• .. 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.

    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。

    耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

  • The settlers were enclosing land and engaged in wars with the Native Americans.

    殖民者在圈地,并挑起了与印第安人的战争。

    耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

  • Well, the Native Americans, as hunter-gatherers, didn't actually enclose land.

    印第安人,作为采猎者,事实上是没有圈地。

    耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

  • Because if you are right that this would justify the taking of land in North America from Native Americans who didn't enclose it, if it's a good argument, then Locke's given us a justification for that.

    因为如果你是对的,洛克此举将正义化从印第安人手中占领,他们尚未圈定的土地这一行为,如果他的观点是正确的,那么洛克给出了占领土地的正当理由。

    耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

$firstVoiceSent
- 来自原声例句
小调查
请问您想要如何调整此模块?

感谢您的反馈,我们会尽快进行适当修改!
进来说说原因吧 确定
小调查
请问您想要如何调整此模块?

感谢您的反馈,我们会尽快进行适当修改!
进来说说原因吧 确定