This will be a little tough without specific examples and I'll try but may have to cite some examples at the end.
Q.1) At what point is land considered as "owned" by an ethnic/cultural/tribal group?
A.1) At the point that they actually believe they "own" land.
Really! Alot of indigenous cultures would not have considered themselves to be land "owners". Care-takers maybe, visitors, blessed rent-free occupiers
but owners? no.. The only reasons for owning land are profit and housing in a congested area, which is usually determined by where the "owner" lives
in order to profit. Loaded question
Q.2) What span of time dictates when one group of people can claim ownership over a strip of land?
A.2) See A.1).
Q.3) Does the failure of a group of people to successfully defend their land mean that it is up for grabs until a group settles in that can defend the
borders? Why or why not?
A.3) Yes, so long as both entities aim to benefit from the land. Its a dog eat dog world in land ownership. However, without the principle of
ownership, I believe the land could be shared or that territorial boundaries might be more respected.
Q.4) Should land be returned to those that recorded history recognises as the rightful owners of that land?
is when we need examples. They are relevant!
Lets use two of the very broadest examples we can here to show no bias, the US & Australia. First, again, the only people who ever claimed ownership
here still own it. Alot of Native Americans sold they're claims to land holdings. Eventually they stopped wanting to sell and the Trail of tears
This isn't feasible due to the numbers alone. The population of remaining American Indian and Alaska Native persons in the US is 1.2%.
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population of Australia was estimated to be 517,000 people at 30 June 2006, or 2.5% of the total
How would this go? Would the non-aboriginal races of the US have to pay an extra tax? If that were the case we would get some DNA testing done and a
bunch of the "Native Americans" would be paying those taxes too. Mayans migrated to the US 2000 years ago through Tampa Bay and established the mound
builders culture which spread all over, just sayin'.
From a totally ethical standpoint, yeah! Lets pack our bags and get off they're property! We know that would never happen..
Q.5) What documents/objects constitute sufficient proof for one group's claim to a strip of land? Historical documents, religious texts, wall
A.5) Is this strip of land newly available or previously unclaimed? If so, whichever would be the oldest.
So rock carvings as you said or whatever archeology would show to be the closest link to the first culture present on said stretch of land.
As for these I don't wanna touch em'.. I think about these applying to the US and just start laughing.
What if the land were just handed back suddenly? Wouldn't the current people's identity, culture and way of life also be destroyed in
the same manner?
Originally posted by Wifibrains
Nice questions. You will either wake people up to the illusion of ownership with this thread, or have them defending systems that give them permission
to say they own something.
To answer all you q's, I think atoms are on loan to us and belong to the universe.