Who owns the land?

[Rolci]

Here is a modern mystery: Who owns the land? Nowadays you have to BUY land. As I live in England, I can say you buy land here from the council, or another person who bought it from the council. You can't just walk into the middle of a wood and stop in one place and say "this is my land." I mean you can, but no one would recognize you as the true owner. And if you built a house on that land they would come and knock it down. Because it's their land. My question is, who gave it to them? And who recognized it when they said it's theirs? Let's take America for an example. The land used to belong to the Indians. Then you have all these white men coming from Europe, settling down in places, cultivating some land, building a farm around and houses. Yeah that's fine, why not. But at one point that man says: "This is my land." Does that make is his land? If I wanted to play there could I not? If he said it's his land, I say, "Who gave it to you?" Obviously the answer is "I was here first". Fair enough, there's plenty more land around, I'll just go somewhere else. Not that I (or anyone) recognize that land as his, but since I don't want to fight, I leave and find myself another piece of land. But again, at one point, a group of people say: "All the land is ours." Who were they? Who gave them the land? And most importantly: who recognized it as theirs? Why is it that I can't settle today on an apparently free piece of land? How did it start? And if it's whoever was here first, Indians can say they were here first, and they're right! So why is not all the land theirs? Same goes for Australia. White man takes land from aboriginal, nowadays you have the debates, white man tries to LEASE land back to original owner. WTF? For story please read http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/07/23/ian-thorpe-australias-dirty-little-secret/ I know one thing. Even IF the government truly and justly owned ALL land (which they don't, unless everyone says they do, but why would we? Hang on, we do! [??]), even then, if you need if to build a house on, you should get it free. A certain amount for everyone. Let's take me for exapmle. I got married to a Ukrainian woman. Every couple that get married get land. Free. And we did. 16m by 110m. Behind the last houses in a street. How it works is, her parents are using it to grow stuff for now. When we move there, if we build a house on it, electricity and other services will be extended for a few metres so we get access. This is how it should be. Council tax does not exist. Of cource there is street lighting and the bins get taken away. This is what tax is paid for. What I don't understand is where tax in the UK goes. So I have to pay stupid council tax here. Again, WTF? I could go on and on and on. But the question is, who owns the land, what gave them the right to say it's theirs, and who is it recognized by? Not me for sure.

[+and-then]

Initially I assume that the land belongs to who ever was strong enough to claim and defend the claim with arms. I'm not sure when titles and deeds came into effect though I'm positive some here will be. I know that in the Bible when God made Abraham heir to the land now being fought over in Israel, even He had an "official" ceremony to acknowledge the covenant He had made to make it legal in the eyes of man.

In the American west there was far more land than people so they gave settlers land free if they would move there, build and live on the land. I think the plots were usually forty acres. In more congested or desirable locations wars were fought over and over down the centuries.

[Goodnite]

In America there is no federal homesteading program and any public land the government does sell is sold only at fair market value.

Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLMPA), the federal government took over ownership of public lands and abolished all remaining traces of the often-amended Homestead Act of 1862.

Specifically, the FLMPA declared that, "the public lands be retained in Federal ownership, unless as a result of the land use planning procedure provided in this Act, it is determined that disposal of a particular parcel will serve the national interest..."

Today, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) oversees the use of some 264 million acres of public land, representing about one-eighth of all the land in the United States. In passing the FLMPA, Congress assigned the main duty of the BLM as "the management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people."

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/moneymatters/a/No-Free-Or-Cheap-Government-Land.htm

Edited April 6, 2012 by Goodnite

[Essan]

But the question is, who owns the land, what gave them the right to say it's theirs, and who is it recognized by? Not me for sure.

Imagine in 1,000 years, someone asking your distant descendant "who owns the land, who gave you the right to say it's yours" about that piece of land in Ukraine you now own?

But in Britain what happened (in very simple terms) is that a thousand years ago the land got carved up amongst rich foreigners who had a big army at their beck and call and an alien concept of land ownership. And over intervening years, some of us have by and by bought little bits and pieces of it back.

[ohio traveler]

No one here in America owns land. They just rent it from the government. The easy way to figure that out is to stop paying your property taxes and see what happens to what you think is " your " land. "

[+and-then]

No one here in America owns land. They just rent it from the government. The easy way to figure that out is to stop paying your property taxes and see what happens to what you think is " your " land. "

EXCELLENT point, Clyde. With the advent of land taxes all right to personal property were actually revoked.

Sometimes, in some States, the government will excuse the tax for an individual who's so old it barely matters anymore because they know it will be changing hands soon....

[Eldorado]

Here is a modern mystery: Who owns the land?

The guy with the biggest stick or the biggest committee of guys with little sticks. Same as it's always been.

p.s.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Eldorado

[randym23]

no one ever has nor ever will own the land. this is the lie of capitalism.

[grendals_bane]

no one ever has nor ever will own the land. this is the lie of capitalism.

I 100% agree.

Claiming to own the land is just as ridiculous as claiming to own the sun or moon.

[Simbi Laveau]

EXCELLENT point, Clyde. With the advent of land taxes all right to personal property were actually revoked.

Sometimes, in some States, the government will excuse the tax for an individual who's so old it barely matters anymore because they know it will be changing hands soon....

Seriously ?

Not in ny.they give seniors a break on land taxes,but its not much.

A senior will pay say,1800,and a non senior will pay 2000.same size plots,same neighborhoods.

[Essan]

You only pay land tax if you own the land

Of course, refusing to pay the tax may result in those imposing the tax using force to take the land off you. Which is how it's been for over a thousand years.

Of course, by 'own' what we mean is the 'right amongst humans to live on, cultivate or extract minerals, etc'. When there's nothing left of the human race except a tiny trace of plastic in ancient sedimentary rocks, the land will still be there.

[when.i.am.queen.]

Dragging back to my knowledge of property law, land rights as commonly understood in the UK today started in 1066, during the Normandy conquest of England. The monarch declared sovereignty (and thus ownership) over the area. The land was then vested to the conquering lords and barons, as a way of maintaining favour and being able to control a large population with relatively few people. (This effectively is how a feudalistic system comes into place. The land is 'owned' by the fief, and then creates a reciprocal relationship of goods/services/labor/military services in exchange for the use of the land.)

Later on, when parliament became more powerful, the land taxes would become very extravagant, and thus you would get tricky vesting of titles, the splitting of the legal and equitable estates, and many bankrupt freeholders looking sell their properties, all of which lead to the dispersement of land ownership to peoples other then the landed gentry (landed gentry - get it?)

As for simply settling down on a bit of land which apparently no body owns, take a look at some of the adverse possession laws. The logic behind them is very similar to what the OP was commenting on.

As for Australian native title, just a couple of comments. Just about all jurisdictions in Oz hold that native title is unalienable (ie that it cannot be sold, transferred, swapped, or disposed), except for the government. While I'm not saying that you should go out and read Mabo no 2, just a little bit of wikipediaing will give you the gist. Basically, native land rights in Australia were not extinguished with the assumption of colonial sovereignty, provided that they could show a continuous and exclusive occupation of the land. I'm not going to go into why this is/is not a good doctrine, but it is one which stands. 'Whiteman' does NOT try to lease it back to the original owners! You might also be interested to know that Australian Aboriginals didn't even have a concept of individual land ownership until European occupation, which is why you can have entire tribes having joint ownership over an area of land.

You might also be interested to know that in the UK, the only group which supports the redistribution of the land are the Greens...

[AdealJustice]

Land shouldn't be bought or sold, the earth is growing ... thank you corrupt man made systems which searches for profit everywhere. Every single person is entitled to this world. not just those who claim owner ship ( monarchies of today where nothing more than thieves of yesterday) ,etc ,etc.

[blarney]

Here is a modern mystery: Who owns the land? Nowadays you have to BUY land. As I live in England, I can say you buy land here from the council, or another person who bought it from the council. You can't just walk into the middle of a wood and stop in one place and say "this is my land." I mean you can, but no one would recognize you as the true owner. And if you built a house on that land they would come and knock it down. Because it's their land. My question is, who gave it to them? And who recognized it when they said it's theirs? Let's take America for an example. The land used to belong to the Indians. Then you have all these white men coming from Europe, settling down in places, cultivating some land, building a farm around and houses. Yeah that's fine, why not. But at one point that man says: "This is my land." Does that make is his land? If I wanted to play there could I not? If he said it's his land, I say, "Who gave it to you?" Obviously the answer is "I was here first". Fair enough, there's plenty more land around, I'll just go somewhere else. Not that I (or anyone) recognize that land as his, but since I don't want to fight, I leave and find myself another piece of land. But again, at one point, a group of people say: "All the land is ours." Who were they? Who gave them the land? And most importantly: who recognized it as theirs? Why is it that I can't settle today on an apparently free piece of land? How did it start? And if it's whoever was here first, Indians can say they were here first, and they're right! So why is not all the land theirs? Same goes for Australia. White man takes land from aboriginal, nowadays you have the debates, white man tries to LEASE land back to original owner. WTF? For story please read http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/07/23/ian-thorpe-australias-dirty-little-secret/ I know one thing. Even IF the government truly and justly owned ALL land (which they don't, unless everyone says they do, but why would we? Hang on, we do! [??]), even then, if you need if to build a house on, you should get it free. A certain amount for everyone. Let's take me for exapmle. I got married to a Ukrainian woman. Every couple that get married get land. Free. And we did. 16m by 110m. Behind the last houses in a street. How it works is, her parents are using it to grow stuff for now. When we move there, if we build a house on it, electricity and other services will be extended for a few metres so we get access. This is how it should be. Council tax does not exist. Of cource there is street lighting and the bins get taken away. This is what tax is paid for. What I don't understand is where tax in the UK goes. So I have to pay stupid council tax here. Again, WTF? I could go on and on and on. But the question is, who owns the land, what gave them the right to say it's theirs, and who is it recognized by? Not me for sure.

As has been put in a few diff ways here, the old axiom of "All political power comes at the end of a gun". Societal "ownership" fall under this as all other powers do as well. And for those anti capitalist friends, this is quote from chairman Mao in 1935 and was followed by "The communist party must control all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party. Ultimately whoever is strongest makes the rules. So if you are strong enough to control a piece of land when contested......its yours.

[lightly]

EXCELLENT point, Clyde. With the advent of land taxes all right to personal property were actually revoked.

Sometimes, in some States, the government will excuse the tax for an individual who's so old it barely matters anymore because they know it will be changing hands soon....

What a cheery thought, but, that's it! that's what i'll tell them .. or maybe i'll just forget to pay !

[Alienated Being]

Nobody owns land; we are merely temporary occupants inhabiting this planet.

[Time Spy]

We live off the Earth, not vise versa. The rivers and oceans that nourish the land are essential to the Earth, just as the life-giving blood is vital to us as it flows throughout our veins. This planet has survived for a very long time and can outlast us, no matter how drastically we pollute, waste, and destroy. It is our children that will pay the price for our own ignorance.

Contrary to popular belief, mankind does not own Mother Earth, not the heights of the skies or the seas in their depths. Truth be known, just the opposite is a cold hard fact, regardless of any opposing opinion. She breathes life unto all who are born of this soil, gently holding each in the palm of her hand for a brief moment in time. She witnesses us come and then go like the wind, watching as our children take their turn and make their stand, the next generation destined to live and die in this great land.

The Native American cultures and others were right to believe that the astronomical bodies are alive and speak to us. The Earth lives, feels, breathes and consumes, every moment of every day. It identifies with life in ways we cannot comprehend and understands from experience what's in store for it, and us as well.

[Rolci]

that was beautiful, thank you.

[zombeikiller]

if you want to own land without paying your goverment just make a large army that can fight for you. at first it will be the cops then the army. if you can push them back you can claim the land as your own. if you can't muster a army then just pay for the land. if you can't do that call hermit right to the land. really in north amrica we took and brought the natives here tawards extiction. those who have power take what they want those who do not will just be sweeped aside.

[Time Spy]

if you want to own land without paying your goverment just make a large army that can fight for you. at first it will be the cops then the army. if you can push them back you can claim the land as your own. if you can't muster a army then just pay for the land. if you can't do that call hermit right to the land. really in north amrica we took and brought the natives here tawards extiction. those who have power take what they want those who do not will just be sweeped aside.

You make some good points. It's like that old high school basketball cheer they no longer allow, "kill, kill, hate, hate, murder, murder, mutilate... yeah, rah team... Anyway...

I think I should point out something however. Not all the Native American Indians went to reservations. I know the history books say so, but my sisters in-laws, who are related to everyone in this nick of the woods, were related to both the French trappers, and the Miami Indian tribes. They never left, still own land above the 'Ancient Sand Town', and have continued to farm the land, and run the local elevator, as did their great,great,great... relations with 'The Turtle', Missisinequa. He signed the treaty at 'Fallen Timbers, dedicated the rest of his life to agriculture and never again took up the hatchet against the 'Fires of the Long Knives'. Incidentally my family on my mother’s side has a trace relations to those who were removed, became 'Cherokee Nation', but hold to the line of the 'Kispokotha Shawnee'. We moved to this land from the high plains above Denver when I was four. I remember it quite well, so well, that I knew the map NSEW, and see it very clearly in my head. After my teenage years came and went, I found out that my father's side had relations only miles away that had traded with the Indians during settlement after the War of 1812 and even had their own cemetery. They later moved on to Wisconsin, to Beaver Dam, near Green Bay, then later the Black Hills of SD. The cemetery sits at a spot the settlers called West Union, as it set between the 10 o’clock line's boundary to the Ancient Sand Town, and western allies on the Kankakee, as then the White and Wabash River Valley's had been accessed to open up all the land to the Great Lakes as well. It was no longer the frontier at that point.

I know this is getting side tracked, but my only point is that when you look a little closer you would be surprised the truth in history. You can drive people out and write whatever you want in a book or movie, but the truth still remains, even if no one seen it. Have you seen the movie “Windtalkers”? The difference the Navajo and the Apache had with communications during WWII while simply speaking their language, which couldn’t be cracked, won important battles. How about during the Civil War? Now talk about something history either just TOTALLY missed, or didn’t bother to reveal. How many black and red men took part in that war? Who do you think scouted for the armies in route to battle? Guess who knew their way around better than anyone, while from experience? That’s right the red man, and there were many that had been fighting the battle against slavery for a VERY long time. They played their part. That is a fact.

[Dreamer screamer]

Goes back to Trusts which goes back hundreds of years.  So 1 family who brought land will leave that land to their family, and so on and on till today.  TRUSTS!!!

[quiXilver]

No one owns anything.  Not even their own bodies.  Ownership is a human created concept, it is an abstract.

But in mass collusion, it has become compelling.  Particularly when enforcement comes into play.

 

 

[Abramelin]

And Lazarus rises from the dead, again, lol!

Btw., concerning the OP, I think it's sort of a remnant of the medieval feudal system:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism

[Tatetopa]

Does a wolf pack, a bear or even a dormouse own land?  Not that we would recognize, yet they go to some length to protect their hunting or foraging territory.

A tribal society might haver a similar approach, personal tie to a single patch of land is irrelevant.  What is important is the communal  hunting, foraging, and safety range  of a tribal territory. That doesn't mean that  individuals are unaware of personal property, and agricultural plots that an individual cultivates can be respected.  But it makes no sense for an individual to claim a portion of a territory that the entire tribe needs to continue existence. That does  not seem to be a problem in societies where an individual's dependence on family and neighbors and sense of community far outweigh any utility of claiming private land ownership.

In our western societies where individual rights are paramount, it does become an issue. In our world people tend to praise the accomplishments of the individual and neglect the support they receive in the form of community and laws to protect them from more powerful neighbors, and the infrastructure that makes modern life possible.  

You can still go off into the wilderness and play Davey Crockett and pay no taxes and have only the rights you can defend if that is your choice.  Like our ancestors, you live free until some  more powerful individual or tribe decides to include what you consider yours into theirs.

 

 

[taniwha]

7 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Does a wolf pack, a bear or even a dormouse own land?  Not that we would recognize, yet they go to some length to protect their hunting or foraging territory.

A tribal society might haver a similar approach, personal tie to a single patch of land is irrelevant.  What is important is the communal  hunting, foraging, and safety range  of a tribal territory. That doesn't mean that  individuals are unaware of personal property, and agricultural plots that an individual cultivates can be respected.  But it makes no sense for an individual to claim a portion of a territory that the entire tribe needs to continue existence. That does  not seem to be a problem in societies where an individual's dependence on family and neighbors and sense of community far outweigh any utility of claiming private land ownership.

In our western societies where individual rights are paramount, it does become an issue. In our world people tend to praise the accomplishments of the individual and neglect the support they receive in the form of community and laws to protect them from more powerful neighbors, and the infrastructure that makes modern life possible.  

You can still go off into the wilderness and play Davey Crockett and pay no taxes and have only the rights you can defend if that is your choice.  Like our ancestors, you live free until some  more powerful individual or tribe decides to include what you consider yours into theirs.

 

 

Good post.

Makes me think of one of the ways that virgin territories were claimed by (pre-European Maori) for the whole tribe, was a race to the highest mountain peak, by male siblings of chiefly decent, where upon the first sibling to light a fire torch won the rank of chief over those lands and waters as far as the eye could see.

Every tribe had their own unique reputation that preceded them. These reputations had to be learned and respected by visiting tribes or disregarded at their own peril. This was done by first sending in an emissary to learn the rules.

One tribe close by me if their facial tattoo included an unfilled circle on the cheeks that would mean that those men were tasked with border security.  It was said that their territory was very easy to enter, but notoriously difficult to leave.

All knowledge pertaining to the survival of the tribe, be it in war or peace was learned inside out, those who persist are known as Mana Whenua, people who belong to that land through ancestral link.

Ownership was more regarded as tiakitanga, a code of guardianship to protect the land and all it provides.

If anyone has a similar story I am interested.