[jfactorial]

> When we build a colony on the Moon, we aren't taking land from Moon people

I think the key distinction in this discussion is your view that the Moon belongs to no people yet, versus the opposing view established by the Outer Space Treaty that the Moon belongs to all people.

[JumpCrisscross]

> the Moon belongs to no people yet, versus the opposing view established by the Outer Space Treaty that the Moon belongs to all people

You're describing the Moon Treaty, which was never ratified [1]. It would have made the Moon the common heritage of all manking [2]. The Outer Space Treaty is far less restrictive [3].

And even if the Moon Treaty were in effect, it still wouldn't make lunar colonisation an assertion of human privilege. It would be an assertion of certain humans' privileges over others. But there is no non-human concern in play to any practical effect.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Treaty#Provisions

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_heritage_of_humanity

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty#Provisions

[jfactorial]

No, I'm describing the first bullet point of the Outer Space Treaty:

"The exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind."

Outer space meaning the universe beyond Earth's atmosphere, and Province of all mankind meaning an area of special knowledge, interest, or responsibility belonging to all mankind. Perhaps others don't read it this way, but this is the meaning of my comment.

[WalterBright]

Belonging to all people means the Tragedy of the Commons.

[jfactorial]

Only if there is no policing of it. Natural preservation from mankind's industry is possible. It's quite a depressing thought that anything belonging to humanity is doomed.