Colonized Land Problem

[WanderingGaze22]

Which part of this sounds familiar? There was a country invaded by a technologically advanced population. The invaders conquered this country and took the land and resources from the original population that lived there. For several decades, the invaders continued to rule the country through a government established by a small minority of them, while the majority native population remained oppressed. Eventually due to mounting international pressure and internal unrest, the government was replaced with a democracy, allowing the original population to elect representatives that fought for their interests. After this democracy was established, it was discovered that the small minority invader population still owned the vast majority of the land and resources in the country.

What should the representatives do? Should they redistribute the unjustly taken land back to the original population? If so, should they reimburse the colonist owners for the land they take--many of whom were born after the period of unjust rule? Or does the minority conquering population have a right to the land in which they claim ownership?

For better references, look into South Africa land reforms and take a peek at this book.

https://gccaz.summon.serialssolutions.c ... g_u5030442

[LuckyR]

Which part of this sounds familiar? There was a country invaded by a technologically advanced population. The invaders conquered this country and took the land and resources from the original population that lived there. For several decades, the invaders continued to rule the country through a government established by a small minority of them, while the majority native population remained oppressed. Eventually due to mounting international pressure and internal unrest, the government was replaced with a democracy, allowing the original population to elect representatives that fought for their interests. After this democracy was established, it was discovered that the small minority invader population still owned the vast majority of the land and resources in the country.

What should the representatives do? Should they redistribute the unjustly taken land back to the original population? If so, should they reimburse the colonist owners for the land they take--many of whom were born after the period of unjust rule? Or does the minority conquering population have a right to the land in which they claim ownership?

For better references, look into South Africa land reforms and take a peek at this book.

https://gccaz.summon.serialssolutions.c ... g_u5030442

Well, my understanding of the South African land (farm/ranch) issue was that white land "owners" were kicked off the land which was given to black farmers without the knowledge/experience to efficiently run large scale operations and the farms didn't produce anywhere near what they did before and the municipality and it's citizens suffered from that turn of events.

Clearly, a better idea would have been to have a transition period where knowledge was passed along in exchange for some of the land and in the end the production would have been the same, the white farmers could make a living (not a killing) on a fraction of their original estate and the black farmers would have had land and the knowledge to optimally farm it.

[Sculptor1]

Which part of this sounds familiar? There was a country invaded by a technologically advanced population. The invaders conquered this country and took the land and resources from the original population that lived there. For several decades, the invaders continued to rule the country through a government established by a small minority of them, while the majority native population remained oppressed. Eventually due to mounting international pressure and internal unrest, the government was replaced with a democracy, allowing the original population to elect representatives that fought for their interests. After this democracy was established, it was discovered that the small minority invader population still owned the vast majority of the land and resources in the country.

What should the representatives do? Should they redistribute the unjustly taken land back to the original population? If so, should they reimburse the colonist owners for the land they take--many of whom were born after the period of unjust rule? Or does the minority conquering population have a right to the land in which they claim ownership?

For better references, look into South Africa land reforms and take a peek at this book.

LINK

Sounds like a fairy story.
IN most instances the invaders still have economic control and tend to buy the "democratic" represetatives.
Only in rare cases do these representatives break out of the eastablished status quo and start to represent the people.
And in most of those cases, the countries that succeed in true independance get the wrath of the US, who sanctions the hell out of their economy; Venuzuela, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos. It has happened in many countries over the years such as the CIA led coup in chili and Iran. Ir they just ger invaded like Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt.

The place to watch at the moment is Bardados with a shockingly intelligent President who has recently sacked the Queen of England and declared a republic. She is now gettin ght flack for getting gifts of vaccine from China and allowing them to invest in the country.
Where Britain tended to loot their resources, China seems to be taking a longer term look by building infrastructure Bardados has so long needed.
I hope she lives to tell the tale to her grandchildren because who knows what accident might happen to her.

[WanderingGaze22]

Well, my understanding of the South African land (farm/ranch) issue was that white land "owners" were kicked off the land which was given to black farmers without the knowledge/experience to efficiently run large scale operations and the farms didn't produce anywhere near what they did before and the municipality and it's citizens suffered from that turn of events.

Clearly, a better idea would have been to have a transition period where knowledge was passed along in exchange for some of the land and in the end the production would have been the same, the white farmers could make a living (not a killing) on a fraction of their original estate and the black farmers would have had land and the knowledge to optimally farm it.

I feel that there will be drawbacks. For a start, who's to say the native farmers would want to continue in meeting the demand. Say they do and production is efficient, how would they be able to trade on a international level? How would they have the knowledge to sell to complete strangers who dealt with the white farmers for the longest time?

[Belindi]

Which part of this sounds familiar? There was a country invaded by a technologically advanced population. The invaders conquered this country and took the land and resources from the original population that lived there. For several decades, the invaders continued to rule the country through a government established by a small minority of them, while the majority native population remained oppressed. Eventually due to mounting international pressure and internal unrest, the government was replaced with a democracy, allowing the original population to elect representatives that fought for their interests. After this democracy was established, it was discovered that the small minority invader population still owned the vast majority of the land and resources in the country.

What should the representatives do? Should they redistribute the unjustly taken land back to the original population? If so, should they reimburse the colonist owners for the land they take--many of whom were born after the period of unjust rule? Or does the minority conquering population have a right to the land in which they claim ownership?

For better references, look into South Africa land reforms and take a peek at this book.

https://gccaz.summon.serialssolutions.c ... g_u5030442

Well, my understanding of the South African land (farm/ranch) issue was that white land "owners" were kicked off the land which was given to black farmers without the knowledge/experience to efficiently run large scale operations and the farms didn't produce anywhere near what they did before and the municipality and it's citizens suffered from that turn of events.

Clearly, a better idea would have been to have a transition period where knowledge was passed along in exchange for some of the land and in the end the production would have been the same, the white farmers could make a living (not a killing) on a fraction of their original estate and the black farmers would have had land and the knowledge to optimally farm it.

I agree. To withhold expertise is as bad as sequestering the tools.

[LuckyR]

Well, my understanding of the South African land (farm/ranch) issue was that white land "owners" were kicked off the land which was given to black farmers without the knowledge/experience to efficiently run large scale operations and the farms didn't produce anywhere near what they did before and the municipality and it's citizens suffered from that turn of events.

Clearly, a better idea would have been to have a transition period where knowledge was passed along in exchange for some of the land and in the end the production would have been the same, the white farmers could make a living (not a killing) on a fraction of their original estate and the black farmers would have had land and the knowledge to optimally farm it.

I feel that there will be drawbacks. For a start, who's to say the native farmers would want to continue in meeting the demand. Say they do and production is efficient, how would they be able to trade on a international level? How would they have the knowledge to sell to complete strangers who dealt with the white farmers for the longest time?

Uummm... maybe through a transition period where they could get that knowledge from the white farmers who understand the market.

[WanderingGaze22]

I feel that there will be drawbacks. For a start, who's to say the native farmers would want to continue in meeting the demand. Say they do and production is efficient, how would they be able to trade on a international level? How would they have the knowledge to sell to complete strangers who dealt with the white farmers for the longest time?

Uummm... maybe through a transition period where they could get that knowledge from the white farmers who understand the market.

That would be ideal, except farming is different than marketing. They will need more than just bits of advice. They will need to enact some form of class to learn more than just the basics of selling. They will also need to learn calculations and tactics for maintaining the trading system.