The Morality of Theft

[Zero Phoenix]

I'm not going to go on at length and explain this. Under the right conditions can theft be considered morally permissible? Suppose someone or a group stole something from you or your ancestors. Would it be morally permissible to take back what was owed to you? Is it owed to you? For humors sake, imagine a WASP waking up one morning and seeing Mexicans, African-Americans, and Native Americans on their estate armed with guns and torches.

[Hell, seeing a group of African-Americans anywhere under any circumstance would scare anyone. I'm sorry but that was funny. And as an African-American I'm allowed to play my race card once per game provided I discard it after my turn. However, my elitist magic card lets me keep it in play.]

Going further, if an entire nation (America, Germany, Russia, Japan, so many others) acquired a territory via means of a military victory, third party treaty, or some other means, would the country that lost its territories be morally justified in using any means necessary to take back what was theirs?

Note: When I say third party treaty, I'm referring to incidents wherein a losing nation loses their territory to the victors without the winning parties paying heed to the best interests of the defeated nation. Think Treaty of Versailles.

1) Is theft a moral act depending on certain conditions? Why or why not?

2) Was my joke funny or in horrendously bad taste? [Kidding. I don't actually care.]

3) Can the loss of territory be considered loss if the earth does not belong to anyone?

4) If a country acquires territory via the mechanism of war then later loses it all the same, do they possess any moral justification to take back what they took from someone prior?

Rant: We're sure to see some America bashing but my god people let's at least be innovative. We're bound to hear all about how America is a thieving, raping, world pillaging country. It's a trend if the rest of the world is doing it but it only becomes a crime if America gets in on the action.

Discuss.

 

[Kamil]

Well starting with property theft, it can be morally justified if not legally justified. Iconic example Robin Hood: stealing from the corrupt and greedy to help those who were harmed by their corruption and greed. Illegal but morally justified.

Robin Hood also works as an example for the hostile military takeover aspect; his land was forcefully taken from him and he forcefully took it back. Morally justified in my opinion.

I don't believe that it is morally justified to steal from people because their parents stole something from your parents though, or anything going on several generations back. For example, I should not have to pay you because of opression more than 100 years ago and you don't have the right to steal from me for that reason either. Basically I believe that "An eye for an eye" is actually quite reasonable when the law is unable to deal with the circumstances, but injustice does not get inherited.

In the case of Native Americans or similar injustice, the offending nation/state as a whole is morally obligated to make ammends to the victim nation/state. However, it is sometimes not feasible to completely return all that was taken so I wouldn't say that war is a good solution either. On the other hand, I have a very limited view on what justifies war so I would tend to avoid it anyway.

 

[-lexus-]

1) Yes, if you are starving, and you have no money, it is morally justifiable that you steal a piece of bread in order to survive. At least, if you have exhausted all the other options first. Even in this case, stealing should be a last option.

2) Seeing anyone on your estate with guns and torches scares you, no matter the color of their skin

3) Well, Id say its morally justified to take back what country was once yours for a certain amound of time. I mean, it was definitely morally justified of France and Russia to reconquer their land after they lost it to the Nazis. At the other hand, if Mexico would start to complain right now that it wants it land back from America, Id say its bad luck for them. Its been to long to consider the land as their own.

Also, I think it kind of depends in what way the land was lost. Like, was it a foreign nation that took it from you or was it for example, kind of like Kosovo where the ethnic people of the region wanted to split off and declare independence. In the later case, in the first case, I think its morally justified for a certain amount of time, in the second case, it depends on much more then just time. Heh, when I think about it, I have to say it can be both morally justified for the people of the region to split off, while at the same time its morally justified for the government to prevent it at almost any cost.

4) Depends on the time it has been yours. If country A conquers a piece of country B and country B manages to liberate it after a year or a few years, country A doesnt have any moral right to claim that piece belongs to them. However, if country B leaves the piece in the hand of country A for decades, they loose their claim to the region at some point. Unless there has been a war going on between both country for decades.

 

[ForsakenGarou]

1) Is theft a moral act depending on certain conditions? Why or why not?: I would never say its moral, under any condition. The question really, should be is it necessary? In other words, when a man has no job and no way to make provisions for his family, it becomes necessary to take the provisions of others. (Think Jean Valjean in Les Miserables.) However, Winnoa Ryder on a sopping spree? Not so much.

2) Was my joke funny or in horrendously bad taste? [Kidding. I don't actually care.]: Fucking funny. Note that I, as one of the vanilla colored 'oppressionists' of all the non-vanilla races in the world, could never make such a joke without Secret Service watching my back. And the Incredible Hulk, AND etc. [That is NOT a joke.]

3) Can the loss of territory be considered loss if the earth does not belong to anyone?: Only to the most powerful.

4) If a country acquires territory via the mechanism of war then later loses it all the same, do they possess any moral justification to take back what they took from someone prior?: See above. Force begets wealth. If I want what you have, and even God can't kick my ass, I get it. It's that simple.