Hacker News Reader

Comment by defrost | Hacker News Reader

> Revisionist history you're pushing here.

Which part of the Texas history link is incorrect?

Civilisation is civilisation . it comes with and without attributes such as cities and agriculture .. the point made is that the timelines in Texas strecth back 13,000 years.

> has little impact to the discussion of it's urban development.

Their urban development consisted of light footprints, seasonal migration in worn patterns, walking, etc.

That can be contrasted with how contemporary US citizens live, how the Dutch live, how varies other people still live today.

View on HN

This is a discussion about urbanism, not just broadly "civilization". Nomadic tribes didn't live in urban environments.

The city I live in practically didn't exist until very modern times. The fact some people used to to hunt around here 16,000 years ago has little impact to the modern way the city was laid out and designed or the people who mostly live here today.

There's practically zero way to draw the roots of this town back to some group that camped here 16,000 years ago. Any form of lineage of civilization was lost a looooong time ago. Extremely few people would even draw their roots back to the Caddo, who are far more recent than anyone you're suggesting here.

This is a discussion about community - See thread title.

Some communities move - Not a hard concept for most.

Yeah, they moved. Away from here, for many reasons, often under bad situations. And most no longer exist, and are thus irrelevant to the discussion of lineage of current towns.

Insane you're really arguing a suburb of North Texas is older or at least as old as Rome or Athens.

So yeah, as an identity, this area is extremely young in comparison. It absolutely does not draw its roots back 16,000 years. We are not an extention of the Caddo people, they were not an extension of the first peoples who were here.

> Because we have mainstreets, buildings, blocks, community centers, parks, American-style squares...

Seems to me we're talking urban design here! That's kind of the whole point of the article, looking at urbanism in Europe to the US. Maybe you're imagining some other topic, but urbanism is deep in the discussion overall. I don't think nomadic groups had a lot of thought to how wide their highways were or planning our their parking lots.

> Insane you're really arguing a suburb of North Texas is older or at least as old as Rome or Athens.

That's your strawman.

I merely pointed out the area you live in has a long history of civilisation.

As pointed out in part by @1659447091 upthread, and as does North America in general - there was a great variation in culture across that area, some parts had very stable communities and reportedly taught the Europeans a thing or two about trade agreements and democracy <shrug>.

There's an odd bit in the HN guidelines

  Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously;

seemingly that's a hard concept for some.

You have a nice life. All the best.

If you're going to cite the guidelines, I thought your "not a hard concept for most" was rather out of line.

I agree ..

It was a throw to now removed usage by the person I replied to in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46342642

That and a few other choice phrases were well over the line.

They significantly edited their comments after I started using their own words in my replies.

Cleaning up after I quote the guidelines citing their usage leaves me looking the worse .. but so it goes.

I have a genuine interest in human history across the globe, they had a visceral reaction to the mere suggestion of prior occupation and use of land in Texas .. let's just mark that down to them having a bad day.

You know what's snarky? Suggesting a suburban city actually draws it's roots to 13,000 BC when it definitely doesn't. Suggesting it does is a disservice to those people who were forced away.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com