Do indigenous people have the right to their land?

Many indigenous cultures (Native Americans, Africans and Maori) often have no concept of owning something (think Pocahontas) and have no reliable system or law of transfering assets to another. Mostly it’s a communual type of thing.

So if a foreign power acquires land lawfully or unlawfully (war, genocide etc.) should they be entitled towards it? I know it’s more of a moral issue but let’s say I challenge you to your land, I kill you and now own it. It was wrong but should my great great grandchildren give it back WITHOUT COMPENSATION? Buying it lawfully is fine however if they’re able to take it forcefully that’s a different story.

Attached: 60D5B72E-EDF9-4730-AC1C-2197F5D4B792.jpg (750x808, 389K)

no
they were hunter-gatherers
they didn't own the land
they didn't fence the land
they didn't secure/defend the land
agriculture beats hunting and gathering
sage

That’s what I was thinking. Actions speak louder than words and the definition of “own” is very important

Only if you're a cuck

Dude, you’re talking to the first country to let women vote and one of the first western ones to allow gay marriage

In America we actually bought a lot of land from them or from the French. Theres an urban legend, that New York, was bought for like 26 dollars. The contract is in a museum in state island

Ahahahah holy shit. In NZ we have the treaty or waitangi but the problem is there are two translations. English one was we will take all your land and the maori one was white people will govern you. So essentially what were they agreeing to it’s really hard.

What I'm thinking is that multiculturalism is such an ambitious project that it's nearly laughable in its hubris
In the long run it's easier to drive the previous inhabitants out and destroy their history
Or just not colonise inhabited places at all

But all that sweet sweet land though...

Attached: p-10300-gns.jpg (500x395, 36K)

i think i heard that a french court ruled white indigenous french people have no special right to french land, so if european aboriginals dont have special rights why should anyone else in the world?

> No concept of owning something

I keked so hard, this is hard bullshit. They dont own land individually but they owned territory as a tribe.
The english, spanish and other used this idea as vaccum to settle, but it was just bullshit.
Then the lefties took it from them, saying "oh look they wuz commies and shit " no property.
And then now pol parrots it, this myth is just 10/10.

Most indigenous people (koi san) were killed in the thousands by invading Zulus. A case could be made for the koi san but not for the Zulus. Whatever their descendants claim, they do not have a right to the land. You must however never fall for the 'noble native' meme. Africa was and is full of warring tribes.
This is a dangerous precedent however, because they will find a way to blame the white man in any situation, which is why they may never ever become a sizeable minority in Europe.

They are not to blame however. They dont know any better. Blame the white man and woman who openly rallies for diversity DESPITE knowing what will happen. Dont take them for fools. They know well and their intent is to destroy whiteness.

> Not knowing the cherokees like most east cost tribe had agriculture and fought territorial wars.

Cretin.

The right of conquest exists mate, the trouble is now we're letting them take over without even conquering us...

Part maori user here (my great grandad came back from NZ). I'd say whites shouldn't be kicked out or anything, but indiegenous people have a right to exist in the lands they used to be majority in. If pakis do the same to whites here, I am against it, so indigenous rights to survive is one of my principles.

>fight each other for territory
>get butthurt when someone else comes along and is much better at it than you

This is what I love when actual leftists bring up indigenous displacement, it's like they think they we're all holding hands and making love before big bad evil Whitey came and killed them all.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.

>Have no concept of owning something
>their land
>THEIR
Possessive fucking pronouns. POSSESSIVE. Make up your minds.

No. Rights are an artificial construct. Might makes right in tribal societies.

In the past, land was conquered, the occupants were raped and massacred and history was rewritten. Modern retards are coddled by the western philosophy and believe that rights are inalienable, but still seek to undermine the philosophy by applying creation myths to settlers who actually recorded their history.

They should buy a patch of land fair and square, or leave western civilization.

Land expropriation has happened many times in Canada from everyone regardless of race, and they were properly compensated.

Couldnt agree more actually.

I fucking hate lefties that spread the lie indians were all peace and love.


Confederations existed for a reason and it wasnt to defend against wild bisons

Many indians used white trade to extend their own territory (think Powatan, wampanoag, Iroquois, Cherokees who BECAME SLAVE OWNERS)

Also:
> Jamestown massacre

Also
> Pequot massacre, many indian tribes helped the whites

Im very well versed in Native history. I fucking hate lefties. "Oh they were peaceful" PEACEFUL MY ASS.

Yes. It would be hypocritical to complain about whites being displaced and at the same time support colonialism and genocide

nobody has a right to anything, we took the land, they lost, all this talk is just a tactic to try and steal it back.

No, losers don't get their shit back.

No way, there is no evidence that they settled any land or that they will turn said land into anything but welfare dependent communities if given back.

Rights?
Rights are created and for white men. Savages and browns will never be my country men. These savages tend to forget the tentative agreement that the remainders can join the society in exchange for their compliance else the more powerful tribe doesn't finish the job of sacrificing them to dark gods. Your station in the society you join is contingent on how well your tribe's men fought and how pretty your bitches are.

Yeah they can exist there but they can't just steal land because whites stole it from them hundreds of years ago.

They built houses you brainlet, they had agricultural works and semi civilization.

You could take the claim of land by killing or claim jumping before laws codified land claims. Whites did what they did to the natives to eachother. The natives also did this to eachothet through warring.
The only difference is the west had better arrows. If one tribe had invented guns, they would have done the same.

>should they be entitled towards it?
No, you have to kill the other party. Its the rules of war no different to Poland sitting on German lands. They cab only get it back after they kill them all.

they couldn't even comprehend nation building, let alone city building, no bridges, no roads, no paths, just a trail where every other nigger went on to get to the river to take a shit

>no concept of owning something
Is a lie, there is fuck all native people's who don't understand the concept of territories.

The Choctaw or Shoshone or Blackfoot weren't going to build a fucking canoe that could reach Europe.

Progress or get out of the way.

No

Attached: images (1).png (297x495, 21K)

Its just that it should work both ways, you aren't allowed to complain when someone else does it to you

Only Anglo Saxon people were suave enough to recognize that property rights must supersede the nation for people to be free and that a free people were superior to a subservient one, therefore, only Anglo Saxons should be allowed to "own" anything

please pay your rents on time