Latest update April 23rd, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- Pres. Ali challenges CARICOM to transform into health research powerhouse
- Government interference skewing police investigations, trust in GPF crumbling – APNU
- Iran seizes ships in Strait of Hormuz after Trump extends ceasefire
- GECOM boat used without permission crashed, burnt – probe finds
- Cops bust Mon Repos robbery plot
Does birthright give you ownership of a given country?
Dear Editor,
In the Season of Debates: Who Owns a Nation?
In the season of debates about who owns America, India, Guyana and Trinidad, there is a call for analytical discussion and critical thinking on the question of national ownership. I am using these four countries to illustrate a broader point about ownership that is relevant to many nations.
In America, often described as a “discovery” country, where mass migration and deportation continue to shape society, discussions arise about who built the nation and who its rightful owners are. This same logic of ownership is also reflected in Guyana and Trinidad, where similar debates occur over who owns the country.
Unlike America, India is not a “discovery” country. It has long been home to the same peoples, religions, and ways of life, though these were interrupted by various Middle Eastern (Muslim) and European (Christian) influences. This is historically documented. However, India’s ownership debate is more political in nature, whereas in the United States it is often framed through ethnic and racial perspectives.
In America, where Indigenous peoples (“Indians”) are not a dominant numerical political force, many ethnic groups claim ownership of the country, often based on birthright. The same pattern can be seen in Guyana and Trinidad.
In India, while birthright grants citizenship and the ability to function within the Constitution, many Hindus, particularly Sanatanists, view themselves as the true owners of Bharat (India), based on thousands of years of heritage and civilizations such as the Harappan and Indus Valley civilizations.
In America, the question arises: does the fact that people came to the country legally or illegally, or are born there automatically make them owners of the nation? Similarly, migrants who work under exploitative conditions in other regions, such as Pakistanis in Gulf States, do not necessarily become “owners” of those countries. Such claims can be seen as questionable.
In America, those who are born and work there may be viewed as stakeholders with varying degrees of claim to ownership. Undocumented immigrants have limited or no claims in this view, while those whose lineage traces back to early settlers from the Mayflower to the founders of independent America who helped establish the Constitution and shape the nation’s industrial and military power, are seen as having a deeper investment in ownership.
In Guyana and Trinidad, the Africans and Indians who worked the swampy lands and contributed to the country’s development and independence within a unique historical experience similar to early American pioneers, may be considered among the primary stakeholders in the nation’s political power, much like in the United States. On the questions of “stolen Land ” The Americas and Caribbean, we all are guilty of the crime, not only ‘White ‘ people. All those who live on the land are guilty as charged.
Yours respectfully,
Vassan Ramracha
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
