# Empire equals theft, how? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 26, 2020, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990 "2020-01-26T14:06:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2020, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/101 "2020-01-30T21:30:08Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Yes, I do know it. That’s why I’m saying you’re wrong. There were no areas anywhere in the Americas or in Australia or in New Zealand that were devoid of native populations when the Europeans arrived. So anyone claiming otherwise is wrong. > > There were some islands that were uninhabited when Europeans arrived. Places like Bermuda, Cape Verde, and Mauritius. I have no problem with the discoverers claiming ownership of these places. They were uninhabited and therefore not stolen. So what happens then when a particular tribe contracts a disease by accident from contact from Europeans and the strain depletes the population to below replacement level? ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2020, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/102 "2020-01-30T21:32:48Z")
> [@](#): > > **Melbourne** > I am not a historian: I don’t know why you think that posting the observation that the English ruling class used such language is an extraordinary claim. Well because I’m English and I don’t really believe what you’re saying. So there’s that. > [@](#): > > What kind of citation? In the 18th century, the population doubled: the area under cultivation did not. Do all such observations require citations? We aren’t in GC: is there a particular reason to require a citation for this point? Yeah, because there was something called the [British agricultural revolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolution) which happened at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/103 "2020-01-31T00:00:17Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > Yeah, because there was something called the [British agricultural revolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolution) which happened at the same time. In which the poor were deprived of land, gleaning, and the right to collect scrap wood from forests, milk and pork disappeared from their diet, and poor-houses tried to maintain a diet of 300 calories a day. Please sir, may I have some more? > [@Gilbert](#): > > Oh, 'tis a glorious thing, I ween, > To be a regular Royal Queen! > No half-and-half affair, I mean, > No half-and-half affair, > But a right-down regular, > Regular, regular, > Regular Royal Queen! > > She’ll drive about in a carriage and pair, > With the King on her left-hand side, > And a milk-white horse, > As a matter of course, > Whenever she wants to ride! > With beautiful silver shoes to wear > Upon her dainty feet; > With endless stocks > Of beautiful frocks > And as much as she wants to eat! The 17 and 18 hundreds were a tough time to be poor in England. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/104 "2020-01-31T05:21:36Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > How about we start with the ‘Rah rah imperialism’ That’s not a moral judgement, it’s an assessment of the tone of your threads. They’re not anti-Imperialist, that’s for damn sure. They’re defenses of Imperialism. > [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > I’ve not denied that happened. So your answer to your own OP is “Yes, it was theft”, then? Because that’s what rapine literally means. > [@](#): > > Nope, it’s an example of how an empire _didn’t_ do theft, and the crux of my discussion was _‘is all empire based on theft’_ How is that _not_ “based on theft”? You’re arguing as though the Spanish and English empires were completely unrelated phenomena. > [@](#): > > We’re discussing _all_ “Some” is a subset of “all”. If you allege something about all, it being untrue for some means it’s untrue for all. Like America not being depopulated. > [@](#): > > Well, enlighten me. Which ‘Argument’ Was demolished? “British Imperialism was great for India”, “America isn’t built on stolen land” and over all, “Imperialism isn’t always a bad thing” > [@](#): > > I do have facts on my side. You’re getting all upset obviously because you’re from South Africa and have experienced the taking away of land from Black South Africans and its manifesting itself in this thread. I can appreciate that. I don’t need to ad hominem anything but I’ll always respond to someone personally attacking me. Now look who’s “trying to ascribe my intentions to fit your position” :rolleyes: Firstly, I’m not “upset”, was it my use of the technical term [bullshit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit)that made you think that? Secondly, I’ve been characterising your threads and posts, not your character or moral motivations. That’s not “personal attacks”. Unless you do, in fact, know Imperialism is always a bad thing, so think “You’re in favour of Imperialism” \*is \*a personal insult. Because it would be bloody stupid of me to insult you with something you don’t even consider an insult. And\* even if I had\* personally insulted you, “_tu quoque_” is _still_ bad debating and no justification for making fallacious _ad hominem_ arguments like “You’re too close to this argument, it’s making you upset”. Because of course I can’t be both South African _and_ a student of history. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/105 "2020-01-31T05:40:30Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > So what happens then when a particular tribe contracts a disease by accident from contact from Europeans and the strain depletes the population to below replacement level? 1. That didn’t happen. You should make it clear when you’re talking history and when you’re talking hypotheticals. 2. Even if it had happened, it wouldn’t have changed anything about the topic of this thread. Remember? We’re talking about empires and theft. It doesn’t matter if you take land that has a million inhabitants or land that has a thousand inhabitants. Either way you’re taking something that belongs to somebody else. And when you take something that belongs to somebody else, it’s theft. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/106 "2020-01-31T16:00:56Z")
> [@](#): > > **MrDibble** > That’s not a moral judgement, it’s an assessment of the tone of your threads. They’re not anti-Imperialist, that’s for damn sure. They’re defenses of Imperialism. Which is a judgement of my moral stance on imperialism > [@](#): > > So your answer to your own OP is “Yes, it was theft”, then? Because that’s what rapine literally means. That’s not the question I’m asking though if you bothered to check. > [@](#): > > How is that not “based on theft”? You’re arguing as though the Spanish and English empires were completely unrelated phenomena. Because not all empire was based on theft? That’s the point. > [@](#): > > “Some” is a subset of “all”. If you allege something about all, it being untrue for some means it’s untrue for all. Like America not being depopulated. _Some as a subset_ isn’t a substitute for _all_ > [@](#): > > “British Imperialism was great for India”, “America isn’t built on stolen land” and over all, “Imperialism isn’t always a bad thing” I didn’t know much about American colonialism and the justifications of land ownership, so I started a debate to see where it would go, same with the Indias wealth one, same with the US empire one. All those threads were started after I had watched academics pitch their talking points. > [@](#): > > Now look who’s “trying to ascribe my intentions to fit your position” Ah so you _are_ trying to do that. Got it. > [@](#): > > Firstly, I’m not “upset”, was it my use of the technical term bullshit that made you think that? Could have fooled me, you’ve been quite antagonistic all the way through this thread. > [@](#): > > Secondly, I’ve been characterising your threads and posts, not your character or moral motivations. That’s not “personal attacks”. Yes it is. Yes you have. > [@](#): > > Unless you do, in fact, know Imperialism is always a bad thing, so think “You’re in favour of Imperialism” is a personal insult. Because it would be bloody stupid of me to insult you with something you don’t even consider an insult. But I do consider it an insult, that’s why I said you were making a moral judgement. > [@](#): > > And even if I had personally insulted you, “tu quoque” is still bad debating and no justification for making fallacious ad hominem arguments like “You’re too close to this argument, it’s making you upset”. Because of course I can’t be both South African and a student of history. But who’s said I’m debating with you? You gave that position up a while back. All you’re _‘contributing’_ Now is trying to make as much noise as possible because you don’t like the topic being discussed, here’s a tip, if you don’t like it, don’t read it. Everybody’s happy. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/107 "2020-01-31T18:01:32Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > Which is a judgement of my moral stance on imperialism No, it isn’t. I would still say your threads were “Rah, rah, Imperialism” even if I were in favour of Imperialism. Observing that you’re expending a lot of effort defending it is not a moral judgement. > [@](#): > > That’s not the question I’m asking though if you bothered to check. “how is it theft if the empire in question was the government body and was responsible for the area it controlled?” is answered by - “…because of all the rapine.” > [@](#): > > Because not all empire was based on theft? That’s the point. Just repeating it doesn’t make it true. > [@](#): > > _Some as a subset_ isn’t a substitute for _all_ It is if being untrue for the part means the whole is also untrue. As it is in this case. > [@](#): > > I didn’t know much about American colonialism and the justifications of land ownership, so I started a debate to see where it would go …vigourously defending only the pro-Imperialist side in each thread. Yeah, that sounds like a fact-finding thread, alright. > [@](#): > > Ah so you _are_ trying to do that. Got it. No, it doesn’t mean I did it just because you clearly and overtly do it . Case in point: > [@](#): > > Could have fooled me, you’ve been quite antagonistic all the way through this thread. Oh, please, point out the “antagonism” in posts [26](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22102729&postcount=26), [27](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22102730&postcount=27), [28](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22102736&postcount=28), [31](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22102803&postcount=31), [38](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22103870&postcount=38), [44](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22104898&postcount=44) or [46](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22104957&postcount=46). Disagreeing with you is not the same as being “antagonistic” > [@](#): > > Yes it is. Yes you have. No it isn’t, and no I haven’t. Or you could cite more than the phrase “Rah, rah, Imperialism”, which as I’ve said was a characterization of your repeated thread subject matter, not a moral judgement. > [@](#): > > But I do consider it an insult So you admit Imperialism is bad? Well, that was easy… > [@](#): > > But who’s said I’m debating with you? I don’t know, must be something about the way you , ya know, keep replying to my posts… ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/108 "2020-01-31T18:32:38Z")
> [@](#): > > **MrDibble** > No, it isn’t. I would still say your threads were “Rah, rah, Imperialism” even if I were in favour of Imperialism. Observing that you’re expending a lot of effort defending it is not a moral judgement. It is a moral judgement though that you made, that’s the whole point. > [@](#): > > “how is it theft if the empire in question was the government body and was responsible for the area it controlled?” > > is answered by - “…because of all the rapine.” And that’s all you had to say, you didn’t need to bring up my other threads to attack me personally. > [@](#): > > Just repeating it doesn’t make it true. Nope but Barbados is a true example. > [@](#): > > …vigourously defending only the pro-Imperialist side in each thread. > > Yeah, that sounds like a fact-finding thread, alright. It’s called playing devils advocate. Nobody’s asking you to participate if you’re that butthurt over it. > [@](#): > > No, it doesn’t mean I did it just because you clearly and overtly do it . Case in point: It’s still an antagonism, you came in this thread all angry and determined to point out how much of a ‘rah rah imperialist’ I am due to your own personal history of living in South Africa and your own history of experience. That isn’t my fault or my problem. > [@](#): > > Oh, please, point out the “antagonism” in posts 26, 27, 28, 31, 38, 44 or 46. > Disagreeing with you is not the same as being “antagonistic” You are capable of doing both. Those are examples of you doing so. > [@](#): > > No it isn’t, and no I haven’t. Or you could cite more than the phrase “Rah, rah, Imperialism”, which as I’ve said was a characterization of your repeated thread subject matter, not a moral judgement. It’s a moral judgement because you’ve ascertained through your own determination that I must be a imperialist because I have started numerous threads exploring the topic. > [@](#): > > So you admit Imperialism is bad? Well, that was easy… Maybe if you weren’t so antagonistic you’d have realised that sooner. > [@](#): > > I don’t know, must be something about the way you , ya know, keep replying to my posts… I’m not debating with you, I’m just clarifying my position. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/109 "2020-01-31T19:50:41Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > It is a moral judgement though that you made, that’s the whole point. a) No, it’s just an observation. I may have made private moral judgements, but I have not articulated them in this thread (at least about you, rather than Kipling, O’Sullivan etc.). That’s entirely on you. b) it’s irrelevant to any actual arguments I’ve made in this thread, of which I’ve made plenty. > [@](#): > > And that’s all you had to say, you didn’t need to bring up my other threads to attack me personally. It’s not a personal attack to point out that you’ve already had this very thread topic debated before (and didn’t come out ahead there, either). > [@](#): > > Nope but Barbados is a true example. A true example of how imperialism is literally theft? Yes, it is that. > [@](#): > > It’s called playing devils advocate. No, it’s only devil’s advocate if you say that’s what you’re doing very clearly right at the start. Otherwise it’s just covering your butt. > [@](#): > > Nobody’s asking you to participate if you’re that butthurt over it. > > It’s still an antagonism, you came in this thread all angry The harder you try and make the _argumentum ad passiones_ fallacy happen, the less and less it will. > [@](#): > > and determined to point out how much of a ‘rah rah imperialist’ I am due Yep. That’s why I waited 2 pages and 10 posts in to spring my antagonistic trap. Muhahaha!!! :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > to your own personal history of living in South Africa and your own history of experience. Where have I cited South Africa or my personal experience in any response to you, other than to note being South African doesn’t negate e.g. my geography and history university courses.? _You’re_ the one who keeps bringing it up. As though somehow having lived experience of the effects of Imperialism in a colonized country gives me _less_ standing to talk about it. Which is of course laughable. But by all means, continue pushing your “angry Brown man” narrative. It’s so _fresh_. > [@](#): > > Those are examples of you doing so. Failure to actually cite any “antagonistic” quotes of mine from those posts duly noted. > [@](#): > > It’s a moral judgement because you’ve ascertained through your own determination that I must be a imperialist because I have started numerous threads exploring the topic. No, it’s an _observation that you start various threads on the subject “exploring” the topic through the exclusive medium of very vigorous defense_. > [@](#): > > Maybe if you weren’t so antagonistic you’d have realised that sooner. It was hard to tell, what with all the defending you were doing… > [@](#): > > I’m not debating with you, I’m just clarifying my position. I hate to break it to you, but … that’s debate, mate. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/110 "2020-01-31T20:06:56Z")
Having said that, it’s clear it’s just going to be a alternating parade of ad hominem attacks and bare assertions that “Obvious Theft _isn’t_ theft” from here on out, so I’m going to leave you to it, then. Have fun advocating those devils… ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/111 "2020-01-31T20:39:27Z")
> [@](#): > > **MrDibble** > a) No, it’s just an observation. I may have made private moral judgements, but I have not articulated them in this thread (at least about you, rather than Kipling, O’Sullivan etc.). That’s entirely on you. > b) it’s irrelevant to any actual arguments I’ve made in this thread, of which I’ve made plenty. You’ve articulated them, doesn’t take a genius to realise that, no matter how much you deflect it. > [@](#): > > It’s not a personal attack to point out that you’ve already had this very thread topic debated before (and didn’t come out ahead there, either). No it wasn’t, you did it to detract from the thread because you didn’t like the subject matter being discussed. > [@](#): > > A true example of how imperialism is literally theft? Yes, it is that. When the island had nobody on it when the English took it over? Your logic strikes again. > [@](#): > > No, it’s only devil’s advocate if you say that’s what you’re doing very clearly right at the start. > Otherwise it’s just covering your butt. Or its just devils advocate. > [@](#): > > The harder you try and make the argumentum ad passiones fallacy happen, the less and less it will. That’s contingent on me having a position on the subject matter. Which I don’t and which you assumed I did. > [@](#): > > Yep. That’s why I waited 2 pages and 10 posts in to spring my antagonistic trap. > > Muhahaha!!! Who said your antagonisms followed a pattern of rationality? > [@](#): > > \>Where have I cited South Africa or my personal experience in any response to you, other than to note being South African doesn’t negate e.g. my geography and history university courses.? You’re the one who keeps bringing it up. Because I know your family had problems with their land being stolen and I remember you talking about it in another thread. I’m talking about the concept of all Empire being based on theft and obviously it would hit a raw nerve. Doesn’t take much to make that leap. > [@](#): > > As though somehow having lived experience of the effects of Imperialism in a colonized country gives me less standing to talk about it. Which is of course laughable. Where have I implied or stated this, you’re annoying me because you’re coming at me as if I’m justifying theft. > [@](#): > > But by all means, continue pushing your “angry Brown man” narrative. It’s so fresh. It’s more an ‘angry Mr Dibble’ narrative. > [@](#): > > Failure to actually cite any “antagonistic” quotes of mine from those posts duly noted. I already did, _Rah rah imperialism_ and then linking three different threads about my previous questions on the nature of imperialism land (Including one thread from **ten years ago** ) etc to completely derail and break down the discussion before it had really got going. > [@](#): > > No, it’s an observation that you start various threads on the subject “exploring” the topic through the exclusive medium of very vigorous defense. It’s called Great Debates, how is anyone supposed to change or see a differing opinion if they’re derailed the minute someone poses a question like you’re doing in my thread? > [@](#): > > It was hard to tell, what with all the defending you were doing… You mean the preconcieved notions you had of me and then reinforced them by defecating all over my thread? You’re doing a great job. > [@](#): > > I hate to break it to you, but … that’s debate, mate. You’re not debating anything, you’re just here to spoil the thread, make ad hominem attacks “mate” > [@](#): > > Having said that, it’s clear it’s just going to be a alternating parade of ad hominem attacks and bare assertions that “Obvious Theft isn’t theft” from here on out, so I’m going to leave you to it, then. Have fun advocating those devils… Took you long enough. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/112 "2020-01-31T20:45:55Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > 1. That didn’t happen. You should make it clear when you’re talking history and when you’re talking hypotheticals. > > 2. Even if it had happened, it wouldn’t have changed anything about the topic of this thread. Remember? We’re talking about empires and theft. > > It doesn’t matter if you take land that has a million inhabitants or land that has a thousand inhabitants. Either way you’re taking something that belongs to somebody else. And when you take something that belongs to somebody else, it’s theft. So how about then if a European army defeated the native army because they were at war? Is it theft then? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2020, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/113 "2020-01-31T23:36:53Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > You could ask the descendants of the native populations of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand if they feel they benefited from being part of the British Empire. They could tell you plenty about how empire equals theft. > [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > [You sure about that?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States#European_exploration_and_colonization) …New Zealand Maori here: and yes, Little Nemo can be sure about that. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2020, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/114 "2020-02-01T00:28:58Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > So how about then if a European army defeated the native army because they were at war? Is it theft then? Yes, it is theft. How many times are you going to ask this same question? Are you expecting us to give you a different answer at some point? If you take something that belongs to somebody else, is it theft? Yes. How about if you take something that belongs to somebody else and they took it from somebody else first, is it theft? Yes. What if you take something that belongs to somebody else and they were sick, is it theft? Yes. How about if you take something that belongs to somebody else and some other people died that week, is it theft? Yes. What if you take something that belongs to somebody else and you shot them first, is it theft? Yes. What if you take something that belongs to somebody else and it’s a Tuesday, is it theft? Yes. What if you take something that belongs to somebody else and it’s a Thursday, is it theft? Yes. What if you take something that belongs to somebody else and it’s a Thursday and you had pizza for lunch, is it theft? Yes. What if you take something that belongs to somebody else and it’s a Thursday and you had pizza for lunch and you own a dog named Spot, is it theft? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2020, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/115 "2020-02-01T02:42:56Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Yes, it is theft. > > How many times are you going to ask this same question? Are you expecting us to give you a different answer at some point? > > If you take something that belongs to somebody else, is it theft? > Yes. > > How about if you take something that belongs to somebody else and they took it from somebody els etc etc etc… Why are you acting so immature to a simple question? It was the same question for _different scenarios_ I wanted to explore the nuance. > [@](#): > > **Banquet Bear** > …New Zealand Maori here: and yes, Little Nemo can be sure about that. How about the Maori Land Court which was established in 1865? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2020, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/116 "2020-02-01T02:59:47Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > How about the Maori Land Court which was established in 1865? …what about it? ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2020, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/117 "2020-02-01T12:44:49Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > So how about then if a European army defeated the native army because they were at war? Is it theft then? It sounds like you are trying to argue that through some “right of conquest”, it’s not technically “theft” because the conquering empire becomes the de facto law of the land for the nation in conquered. Of course it’s still “theft”. Or at the very least it is “imperialism” which is essentially the same thing. Most of the colonies of the British Empire didn’t ask to be part of the Empire. They were either islands or nations conquered by the British or newly formed settlements that displaced the indigenous population. ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2020, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/118 "2020-02-01T13:32:31Z")
Ryan Liam, How is it not theft? The Pope divided the world between Spain and Portugal. Did he own it? The English and Spanish kings granted lands in the new world. Did they have title to them? By what authority did they grant title? ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2020, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/119 "2020-02-02T00:48:09Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > It sounds like you are trying to argue that through some “right of conquest”, it’s not technically “theft” because the conquering empire becomes the de facto law of the land for the nation in conquered. > > Of course it’s still “theft”. Or at the very least it is “imperialism” which is essentially the same thing. Most of the colonies of the British Empire didn’t ask to be part of the Empire. They were either islands or nations conquered by the British or newly formed settlements that displaced the indigenous population. Then how do you explain polities such as Holy Roman Empire? > [@](#): > > **Crane** > Ryan Liam, > > How is it not theft? > > The Pope divided the world between Spain and Portugal. Did he own it? > > The English and Spanish kings granted lands in the new world. Did they have title to them? By what authority did they grant title? I didn’t say it wasn’t, and the treaty of Tordsellias was more to do with keeping the peace between two Catholic powers than anything really with the New World. > [@](#): > > By what authority did they grant title? > [@](#): > > The settlement at Jamestown, Virginia (May 1607) was within the territory of the powerful Chief Wahunsunacawh, known to the colonists as Chief Powhatan.[2] The area was quite swampy and ill-suited to farming, and Powhatan wanted Captain John Smith and the colonists to forsake the swamp and live in one of his satellite towns called Capahosick where they would make metal tools for him in exchange for full provision.[3] > **[Anglo-Powhatan Wars](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Powhatan_Wars)** > > The Anglo–Powhatan Wars were three wars fought between settlers of the Colony of Virginia and the Powhatan People of Tsenacommacah in the early 17th century. The first war started in 1609 and ended in a peace settlement in 1614. The second war lasted from 1622 to 1632. The third war lasted from 1644 until 1646 and ended when Opechancanough was captured and killed. That war resulted in a defined boundary between the Indians and colonial lands that could only be crossed for official business wit ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2020, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990/120 "2020-02-02T03:31:49Z")
Ryan, do you intend to keep arguing through non sequiturs? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/empire-equals-theft-how/846990.md?page=7)