#also I wanna emphasize I'm not necessarily accusing your dad of being like a violent racist

[neechees]

This isn't supposed to be a gotcha, I'm genuinely asking because my dad keeps using this as an argument when I try to explain land back stuff to him. And I'm hoping you can help give tips on how to explain it to him.

We're European, and as you probably know there's people here who are anti-immigrant / anti-refugee bc they're racist and want it to be only Europeans. My dad thankfully isn't *that* bad, but his argument is "well if indigenous ppl deserve their land back, even despite all the non-natives who moved there bc they had to, then don't the anti-immigrant EU ppl have the right to kick out the immigrants even if they fled to here as refugees?"

It's so gross and i don't blame you if you don't want to engage with it/answer this anon. I just am like trying to figure out how to answer him and of all the progressive issues I explain to my dad this is the one I'm least familiar with. So how do I explain to him why it doesn't really apply to indigenous Europeans?

I can't tell what you mean when you say "Indigenous Europeans", because Indigenous is a racialized and political category of people that have been affected and racialized by colonialism in a specific way, "Indigenous" doesn't just mean "x group of people who originally come from x area". Because you haven't specific a specific Indigenous Nation (for example, Saami), I'm going to assume you just mean that you are White Europeans who are not Indigenous. You'll have to explain that to him as well. This is also important, because I know many racist Europeans will co-opt Indigeneity in order to promote White Supremacist ideas like creating an ethnostate, and what your dad has suggested, is the definition of that. Secondly, tell him (even if you ARE Indigenous,) Indigenous people, as the same with anyone else, being xenophobic and racist towards immigrants is still bad and unacceptable, we don't get a free pass to be bigoted towards different groups of people and use "landback" as an excuse. Landback goes hand in hand with decolonizing, and you can't do that while perpetrating settler-colonial ideology and bigotry.

I don't know how many times we have to say this, but Landback does not inherently have to do with deporting anybody who isn't "Indigenous", and does not have anything to do with trying to create an ethnostate, the core goals of Landback is neither of those things. You have to emphasize this to him.

Landback has to do with sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples because as it is, we're being oppressed by the White governments that are occupying us. We are stripped of multiple rights while in our own homes. What your dad has suggested about White Europeans having the "right" to deport immigrants is already a reality, White Europeans already have privilege and power over immigrants, and many immigrants already ARE being deported and mistreated by those governments. There are race riots targeting immigrants happening in the U.K for goodness sake!

Landback is centered ideas of decolonizing and dismantling White Supremacy: Your dad's presented idea of mass deportation of any person who isn't ehtnically/racially European or is an (immigrant to there) from the country you reside in is based on White Supremacy. The category "immigrant" itself is very racialized, because when White North Americans or Europeans talk about deporting "immigrants" from the country, typically they're talking about Brown and Black people & people who aren't Christian, and I've never heard a White Canadian complain about a White French immigrant and suggest we deport them, or hear a White American complain about deporting the Irish.

As an example, trying to kick everyone else out of Turtle Island (or anywhere) for one thing would be WAAAAY too much of a hassle to even attempt, too expensive, and useless. Plus, if there was a mass exodus (for lack of a better word) of people via planes, vehicles, and ships all at once or even over time, that would have a big negative impact on the environment, which kind of goes against why people want Landback in the first place (to take care of the land and environment, we care about it). It's counterproductive to several of the goals of Landback.

So to recap, deporting any people who are not "Indigenous" or originally from one area is not the goal, your dad has made a false equivalency because 1

that's not what we want in the first place, Landback has nothing inherently to do with deporting anyone who isn't originally from a specific area or creating an ethnostate, and

trying to do it would be useless and going AGAINST the goals and principles of Landback and what is wanted

part of Landback is undoing racism and White Supremacy, and what he's suggested is promoting those things (White Supremacy and racism)