Members banned from this thread: USFREEDOM911 and Earl |
It's a point of debate amongst Muslim intellectuals, Teffy. You should join in.
Don't let the degenerate Saudis catch you thinking about it though.Islamic socialism
Islamic socialism is a term coined by various Muslim leaders to describe a more spiritual form of socialism. Muslim socialists believe that the teachings of the Quran and Muhammad—especially the zakat—are compatible with principles of economic and social equality. They draw inspiration from the early Medinan welfare state established by Muhammad. Muslim socialists found their roots in anti-imperialism. Muslim socialist leaders believe in the derivation of legitimacy from the public.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism
" First they came for the journalists...
We don't know what happened after that . "
Maria Ressa.
The area of Britain now called England has been conquered by nearly everybody who tried, including Romans. Germans, Danes and Normans, and each one stole land, then used the rent to buy more. That happens in many places. It is very remarkable indeed that anyone should suppose that they somehow have a 'right' to land, as if they dug it out of the sea or something. It was just there, and people grabbed it.
I read some article recently that said that the Winsor family has the most personal land ownership in the world, legally. While there was some nays to that claim there really hasn't been a story to the contrary that I noticed.
Last edited by Part Multi 313; 04-18-2019 at 10:33 PM.
On the plus side, zero percent of England will soon be owned by Berlin.
"It [the draft] is duty rather than slavery. I part with the author on the caviler idea that individual freedom (whatever that may be to the person) leads to nirvana, anyone older that 12 knows that is BS."
-(Midcan5)
"Allow me to masturbate my patriotism furiously and publicly at this opportunity."
-(Ib1yysguy)
"There is no 'equal opportunity' today unless the government makes it so."
-(apple0154 )
"abortion is not killing Its birth control"
-(Desh)
cancel2 2022 (04-18-2019)
cancel2 2022 (04-19-2019), Truth Detector (04-19-2019)
Who owns England ?
Multi-million pound corporations with complex structures have purchased the very ground we walk on – and we are only just beginning to discover the damage it is doing to Britain.
By Guy Shrubsole
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-hoarding-land
Where else is this happening ? The English are subservient to their aristocracy and their wealthy, ' fore-lock touchers ' and grovellers. They don't even have a Constitution.
" First they came for the journalists...
We don't know what happened after that . "
Maria Ressa.
.
Fretting over ‘land inequality’ is a waste of time
As if the nation is not already mired in enough scandal, now comes the revelation that half the land in England is owned by just 25,000 individuals and organisations (1% of the population!). How wrong and elitist that sounds when placed beneath a Guardian headline which implies it is a yet another measure of horrible inequality and deprivation. According to Labour MP John Trickett “The dramatic concentration of land ownership is an inescapable reminder that ours is a country for the few and not the many”.
But it means nothing at all. We are not an agrarian society. Fewer than one per cent of the population are employed in agriculture. In addition to farmworkers there are a few allotment-holders, like Jeremy Corbyn, who satisfy some of their own food needs. As for the rest of us, we are quite happy to buy our food with money we have earned in other occupations. We have no need to own large amounts of land.
The acreage of land an individual owns is, in any case, a poor guide to overall wealth. You could own an acre of Sutherland and still not be as wealthy as someone who owed a square yard of the City of London. You could own a £10 million penthouse in London and not own any land at all – if you are a leaseholder, you are not a landowner. Conversely, there are plenty of farmers who own substantial numbers of acres – most of it with little development value yet have hardly a pair of farthings to rub together. On a measure of land-ownership, I note, I could myself claim to be deprived, as I own a mere tenth of an acre of land – my garden – and even that I share with my wife. Were land divided equally among the population I would be entitled to around an acre. But I don’t think the benefits office would be too impressed if I used that as an excuse to claim financial help from the taxpayer.
What matters far more than who owns land is what rights the rest of us have over it. It would be thoroughly depressing if England was made up entirely of private domains which the rest of us could not enter and enjoy. Yet we have parks, commons, footpaths and the right to roam over open moorland. In some places we could do with better public access, but we don’t need individually to own the land. Thirty per cent of land lies in the hands of aristocrats – a situation Shrubsole and The Guardian appear to find intolerable. Yet within this 30 per cent is much land available for public enjoyment. What does it matter that Chatsworth Park, for example, is owned by a Duke when we are all allowed to walk and picnic there? Most of us are able to enjoy land without the burden and responsibility of owning it – which is a pretty good deal. We get a good walk; while the poor aristocrat own owns it gets to deal with fallen trees, Japanese knotweed, fly-tipped waste and all the other hazards which go with land-ownership.
Would John Trickett and Guy Shrubsole, author of Who Owns England, really rather the country was divided up into acre-sized plots to which each of us is entitled? I know what my acre would look like: an uncultivated wilderness which produced no food and which was of no use to anyone. I am sure that wealth in Britain could be a bit better spread – but how much land is concentrated in a few hands provides no useful guide to the health of an advanced industrialised country
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/0...waste-of-time/
Bookmarks