The island has been a traffic stop for seafaring people since prehistoric times. The Europeans ethically cleansed the natives, then spent three centuries contesting their control.
That 2021 Hamley paper is total guesswork, and the scientific community essentially laughed it out of the room…
Actual archaeologists and ecologists heavily criticised the study because it lacks the absolute bare minimum required to prove human settlement:
Zero Human Remains or Structures: In the cold, acidic peat bogs of the Falklands—which perfectly preserve organic material—they found zero human bones, zero teeth, no post holes, no tents and fuck all else.
The Fox Myth: The authors claimed the extinct fox (the warrah) had a marine diet because humans fed it. Peer researchers immediately pointed out that 19th-century museum specimens of the fox (when humans were actively trying to wipe them out) show the exact same diet. The fox was just scavenging naturally. Which makes sense as there were penguins everywhere and it was stealing from them
Natural Explanations: The bone piles have zero stone-tool butchery marks and were likely piled up by natural wind and wave erosion. The charcoal spikes were just natural brush fires during droughts. Nah must have been Argentinans doing it… Yep
If you want to see how badly peer researchers dismantled this paper, you can read the formal scientific rebuttals here:
Science Advances (Official Rebuttal): Comment on “Evidence of prehistoric human activity in the Falkland Islands” by researchers T.J. Clark, J. Newton, and E.D. Wakefield. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abo0928
There is even a reply on the same webpage that calls this article out on its assumptions, did you even read the article you provided?
It’s an incredibly weak paper trying to turn a few pieces of circumstantial ecological data into a political origin story. There is zero proof of a pre-European human footprint.
Nice try tho - Even if it was true, they clearly left well before the Europeans arrived so who fucking cares.
Copied text from your article, and the link I have submitted here
Careful. As in other debates concerning Latin America, magically people outside the region see all the good of colonialism. “Stop crying. ‘America’ is now the name of a country, even if stolen from your territory”. “Mexico lost half the country just as every other country lost territory in the past”. “The Falkand Islands belong to Europeans because they claimed them: simple as that”. “Well, if you didn’t want to lose sovereignty, maybe you should have been stronger against illegal tactics from the CIA and others”. Just precious.
Does Argentina belong to the Spanish? Why do you think Argentina should take them? Who lived in Argentina before the Spanish came? Who lived in the Falkland islands, nobody.
It doesn’t matter who lived there first, because I’ll swear on the King’s life that the Brits weren’t first
Also, “who lived in Argentina before the Spanish came?” Maybe the people living there tens of thousands of years before European colonialism hit their shores?
Are you saying there were no indigenous people in what is now Argentina when the colonists came? Just a simple search for “indigenous people of Argentina” delivers ample evidence that there were.
Conclusion: “rightfully British”? The law seems to be whoever smacks the other in the teeth and takes it by force, so I suppose that’s accurate.
However, having had a settlement in the island, Argentina’s claim is as valid as the UKs, and they just got smacked in the teeth so my verdict is that Argentina takes over administrative control over the Islands up until such time as they meet again in a world cup.
Yes it did. Argentina’s “Venticinco de Mayo” revolution in 1810 made it independent, though a formal declaration happened only in 1816 (technically “the United provinces of the Rio del la Plata”, that’s being nitpicky).
What no, I’m talking of the 1830s. The British came back and expelled the Argentinian settlement, and settled back in.
They came back because the Argentinians occupied it.
I see two different reasons for a claim for Argentina: that they settled when there was no permanent occupation, like the French and the British did originally, and that they inherited Spain’s claim (who purchased the French settlement) following their independence from Spain.
My post was mostly going for humour, but if we’re looking at it a bit seriously, England’s claim is a colonial one, a legacy from a bygone era. They will inevitably have to cede the islands.
By all the same arguments that you could invoke to justify British colonization in the first place, assuming you’re not going for bullshit like “god gave our King that holy right”.
No one should colonise anything. But the difference between Argentina and The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (God save the King) is as vast as, well, the distance between London and any point in South America
Because “sail around the world and claim what you want” is fucking great if you’re playing Monopoly. Less great to sort out world affairs in a modern world.
But if the islands were empty before? Like there’s islands who have thousands of years of history of people living there. But then there’s also those who just doesn’t. Are they supposed to stay empty? All humans always bad, or something?
Ah, yes, the fact that prehistoric Fuegians may have visited the Falklands surely means they’re the birthright of Argentina. Airtight anti-colonialist explanation.
Literally no one was there when France landed there, so you can either a) ask France and Spain for their thoughts, b) resurrect the Fuegians who visited and let them have it, forcibly deporting the people who’ve lived there for centuries, or c) disregard pragmatism and say they aren’t part of any country – either way, you can stop obnoxiously trying to defend Argentina’s baseless colonialist claim under the guise of “anticolonialism”.
To the extent it belongs to anyone, it obviously belongs to the UK far more than it does to the asshurt losers who flaccidly tried and utterly failed to assert sovereignty over it.
So if no land belongs to anyone, the only people who’s opinion should count are the people actually fucking living there, no? Who want, pretty much universally, to remain under uk rule. Who owns the bit of rock is far less important than the thoughts of the population that live there. And they think “fuck off argentina”
Wait, who colonized Argentina? And wait who was first to the Falkland Islands? I genuinely don’t understand why you think Argentina wanting the Falkland Islands has anything to do with opposition to colonialism.
Opposing would be free Malvinas or something like that.
The native population of the Falklands is arguably the British people living there. Who have clearly stated their preference to remain part of Britain. While Argentina’s plan to displace and deport them, and replace them with Argentinians, is literally genocide and colonialism.
Respecting the native inhabitants’ wishes is anti-colonialism.
The British came to the island for resupply and left again, much like prior native peoples who had been visiting the island for centuries. And the British, along with French and Spanish peers, decimated the nearby locals to make the islands exclusive
Later, British explicitly removed the island from Argentinian territorial control, back in 1833. But the islands have been changing colonial hands since the 1700s they’ve had visitors from the mainland going back to prehistoric times.
Claiming it’s uninhabitable after Europeans spent decades ethnically cleansing the mainland is cynical af.
Sore losers even when they’re winning.
Opposing colonialism is being a sore loser now?
You are aware that the first inhabitants of the Falklands were French? There was nobody to be colonised.
😐
That’s certainly a theory.
Yeah they colonised some penguins… Got em
The island has been a traffic stop for seafaring people since prehistoric times. The Europeans ethically cleansed the natives, then spent three centuries contesting their control.
How do you know if it’s pre-historic…?
Who were these pre historic natives, and how did they manage to get there without boats?
Did you graduate from any form of schooling?
Are you mistaking penguins for humans
I would consult an anthropologist on that one.
Evidence of prehistoric human activity in the Falkland Islands
I’m not mistaking them for the French, if that’s what you’re asking.
That 2021 Hamley paper is total guesswork, and the scientific community essentially laughed it out of the room…
Actual archaeologists and ecologists heavily criticised the study because it lacks the absolute bare minimum required to prove human settlement:
If you want to see how badly peer researchers dismantled this paper, you can read the formal scientific rebuttals here:
There is even a reply on the same webpage that calls this article out on its assumptions, did you even read the article you provided?
It’s an incredibly weak paper trying to turn a few pieces of circumstantial ecological data into a political origin story. There is zero proof of a pre-European human footprint.
Nice try tho - Even if it was true, they clearly left well before the Europeans arrived so who fucking cares.
Copied text from your article, and the link I have submitted here
Edit: Well that shut them up.
It can’t be both a traffic stop and a home.
The dispute is over whether it should be a military base of a foreign power
No, it was about the Argentinian claim being the anti-colonialism one somehow, and this was supposed to be some kind of justification for that claim.
Careful. As in other debates concerning Latin America, magically people outside the region see all the good of colonialism. “Stop crying. ‘America’ is now the name of a country, even if stolen from your territory”. “Mexico lost half the country just as every other country lost territory in the past”. “The Falkand Islands belong to Europeans because they claimed them: simple as that”. “Well, if you didn’t want to lose sovereignty, maybe you should have been stronger against illegal tactics from the CIA and others”. Just precious.
You must be American
Please explain to me how this is opposing colonialism? They want to colonise the Falklands themselves.
They sure as fuck don’t belong to England
Does Argentina belong to the Spanish? Why do you think Argentina should take them? Who lived in Argentina before the Spanish came? Who lived in the Falkland islands, nobody.
It doesn’t matter who lived there first, because I’ll swear on the King’s life that the Brits weren’t first
Also, “who lived in Argentina before the Spanish came?” Maybe the people living there tens of thousands of years before European colonialism hit their shores?
Really? Who were they? Is there any evidence whatsoever to back this claim up?
Are you saying there were no indigenous people in what is now Argentina when the colonists came? Just a simple search for “indigenous people of Argentina” delivers ample evidence that there were.
We’re talking about the Falkland islands, Argentina wasn’t colonised by the British.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peopling_of_the_Americas
This doesn’t show the Falkland islands were populated?
It does if the argument is about colonialism.
No one lived there before Europeans arrived.
They’ve belonged to them for over 200 years, I don’t see why they don’t.
Let’s recap islands history:
Deserted, no permanent population.
French set up a settlement.
English makes another, fight the French.
Spain buys French port, fights British.
Britain leaves.
Spain leaves.
Deserted, no permanent population.
Argentina sets up a settlement.
England comes back, fight them off.
Conclusion: “rightfully British”? The law seems to be whoever smacks the other in the teeth and takes it by force, so I suppose that’s accurate.
However, having had a settlement in the island, Argentina’s claim is as valid as the UKs, and they just got smacked in the teeth so my verdict is that Argentina takes over administrative control over the Islands up until such time as they meet again in a world cup.
Argentina didnt exist yet
Yes it did. Argentina’s “Venticinco de Mayo” revolution in 1810 made it independent, though a formal declaration happened only in 1816 (technically “the United provinces of the Rio del la Plata”, that’s being nitpicky).
🤔 Why did England come back? Are you saying Argentina won the war in the 1980s?
What no, I’m talking of the 1830s. The British came back and expelled the Argentinian settlement, and settled back in.
They came back because the Argentinians occupied it.
I see two different reasons for a claim for Argentina: that they settled when there was no permanent occupation, like the French and the British did originally, and that they inherited Spain’s claim (who purchased the French settlement) following their independence from Spain.
My post was mostly going for humour, but if we’re looking at it a bit seriously, England’s claim is a colonial one, a legacy from a bygone era. They will inevitably have to cede the islands.
Thatcher’s dead and buried, defending British imperialism isn’t going to get her to sleep with you
You’ve still not explained why Argentina should be allowed to colonise it and Britain shouldnt.
By all the same arguments that you could invoke to justify British colonization in the first place, assuming you’re not going for bullshit like “god gave our King that holy right”.
No one should colonise anything. But the difference between Argentina and The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (God save the King) is as vast as, well, the distance between London and any point in South America
Because “sail around the world and claim what you want” is fucking great if you’re playing Monopoly. Less great to sort out world affairs in a modern world.
But if the islands were empty before? Like there’s islands who have thousands of years of history of people living there. But then there’s also those who just doesn’t. Are they supposed to stay empty? All humans always bad, or something?
There weren’t empty at the time of the British invasion.
There was an Argentinian settlement with a governor and a military garrison.
The British suck but not literally everything they do is an invasion. And there were other Europeans there when they first arrived, not Argentinians.
Both Spain and France and UK each have stronger claims than Argentina.
No garrison.
There weren’t “people” in the New World, so colonizing it was totally cool /s
You have to be one of the dumbest people I’ve ever interacted with on this platform, and that’s genuinely saying something.
You’re completely unable to make a coherent case for your beliefs, and all your arguments basically amount to “it just is”
Good luck with life, I guess.
OK so now YOU’RE equating humans to literally just birds and plants
Eh, nobody else was using them for anything.
They sure are fuck belong to whoever the majority of inhabitants want it to belong to.
Just like Greenland.
The islands are on the continental shelf.
OK, so?
There’s evidence of pre-Columbian Argentine peoples using the island.
Ah, yes, the fact that prehistoric Fuegians may have visited the Falklands surely means they’re the birthright of Argentina. Airtight anti-colonialist explanation.
It certainly doesn’t belong to the British.
Literally no one was there when France landed there, so you can either a) ask France and Spain for their thoughts, b) resurrect the Fuegians who visited and let them have it, forcibly deporting the people who’ve lived there for centuries, or c) disregard pragmatism and say they aren’t part of any country – either way, you can stop obnoxiously trying to defend Argentina’s baseless colonialist claim under the guise of “anticolonialism”.
To the extent it belongs to anyone, it obviously belongs to the UK far more than it does to the asshurt losers who flaccidly tried and utterly failed to assert sovereignty over it.
No land “belongs” to anyone, least of all to the asshurt losers who flaccidly tried and utterly failed to keep their empire alive
So if no land belongs to anyone, the only people who’s opinion should count are the people actually fucking living there, no? Who want, pretty much universally, to remain under uk rule. Who owns the bit of rock is far less important than the thoughts of the population that live there. And they think “fuck off argentina”
Funny how quick the anti-colonialism argument got abandoned when facts entered the picture.
They belong to me.
I have as good as a claim on the Islands as Argentina.
So pre-Argentine as well?
Ah, the Israel school of territorial claim
Wait, who colonized Argentina? And wait who was first to the Falkland Islands? I genuinely don’t understand why you think Argentina wanting the Falkland Islands has anything to do with opposition to colonialism.
Isn’t that promoting colonialism?
Opposing would be free Malvinas or something like that.
The native population of the Falklands is arguably the British people living there. Who have clearly stated their preference to remain part of Britain. While Argentina’s plan to displace and deport them, and replace them with Argentinians, is literally genocide and colonialism.
Respecting the native inhabitants’ wishes is anti-colonialism.
Argentina supports Israel and has an ancap president. They aren’t anti colonial.
Australian New Car Assessment Program? What do they have to do with this?
Anarcho-capitalist. The end state of muh free marketz morons.
Millei is not ancap. He hasn’t legalised jack shit, and is anti abortion. He’s just a conservative.
From the horses mouth
ah si claro, y el legaliza un montonazo de cosas como minarchista para sacar el gobierno de la libertad de la gente /s
sos boludo?
ah yes, and milei has legalised a BUNCH of shit like any minarchist, in order to take the government out of the way of the freedom of the people /s
Are you a dumbass?
Do you also think the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is a democracy?
Are you a butt hurt libertarian?
Please recount to me the tales of how the Falklands war ended up going in the 1980s. I’m fascinated by your take.
deleted by creator
This is sad. I wanted to know your perspective, why not try again without deleting it?
Sure as hell the fascist military Junta wasn’t right. I can tell you that.
Genuinely can’t tell which militarily force you are supporting.
deleted by creator
It’s not real colonialism. It’s Sparkling Regime Change.
What regime did the English change when they showed up to an uninhabited island a few hundred years ago?
Nature’s /s
The British came to the island for resupply and left again, much like prior native peoples who had been visiting the island for centuries. And the British, along with French and Spanish peers, decimated the nearby locals to make the islands exclusive
Later, British explicitly removed the island from Argentinian territorial control, back in 1833. But the islands have been changing colonial hands since the 1700s they’ve had visitors from the mainland going back to prehistoric times.
Claiming it’s uninhabitable after Europeans spent decades ethnically cleansing the mainland is cynical af.