more widely used, if not also somewhat an inaccurate if you’re getting technical.

      • Navarian@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Absolutely fair enough, I’m just a somewhat ignorant Welsh man!

        They have only ever been described here as American/Native American.

        Though now that you mention this, Cowboys & Indians suddenly makes a lot more sense to me.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        In Russian language the difference between American and actual Indians is one letter in spelling (easily heard in pronunciation, so only small children maybe mix them up), historically it’s a variation of the same word.

        For “turkey” the bird the feminine version of the former is used (and not used to refer to an American Indian woman).

        The point is, it’s the main word to refer to Native Americans. “Настоящему индейцу завсегда везде ништяк” and all that.

      • Demdaru@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Old worlder here. Still calling them Indians. Also actively refusing to use the term towards people of India, bexause we have other words for them (actually two, one similiar to Indian, secons not at all, neither a slur).