Should major public events include land acknowledgment statements?

The property can have plaques and educational resources but acknowledgment statements during events are not necessary

Maybe just give the people whose land we took money and put up a sign. Maybe do an announcement at big events.

Yes, If it is directly involved with something to do with what the land or tribe was about originally, not if it is simply being used for another reason.

I feel that the amount of emphasis placed on it should be reduced, but it is never a bad thing to aknowledge those who came before us.

Acknowledging the history of the land, and how we got it, is important but how does it really help anyone to just point out that fact and make generalized apologetic statements but take no action. Most if not all of the land owned by countries today was taken from another country/people at some point or another(the morality of this is a different topic). And these land were not just seized by 'colonial powers' but also taken after the United States was formed (and had it's independence) by the United States.

I can understand the heart behind it. I am neither in favor nor against it

No. Dumb question.

Yes, but we need to do more to actually give land back

Land acknowledgements are usually performative.

reallyjust depnds on the topic.

I agree with the practice but don't believe it should be mandatory

It depends. Shouldn't be required, but now banned either.

Yes but only if requested by the Indigenous community

Shouldn't be required but if someone wants to then great

This should be up to native americans.

Only if it's been requested by the original Indigenous peoples.

Not at every event. Only if it is relevant to what the event is about or happens right after some sort of atrocity.

No, to respect the moratorium recommended by the American Anthropological Association; we should prioritize pursuing actually consociational policies with tribal governments to foster concrete power-sharing and the return of federal lands to native sovereignty, rather than largely symbolic gestures.

Yes, but this should not be mandated

No, it should not be legally required, but incentivized to do.

Yes, but only if Native heritage pertains to the event itself.

Yes, but they don't have to if they don't want to.

No opinions

Yes, and offer more recognition and benefits to the indigenous people of the land.

No, acknowledgment does nothing without land back

Waste of time. Everyone should know how certain races impact the world and have impacted the world. Simple history will explain that...The graditude can come from us humans (the ones who know history)

The world has always worked by the stronger power taking over weaker groups, and that is what we did. The natives themselves did the same things to eachother, I do not see why we are struggaling to decide weither to give these people their power back or keep what we took.

This is a question more appropriate for those for whom the land acknowledgement actually means something, and should not be determined by the public

they're nice but actions matter more.

It depends on the event itself; if it was a sports game, I don't think it's necessary. However, if it's a politically driven event then yes, I think it is necessary.

No, this feels repetitive and unnecessary. It would be different i it was actually accomplishing something for the Indigenous.

No because it is a public reminder we took their land and never are going to give it back which is rude

I think we need to stop saying honorary things and start acting to equalize what has been done to the indigenous communities.

Yes, but its superficial in comparison to actual landback and education about tribal history and needs

I think it should be recognized more just in the teaching of history itself and people should be aware, but not in public statements.

It's more in the middle for me due to the fact that not all land is stolen and some people do want to have a good time without being reminded of how they are on stolen land, but it could also that people want that recognition for how they had their families land stolen and now a local event is happening and people don't even know what the history of it was.

I think they should reach out to those that still exist and ask if they'd like to be included. For the one's that no longer exist however, they should be included by default.

I am unclear on what this is asking for. It sounds like making a statement before public events but not necessarily changing the situation. This sounds a bit like virtue signalling otherwise I am unsure of the goal.

I believe these statements need to be backed up with action. Acknowledging stolen land is not enough.

Not if it’s all they do to acknowledge stolen land from native peoples. These companies should find some way to repay the tribes whose land they are on.

That should be judged by the relevant native nations to the location of the event, whether they are in favor of land acknowledgements.

If the event involves honoring the land (adding a memorial, burials, new gardens, ICE protests, etc) then, YES! If its a regular event or a politically protest then I don´t think its necessary.

Yes, but we also have to understand this is performative and not paying reparations or giving land back

Yes, but these acknowledgments so far seem to be entirely symbolic and don't actually help any native people and just seems to be more of a half-hearted attempt to make things right through rather meaningless words. While I think acknowledgments should become commonplace, what's more important would be a commitment to impact and actually helping native communities.

Not generally, perhaps if it is a specific event but there are better ways to teach history than virtue signaling

No, because this doesn't really do anything substantial as far as bettering the conditions for indigenous Americans

No, land-acknowledgement statements are empty words meant to cover for the fact that we won't do reparations with real impact.

No, I do not believe this should occur. All this does is promote further political rhetoric. Everyone knows that the indigenous population who inhabited these lands were persecuted and forcibly removed.

yes but not just because we should or need to but because it shows history and people should learn about that kind of stuff

Land acknowledgement statements are performative, and are empty words. There has to be a better way to acknowledge, support, and benefit native communities.

Yes, but only if there is real action being taken to restore some sovereignty of that land to indigenous people

No, it would seem pointless since every single land in America was forcibly removed from the control of native populations.

I believe it depends on the event. If the event is related to the land or could potentially disrupt the traditions and/or lives of those who inhabit it they should have land acknowledgments. Additionally, the land acknowledgment should be at the request of the indigenous peoples of the land.

Organizations and agencies should choose whether to include land acknowledgment statements on their own.

No, While land acknowledgment is vital, making grand and generalized statements in public gatherings helps no one. Give the land back.

Yes, and a portion of profits should go to local indigenous communities or whatever culture was originally from the land being used.

with approval from the Native tribe that lived on those lands, and they should give the acknowledgement along with community leaders.

I don't really know, I feel like it's a day like Columbus Day, absolutely, but if it isn't, then no, not really, or if it is Thanksgiving, or some type of event related to indigenous revues

I think it is the respectful, courteous thing to do. I do no feel it should be mandated, however, but it should definitely be encouraged.

It really depends on the history of the land, and making sure it's truthful, not some silly story based on baseless accusations.

No, it is hard to truly analyze if land was taken from for centuries ago, therefore it’s much more likely to be an agenda rather than based on fact.

We should have land acknowledgement statements, but they should not be required by any form of federal government

Not Mandated. It should not be mandatory because then it causes tension, if it is voluntary, that shows support more than if forced.

No Indians didn’t believe in land ownership so not there’s and plus they came over from a land bridge so again not their land

Yes, if it promotes awareness and education but not used as a divisive technique to continue creating segregation.

No, the past is the past and none of us who are alive today are responsible for any events that happened in the 1600s and therefore no one should have to feel sorry for something that was out of their control.

Yes, and they should also show their support to the Native peoples who's land their on in a tangible way

This is part of an ideological movement that include struggle sessions. Its made to divide people into groups.

No, instead of performative gestures, Indigenous communities should receive active support from these organizations

No, it's entirely hypocritical for simply say we're sorry for mass murdering you and taking your land. Instead, governmental agencies should provide more opportunities for those on Indian Reservations.

Yes, if a Tribal Council decides that they would like to make a land acknowledgment, the event should be legally obligated to allow the statement publically and as part of the event.

No, this is performative. These indigenous peoples deserve true reparations. Not some fake semblance of recognition of the atrocities committed by colonials.

It’s nice to acknowledge it but ultimately useless because you’re not returning the land to its original owners or even allowing them use

Us should just adopt a broad brush policy to acknowledge the harmful practices that founded this country ( natives and slaves) with policies and broad educational materials available in all affected communities

It generally depends on what the public event is about, if it has nothing to do about the land then no, but if it has everything to do with the land and the history of the land then maybe we should acknowledge the indigenous who lived there before.

Yes, but only at the first event of the season or first event of a tournament. This would also include when a new public facility is opened.

No, because the only people you would be acknowledging are the Americans, our land does not belong to American Indians and we owe them nothing

No, the United States stole all the land from natives, it is redundant to have a “land acknowledgement” statement.

No, because the only people you would be referring to are Americans, our land does not belong to American Indians

I typically don’t see the history of a location presented during ceremony but I suppose it’s honorable.

No, as land acknowledgments are a shallow form of addressing the history of this nation and its wrongful seizure of land from Indigenous peoples. While the gesture and sentiment can be well-meaning, it is not a productive step in reckoning with the origins of much of this country.

Public events should not be forced to make land acknowledgement statements, but they can if the organizers choose to.

It is up to the individual or organization running the event to decide whether to include land acknowledgment statements.

The organizations/groups holding the public events can make land acknowledgement statements if they want to

Only if the land is being held on indigenous land or land that is majorly significant to indigenous people.

Unless the event doesn't have to do or relate to the Indigenous tribes, I see no reason to mention it.

I think yes in some cases, but in other cases it can become too big of an issue and is less relevant. If we did this for every public event the event would last years.

I think if you want land acknowledgment statements, go ahead. But, I don't feel like it should be required.

There's a time and a place to acknowledge our past. If the public event is related to indigenous tribes then maybe. Otherwise, I don't think doing it at all types of major public events is helpful in furthering awareness. Instead it turns people off to their cause.

I really do not care. If it īs important to native communities, continue. If it is not, then no need for white people to virtue signal.