4 ms·

UK is literally still a monarchy mostly, a limited one, but still a kingdom, no surprise there. No one says it was "stolen from common people", because they hav

UK is literally still a monarchy mostly, a limited one, but still a kingdom, no surprise there. No one says it was "stolen from common people", because they have always owned it. UK people still pay land tax to baron families from ancient times in many places, London included. AFAIR the whole House of Lords is created to protect their rights. You may say it's unfair, but I'm not sure it's productive. Good thing nowadays you can emigrate relatively easily.

abeppu 2y ago
> No one says it was "stolen from common people", because they have always owned it. ... but enclosure acts were specific legislative acts which privatized land and removed common access. I.e. common people had access to the land, and it was taken away. Whether it is "stolen" is perhaps messier to decide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure#Parliamentary_Inclosure_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure#Parliamentary_Inclos... Being a monarchy is orthogonal; Norway has a king and right to roam, for example.
- arethuza 2y ago
  Scotland is part of the UK and has right to roam.
  - abeppu 2y ago
    I've heard about Scottish bothies. As an American, culturally it seems hard to imagine not only a right to walk over private land, but land owners sometimes even donating shelter for use by strangers, for free.
    - arethuza 2y ago
      Bothies are awesome: https://www.mountainbothies.org.uk/ https://www.mountainbothies.org.uk/ My favourite is probably Camasunary: https://annestravelsandhikes.com/2018/02/16/a-walk-to-camasunary-bay-skye/ https://annestravelsandhikes.com/2018/02/16/a-walk-to-camasu...
- vincebowdren 2y ago
  > I.e. common people had access to the land Only in a limited sense. The public did not have access to the land; specific "commoners" (local farmers) had specific usage rights e.g. for grazing.
dboreham 2y ago
As is often the case, Scotland is different. Fue duty was abolished decades ago, for example.
graemep 2y ago
> No one says it was "stolen from common people", because they have always owned it. Not true. Common land, in particular, was stolen during the agricultural revolution and enclosed. This also created the cheap labour needed for the industrial revolution. The modern world was built on theft from the rural common people. > Good thing nowadays you can emigrate relatively easily. As an immigrant (as a child) I have already done that. I even have dual nationality so one emigration option is easy. The problem is I do not know of anywhere much better.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- groby_b 2y ago
  Given that the "rural common people" were just as happy killing each other for access to land, good luck finding the "real" owner. Seriously, there are lots of things wrong with the allocation of wealth and property around the world, but "it was stolen during the agricultural revolution" is an absolutely meaningless argument. Britain e.g. has 900k years of human history. (With the first humans only visiting between cold spells). There is no "true first owner".
  - graemep 2y ago
    > There is no "true first owner". I did not claim there was a "true first owner". I said that there was ownership by the common people.
    - groby_b 2y ago
      Which common people? Unless you'd like to treat "the common people" as an amorphous blob?
      - hgomersall 2y ago
        The commons: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons A successful system of land stewardship for many centuries. It was maintained and looked after by the people that lived near to it.
otherme123 2y ago
Funnily enough, the need to have a passport to leave your country is a relatively recent thing. Pre-World War I, people could just pack and go to another country, and passports were rarely enforced. They were more a helping document while traveling than a controling tool. Only after WWI one of the explicit objetives of the passports was to limit the emigration of skilled people. Not to menction that most countries in America were happily receiving huge amounts of people from everywhere without too much hassle. I don't think that is happening today.
KaiserPro 2y ago
I think OP was referring to enclosures
- deepsun 2y ago
  Yep, my point is that owner is owner. Owner can give some rights (e.g. to roam), but owner can take them away (to enclose). But I don't argue whether it's good or bad. I personally don't even know if land ownership is a good thing to begin with. On the other end of range is Communism, that I've experienced personally, and choosing between the two evils I'd choose Monarchy. Probably some middle ground, like land can be leased from government for max 50-99 year at a market price. Or like with the right to roam -- land is owned forever, but government highly restricts the definition of "ownership".
gadders 2y ago
>>Good thing nowadays you can emigrate relatively easily. Given than 1.2m people migrated to the UK in the year ending June 2023, it doesn't seem to be putting people off.
helboi4 2y ago
Blatant ignorance of history said with overconfidence. The land was literally called common land and was in common ownership until the enclosure acts.
- deepsun 2y ago
  As I see it, the Land was in common ownership only until 1066 AD. Then William I distributed the land amongst his 180 barons. However, he promised the English people would be able to exercise their previous rights (pasture, roam etc), hence "common land". That's important -- all land was (is?) owned by 180 barons (not sure how many families survived till today), it's just the government restricted land owners to prevent people using it in some cases. Yes it was called "common land". But it doesn't mean its owner is common people.

abeppu 2y ago

> No one says it was "stolen from common people", because they have always owned it. ... but enclosure acts were specific legislative acts which privatized land and removed common access. I.e. common people had access to the land, and it was taken away. Whether it is "stolen" is perhaps messier to decide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure#Parliamentary_Inclosure_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure#Parliamentary_Inclos... Being a monarchy is orthogonal; Norway has a king and right to roam, for example.

arethuza 2y ago
Scotland is part of the UK and has right to roam.
- abeppu 2y ago
  I've heard about Scottish bothies. As an American, culturally it seems hard to imagine not only a right to walk over private land, but land owners sometimes even donating shelter for use by strangers, for free.
  - arethuza 2y ago
    Bothies are awesome: https://www.mountainbothies.org.uk/ https://www.mountainbothies.org.uk/ My favourite is probably Camasunary: https://annestravelsandhikes.com/2018/02/16/a-walk-to-camasunary-bay-skye/ https://annestravelsandhikes.com/2018/02/16/a-walk-to-camasu...
vincebowdren 2y ago
> I.e. common people had access to the land Only in a limited sense. The public did not have access to the land; specific "commoners" (local farmers) had specific usage rights e.g. for grazing.

dboreham 2y ago

As is often the case, Scotland is different. Fue duty was abolished decades ago, for example.

graemep 2y ago

> No one says it was "stolen from common people", because they have always owned it. Not true. Common land, in particular, was stolen during the agricultural revolution and enclosed. This also created the cheap labour needed for the industrial revolution. The modern world was built on theft from the rural common people. > Good thing nowadays you can emigrate relatively easily. As an immigrant (as a child) I have already done that. I even have dual nationality so one emigration option is easy. The problem is I do not know of anywhere much better.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
groby_b 2y ago
Given that the "rural common people" were just as happy killing each other for access to land, good luck finding the "real" owner. Seriously, there are lots of things wrong with the allocation of wealth and property around the world, but "it was stolen during the agricultural revolution" is an absolutely meaningless argument. Britain e.g. has 900k years of human history. (With the first humans only visiting between cold spells). There is no "true first owner".
- graemep 2y ago
  > There is no "true first owner". I did not claim there was a "true first owner". I said that there was ownership by the common people.
  - groby_b 2y ago
    Which common people? Unless you'd like to treat "the common people" as an amorphous blob?
    - hgomersall 2y ago
      The commons: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons A successful system of land stewardship for many centuries. It was maintained and looked after by the people that lived near to it.

otherme123 2y ago

Funnily enough, the need to have a passport to leave your country is a relatively recent thing. Pre-World War I, people could just pack and go to another country, and passports were rarely enforced. They were more a helping document while traveling than a controling tool. Only after WWI one of the explicit objetives of the passports was to limit the emigration of skilled people. Not to menction that most countries in America were happily receiving huge amounts of people from everywhere without too much hassle. I don't think that is happening today.

KaiserPro 2y ago

I think OP was referring to enclosures

deepsun 2y ago
Yep, my point is that owner is owner. Owner can give some rights (e.g. to roam), but owner can take them away (to enclose). But I don't argue whether it's good or bad. I personally don't even know if land ownership is a good thing to begin with. On the other end of range is Communism, that I've experienced personally, and choosing between the two evils I'd choose Monarchy. Probably some middle ground, like land can be leased from government for max 50-99 year at a market price. Or like with the right to roam -- land is owned forever, but government highly restricts the definition of "ownership".

gadders 2y ago

>>Good thing nowadays you can emigrate relatively easily. Given than 1.2m people migrated to the UK in the year ending June 2023, it doesn't seem to be putting people off.

helboi4 2y ago

Blatant ignorance of history said with overconfidence. The land was literally called common land and was in common ownership until the enclosure acts.

deepsun 2y ago
As I see it, the Land was in common ownership only until 1066 AD. Then William I distributed the land amongst his 180 barons. However, he promised the English people would be able to exercise their previous rights (pasture, roam etc), hence "common land". That's important -- all land was (is?) owned by 180 barons (not sure how many families survived till today), it's just the government restricted land owners to prevent people using it in some cases. Yes it was called "common land". But it doesn't mean its owner is common people.