充满智慧、幽默的哈佛大学公开课-第7讲这是我的土地(17)

这难道不是在暗示印第安人并未完成圈地吗？印第安人作为采猎者，事实上是没有圈地。所以我觉得罗谢尔说到点子上了。
- What I want to. . . Go ahead, Dan. - At the same time, he is saying that just by picking an acorn or taking an apple or maybe killing a buffalo on a certain amount of land, that makes it yours because it"s your labor and your labor would enclose that land. - So by that definition, maybe they didn"t have fences around little plots of land but didn"t. . . - They were using it.
- 我想说的是……继续说，丹。- 同时，洛克说只要在特地土地拾得橡果或摘下苹果或杀一头水牛，你就拥有了这块土地，因为这是你的劳动，你通过劳动圈定了这块土地。- 按照这个定义，也许他们是没有在那小块地上围上篱笆，但并不意味着……- 他们在使用该土地。
- Yes. By Locke"s definition, you can say. . . - So maybe by Locke"s definition, the Native Americans could have claimed a property right in the land itself. - Right, but they just didn"t have Locke on their side, as she points out. - All right, good. Okay, that"s good. One more defender of Locke. Go ahead.
- 是的，按照洛克的定义，你可以说……- 也许按照洛克的定义，印第安人可以宣称拥有对该土地的财产权。- 没错，只是洛克没有站在他们那边而已，正如罗谢尔指出的。- 很好，好的，这很不错。再来一个为洛克辩护的，你来。
Well, I mean, just to defend Locke, he does say that there are some times in which you can"t take another person"s land. For example, you can"t acquire a land that is common property, so people in terms of the American Indians, I feel like they already have civilizations themselves and they were using land in common.