The initial statement was: * " Land belongs to people who can control it, and always has." * @watwut asserted: "Nazi says that, yes." * @YetAnotherNick expan

The initial statement was: * " Land belongs to people who can control it, and always has." * @watwut asserted: "Nazi says that, yes." * @YetAnotherNick expanded on that "Communist say that too as do socialist as do almost all ideology." * @YetAnotherNick then "asked" (perhaps rhetorically) "Why do anyone want to give their power in your land to any other politically motivated entity." * @defrost provided an example of a legal doctrine that returned significant areas of land to original first inhabitants after that land had been claimed by others with crown troops. Now that land belongs to people that lack force to control it, and it was given to them by people that considered it their land by colonisation. If you're interested in the answer to the question you posed "Why do anyone want to give their power in your land to any other politically motivated entity." (which isn't entirely well posed) then perhaps the reasoning of the judges in the Mabo case might give you some insight into their thinking.