[scatterhead]

> If it is legal in the US, it should be legal for everyone

That's a strawman. No one is arguing against that.

How a resource is being used by foreign corporations is an important input to policy decisions.

We're at a point in today's society where the mere suggestion that nationality might be relevant is met with accusations of xenophobia. It's the same way with race or sex.

[slg]

> We're at a point in today's society where the mere suggestion that nationality might be relevant is met with accusations of xenophobia.

How is the nationality relevant? Would this behavior be acceptable if the farms were owned by an Australian company? What about a publicly traded American company? What about an Arizonan billionaire? I don’t see how that would change anything.

Monopolizing natural resources is bad regardless of the nationality or residency of the people profiting.

[phendrenad2]

For saying it's a strawman, you're doing a lot of litigation in the court of public opinion.

[morelisp]

Race exists literally only to draw unfair distinctions.

[effingwewt]

Then how would you explain nature being 'unfair'.

Race exists due to nature and we use it to denote distinctions in our collective race.

We should celebrate our differences, not pretend they don't exist, or are merely humans being derogatory to each other.

[viciousvoxel]

While I agree with your conclusion, unless by "nature" you mean "human nature," the statement > Race exists due to nature is absolutely false. Race is a cultural construct and has little to do with biology or national origin.