Harsh observations
by Turncoat"I know. But if being first isn't accepted as an ethical principle of land ownership, what can be?"
Superior power. If it can be taken, it's no longer theirs.
Yes. That's the only "principle" involved in land ownership. The law of the jungle. But then people form societies and countries that are supposedly based on a principle that is supposed to be applied equally to all it's members. At least the United States was supposed to be based on such principles. "All men are created equal and are endowed by their creator by certain inalienable rights, among them, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness." Might makes right conflicts with some of the principles stated by the founding fathers. But I was thinking especially about Ayn Rand who claimed her philosophy was a level playing field. She "justified" the grab of land by saying the indigenous people weren't doing enough with the land they had and this justified a "more advanced" people to take their land. She used the same argument in Israel's grab of Palestinian land.
Yet, Ayn Rand's whole philosophy pretended that capitalism is a level playing field where talent determines who becomes a success. She ignores the enormous advantage people with land have over the landless.