Europeans often had a different version of land ownership than the people they colonized, but Europeans were not the only ones to develop the idea that people could have rights to use land, or use the fruits of land, or destroy some of the wealth of the land – all property rights that can be stolen in the sense we talk about stealing lands from indigenous people.
There were also huge differences in land ownership philosophies among the many distinct societies outside of Europe, and plenty of these had land ownership laws that were not radically different from European laws.
Europeans often had a different version of land ownership than the people they colonized, but Europeans were not the only ones to develop the idea that people could have rights to use land, or use the fruits of land, or destroy some of the wealth of the land – all property rights that can be stolen in the sense we talk about stealing lands from indigenous people.
There were also huge differences in land ownership philosophies among the many distinct societies outside of Europe, and plenty of these had land ownership laws that were not radically different from European laws.
Could you please explain the point of your point because it just sounds like apologia for colonialism?
No one said Europe has one model of land tenure (Carl Marks, anyone?)
Agrarian capitalism definitely developed in England thought
“Colonized people knew they had rights to the land so everyone at the time knew it was stolen” is apologia for colonialism now? Really?
Beyond that, being accurate about history is inherently important.