Article 12 sacrifices traditional landownership

Since time immemorial, full ownership and disposition of private land has been a permanent part of our cultural tradition. Landownership is either conveyed or acquired. In either case, full ownership is the hallmark of private land in this archipelago.

Strange how we’ve missed the substantive change imposed against traditional landownership under Article 12. Perhaps we’ve brushed it aside because of the transitional nature inherent under Section 805 of the Covenant Agreement upon which was founded Article 12. But take a look at what it says that is so quietly obvious but craftily written so that it runs up against traditional landownership.

Having put this issue into perspective, the question each of us must answer is: Do we wish to lose ownership and final disposition of private land (our land) by allowing the dictates of Article 12 to continue placing half of our properties in limbo? Do we let this constitutional provision permanently change traditional landownership in these isles?

In brief, do you want to own the other half of your property placed in limbo by Article 12 so that the only way you could use it is by seeking the permission of others to do so? This arrangement compromises your right to own and retain full disposition of your land, doesn’t it? Is this what you have in mind?

That half your land isn’t yours grants the local government the right to confiscate it and turn it into a land banking system of sort for future use by others who don’t have any right to it. Do you agree with this mode of landownership? This is the very dictate of Article 12 that is so unsettling—an opportunity to lose your ultimate right to your land. Why would you want to surrender half of your property as forcibly dictated by Article 12? Isn’t it time that we repeal Article XII?

Furthermore, our land tenure system includes the conveyance of family land to siblings. How limited family land is given depends on the family patriarch and matriarch. In every instance, however, it is given not for purposes of promoting racial ownership of land but individual survival. If in doubt, take a glimpse at any deed of gift or will. I’ve never seen an instructive phrase or sentence by the original owners limiting disposition of family land in their last will and testament. Why? It’s up to the next owner upon completion of transfer.

If I may reiterate, full landownership is a cultural tradition. The change in tradition under Article 12 on this issue is not a cultural tradition of the indigenous people. Otherwise, every piece of land here would have belonged to the collective community rather than individual ownership. For the sake of all landowners, it’s about time that we repeal this constitutional provision forthwith!

We’ve heard arguments about the protection of Native American land across the country. Again, a closer scrutiny reveals that members of bona fide tribes do not own these properties individually but collectively. The federal government manages it for them and the only activities (involving use of Native American land) that could be approved are those that benefit the entire tribe.

Interesting that Native Americans own the largest acreage of land than other minorities, according to Fox News’ John Stossel in his exposé “Government Creates Poverty.” Interestingly, too, they happen to be the poorest of them all. Yes, there’s this collective ownership that encourages greater reliance on everything that is federal government. In brief, they feed off entitlement programs from cradle to grave. What a way to compromise freedom!

Because a government trust controls most Indian property, individuals rarely build decent homes or businesses. “No individual on the reservation owns the land. So they can’t develop it,” said Ben Chavis, a highly successful Lumbee businessman. “Look at my tribe. We have title and deeds to our land. That’s the secret. I raise cattle. I can do what I want to because it’s my private property.”

The non-bona fide tribes like the Lumbees have opted to engage in the acquisition of land and have ventured into entrepreneurship to support their families. They prefer personal industry to handouts from Uncle Sam. And they have proven the essence and benefits of owning private over tribal land. Bona fide tribes are given special treatment. But that “specialness” has brought the Indians socialism. It’s what keeps them dependent and poor. On the other hand, because the U.S. government never signed a treaty with the Lumbees, they aren’t so “special” in its eyes. That left them mostly free.

Freedom lets them prosper.

Please understand that half of your private land is in limbo. Would you allow the local government to confiscate it, turn it into a land banking system for future purposes, i.e., homestead on land that belongs to you? Or would you agree that it be given away for commercial purposes? Is this why proponents of Article 12 wanted their collectivist or redistributionist agenda kept intact so they could continue controlling landowners on the fate of their properties?

Yes, culture is what makes possible, on a high level, the rich social life that constitutes a people, their customs, styles, tastes, festivals, rituals, gods—all that binds individuals into a group with roots. A culture is a work of art, of which the fine arts are the sublime expression.

Upon our land was born a small agrarian community of the Moros who cleared, plowed and toiled the soil to provide for family sustenance. In short, our ancestors were farmers and fishermen too. It is in both venues where they work daily to meet family dietary needs. And so for centuries, it is upon the land that was established a culture known as farming. This traditional lifestyle changed into what is now a money economy. It is through tradition that “core values” are established and passed on from father to son/mother to daughter, like name or property, and become a way of life that is both virtuous and enduring.

One of the core values found in the local tradition is full and complete ownership and disposition of private land. They have been that way for centuries. It’s a lasting and time-honored tradition that must be retained and strengthened by repealing Article 12!