Show of HandsShow of Hands

Mattwall1 November 9th, 2014 11:36pm

Based on the Non Aggression Principle, every single scrap of land has been stolen through what would qualify as force at some point. Since the ramifications continue to this day, all property is therefore held immorally and in violation of the NAP.

7 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Mattwall1
11/09/14 5:33 pm

It was still stolen originally, thus therefore still held wrongly and by force under the NAP

Reply
rons screw politicians
11/09/14 5:06 pm

start with California To the Aztecs!

Reply
Zod Above Pugetropolis
11/09/14 5:32 pm

Agree, I guess, but that presumes I agree with this or any of the other nonsense you'll find in the big-L "Libertarian" party platform.

Reply
Liberty 4,032,064
11/09/14 6:09 pm

That comes very close to being a valid point. It's an interesting idea anyway.
Manhattan and some of the land bought from the Indians may be the only "legit" land in the world, haha.

Reply
NDAmerican Florida
11/09/14 8:23 pm

I disagree about all property.

Reply
MisterE Conservistan
11/09/14 5:47 pm

To be more precise on how unowned land becomes owned, I would say that it becomes owned when someone invests in it.

Reply
Mattwall1
11/09/14 7:26 pm

No, the ones that sold it to the Dutch didn't have a claim at all, and the Indians that lived there before weren't exactly the first humans to hold the land and have it as theirs, so...

Reply
twss trump is a garbage human
11/09/14 5:10 pm

If you wanna get technical, yes.

Reply
NDAmerican Florida
11/10/14 10:54 pm

Nobody had claim or ownership to all land.

Mattwall1
11/09/14 9:35 pm

I could see an exception relating to intellectual property, but for when it comes to any physical property?

Praetorianus Fair enough.
11/09/14 5:30 pm

I actually hold the rare opinion that land cannot be owned unless it's claimed by the first ever human settlers on it, or sold by them, never through taking land that is occupied.

political Georgia
11/09/14 4:41 pm

So...who should we give America to?

MisterE Conservistan
11/09/14 5:33 pm

The rightful owners of the land are long gone, and it has changed hands countless times since it was stolen.

MisterE Conservistan
11/09/14 5:44 pm

In the case of theft ownership should be restored to the person that was stolen from. There isn't anyone to give the land back to, and it's very difficult to prove the specifics of the theft. Investment also gives legitimacy to a claim.

Mattwall1
11/09/14 7:20 pm

No, because the Indians who sold it didn't love there and had no right to sell it...

Mattwall1
11/09/14 5:46 pm

In big denying its difficult or impossible to find the original owner. My point is no matter how difficult it may be, the NAP fails to cover this. All land, and thus, all property, Was at some point stolen. Under the NAP, all promptly is thus held

Mattwall1
11/09/14 5:47 pm

Immorally. It doesn't matter how hard it may be to find the original owners, assuming that is even possible. The point is, the land and property was still stolen.

Mattwall1
11/09/14 7:23 pm

You're not getting the point. The Indians who sold Manhattan to the Dutch DIDN'T own Manhattan.

Liberty 4,032,064
11/09/14 7:24 pm

The first ones didn't; that's correct. But then they bought it again from the ones that actually did own it.

Mattwall1
11/13/14 12:41 am

Outside of Antarctica, where is there any place that hasn't had land forcibly or illegally taken from its rightful owners at some point?

Mattwall1
11/10/14 9:26 am

How do you not get technical with the NAP?