I quoted the starting bit in a couple of other threads, but I think the full paragraph is relevant to some of the discussion over the past few pages. (I have split it up to make it more readable.) Source Although I am not a fan of Jefferson's general reasoning, he basically repeats my position exactly (just with more emphasis on what happens in the absence of social norms), which just goes to show that it's not a strange or new reasoning but one that's been around for hundreds of years. An interesting point he makes at the end is that because bequests are primarily governed by a social norm, there is essentially no requirement to respect "ancestral lands", church lands, old titles of descent etc and that any reimbursement for changing titles to such lands is more a question of generosity rather than a question of right. Obviously the practicalities of having a peaceful transfer of property and what constitutes a legitimate claim will limit the range of what's possible rather than what can be dreamed, but I think it is an interesting thought experiment to flesh this out more.
