# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the land belongs to the mapuche but was later claimed by the Chileans. Though this is my belief, the documentary explains many occasions where violence was started due to the argument of who should own and who should be allowed to be on the land. One of the examples that supports my claim is, the living conditions the mapuche are living under. The houses are clearly run down ,and they are still living a similar lifestyle that their ancestors would have lived, meaning they rely on natural resources to survive and don't have much money to live. Majority of the men work in the fields for the Chileans and are given money based on how much produce they collect. My second example is the violence they are causing towards the farm owners. They believe that by destroying the machinery that is on their land, they will influence to leave the mapuche alone and find a different area to farm. My last example to prove my claim is the history behind the mapuche. Stories were told such as the father who had to flee being incarcerated to prevent the government from completing political machinations against him.

# data[].attributes.body
In light of the history surrounding the land feud between the Luchsinger family and the indigenous Mapuche people, I have come to the conclusion that the land rightfully belongs to the Mapuche. Throughout the documentary, numerous reasons are given for the history of land ownership between the Luchsingers and the Mapuche. One of the most compelling in favor of the Mapuche, is that their land was grabbed by the Chilean government and sold to prospective settlers from a few European countries most notably of which was Switzerland where the Luchsingers are from. This shows that they were not properly respected by the government, and as such were stolen from. Secondly, the Mapuche have been hired to tend the land which the Luchsingers currently hold and in doing so are payed very poorly. In my view, it is highly disrespectful, to own someone else’s property and then hire them to work it for low pay whilst the benefits are reaped by another group. Lastly, The Mapuche have not been treated fairly by the court system which is comprised entirely of non indigenous people. This has meant that the Mapuche struggle is often misunderstood and dismissed, when there really is a point to be made about who the rightful owner of the land is. In conclusion, both parties involved, the Luchsingers and the Mapuches, have much to be frustrated about. Although it remains clear to me that the land rightfully belongs to the Mapuche, they have taken some actions which I also really don’t agree with such as continued political violent assault and arson of both the people and the land which the Luchsingers currently hold. In order to solve the issue, I think that a series of meetings needs to occur between the Mapuche people along with those who have been wrongfully imprisoned, the Luchsinger farm owners, and those who have been a victim of the political violence thus far. After these meetings conclude, both groups should come up with a case against each other, and take it to the human rights court which exists outside of Chile in order to most effectively resolve the issue.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching this documentary, I believe that the land belongs to the Mapuche people. Firstly, their land was taken from them by the government and sold to settlers. This is really sad and is similar to what was happening with many native tribes throughout the americas. Also, another example is that the Mapuche were living in terrible conditions. This was clearly shown in the documentary; you could see the houses were run down. I think that a potentially viable solution moving forward is a slight bit of government involvement in order to stop all violence that is occurring and regulate some civil meetings to end the conflict.

# data[].attributes.body
Watching this documentary clearly expressed the upcoming struggle of possession of land. The land belongs to the Mapuche people, it is their land at start, by occurrence, even though the government sold the land and by "money" they have authority, but that itself is the issue. Cultural basis and ways of land are significantly more important than a price tag. Personally, I feel the land shouldn't be negotiable as to who it belongs to.  I felt frustrated watching how much struggle and action of being held back in cultural growth and expansion was occurring. Both sides received a lot of downfall to this occurrence, which strangely enough was expected.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the documentary I strongly believe that the land belongs to the Mapuche people. Throughout the documentary, we see many instances from long ago and even today where the authorities disregard the Mapuche people and favor the ruling class. Due to the authorities not being in their favor the Mapuche are now having to fight for the land their ancestors discovered even though it should be their right to continue and own the land. When the first group of settlers came who are also known as the Luchsinger family, the Chilean government granted 40 acres of land to each settler without consulting the Mapuche people who have lived on this land long before the ships of settlers arrived. Since then the Mapuche have been cast aside as we see today, where they are living in tiny plots of land and are struggling to make money while the settlers live on big properties and are continuing to become richer off of the land of the Mapuche people and hard work of the Mapuche farmers. As they fight for their land rights the authorities use the anti-terrorism legislation that was used by Pinochet to arrest protesters who were protesting for social rights and are applying it to the conflict between the Mapuche and the settler families. Overall, I think that this needs to be taken up with the human rights court and each group needs to plead their case so there can be an end to this dispute, but I think they need to be judged by people without bias.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the documentary, I believe that the land belongs to the Mapuche people. The settlers have no claim to it, yet still stole it right out from under the Mapuche. This theft left many of them in poverty, with very little land to grow crops on, so they resorted to selling handmade items to supplement their income. The Luchsingers and Chilean government have no right to claim ownership of what is not theirs. While I clearly don't believe in the violence towards the Luchsingers and their farms, it seems to me that the government is trying very hard to pin it on the Mapuche. The legislation used by the Pinochet is entirely outdated and irrelevant to the situation at hand, and I hope that the human rights court intervenes and rules in favor of the Mapuche.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching this video, I believe that the land belongs to the Mapuche people. During the documentary, there are many reasons given as to why the land could be considered to belong to the Mapuche, and there are many reasons given as to why it could belong to the Luchsinger family; but I believe that the evidence provided for the Mapuche people is stronger. First, as one of the Mapuche people said, the land belongs to the Mapuche ancestors and thus it belongs to the Mapuche people living there today. Second, the government took the land from the Mapuche people, and without consulting or speaking to them, sold various parts of their land to European settlers. This shows no respect for the Mapuche people and no consideration for their ancestors, even though the land belonged to them and should continue to belong to them. Because of this, many of the Mapuche people were left in poverty. The Mapuche people deserve to live on their land without having to work there for the Luchsinger family for very little pay and very little respect. It is not the responsibility of the Mapuche people to uphold the land that they have lived on for so long if it belongs to people that don't seem to respect them. I am hesitant to immediately bring in legal action, because as we’ve seen in the past, the government doesn’t allow for a fair argument for indigenous people, the courts are often filled almost entirely of white people, and in this particular case, the government has taken action against the Mapuche people without even consulting them, which shows a blatant disregard for the feelings and opinions of the Mapuche people. For these reason, I suggest to attempt to find peace between the Mapuche people and the Luchsinger family without formal, legal intervention, if possible. However, I recognize that this might not be possible and in this case, I would advise legal action that has to always remain fair and equitable.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no doubt in my mind that the land belongs to the Mapuche people and should ultimately be returned to them. I don't think the Chilean government should have brought in the Luchsinger family or any other European people, but instead put energy and resources into providing Chilean citizens with the resources they need(ed). I think that because the land belonged to the ancestors of the Mapuche people, it is still Mapuche land and should be treated as such. I also think it's disrespectful to the Mapuche to have their land owned by the Luchsingers and have to work on it for very little pay. Even though the Luchsingers argue that it's their land and their livelihood, they clearly have enough resources to either move or give the land back to the Mapuche. I say clearly because they were able to completely rebuild a home that no one lives in full time, and they own a lot of land that could be used by the Mapuche, but isn't. A viable solution would be for the Luchsingers to return the land to the Mapuche that they aren't immediately using, and then slowly return the rest as they move. I think the terms of the agreement should be designed by the Mapuche because it's their land, and if they would allow the Luchsingers to keep their houses and continue living in them and only returning the farm land, that would be up to them. I realize that the Luchsingers believe they have rights to the land, but they need to respect the importance the land holds for the Mapuche and realize that even today, they are still just colonizers on Indigenous land.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the land belongs to the Mapuche people.  The Chilean government had no right to sell that land to the Luchsingers. It seems so incredibly disrespectful that the Mapuche were then hired to take care of the land for extremely low compensation. Taking away something someone has and then paying them a small amount of money to care for it for you seems like a huge slap in the face to them.  Though the Mapuche did not always take the moral high ground (sometimes participating in political violence), I can see their cause for frustration.  I think the actions taken by both the Chilean government and Luchsingers have racial undertones indicative of assumed superiority over indigenous people. This is why they had no problems selling their land and paying them very little. I honestly do not know how to resolve this conflict, as I feel that because action was not taken when it should have been, there will not be a decision that will appease everyone.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the documentary, I believe that the land belongs to the Mapuche people. Throughout the documentary reasons are provided to favor both the Luchsingers and the Mapuche people on who the land should belong to; however I believe the reasons for the Mapuche people are stronger. Firstly, the land was theirs to begin with, as the video mentions, it belonged to their ancestors and should today belong to the modern Mapuche people. Secondly, the land was unfairly taken from them by the Chilean government without their consent, permission, or notice and sold to the settlers. This can help one understand why the Mapuche people were so upset with the occupants of the land. The documentary explains this is a reason that many were left in poverty which is seen when looking at the homes the Mapuche people live in. It is not their job to uphold the land with little pay or respect. Lastly, because of the court system the Mapuche people have not been treated fairly; with that being said I don’t agree with the violent actions the Mapuche people took upon the Luchsinger family. I think a viable solution would be to bring this case up to the humans right court and for the Mapuche people, those who believe they are wrongfully imprisoned, and those of the Luchsinger family to plead their case to people without a bias.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching this documentary, I think that the land belongs to the Mapuche. Though the documentary gave good arguments for both sides, I think the argument for the Mapuche was stronger. The land was originally theirs and was essentially stolen from them by the Chilean government, which then gave the land to settlers. Even if the settlers paid for it, it was not the government's land to sell or give away in the first place. It is also clear that the Mapuche have been mistreated by the legal system, resulting in two people being wrongfully imprisoned. To add insult to injury, the Mapuche people have essentially been forced by the circumstances to work on the settlers' farms for very little money. Though I don't agree with the use of violence to obtain their goal, I understand why some people might feel like it's necessary. They are hemmed in by legal, social, and financial limitations, mostly caused by discrimination and mistreatment. I do also understand the position of Luchsingers and other settlers. If they lose the land, they have no place to go and no way to make money. In this case, I think the best solution would be to return the majority, if not all, of the land to the Mapuche, and have the government provide compensation for the misplaced families like the Luchsingers.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the documentary, it is evident to me that the land belongs to the Mapuche. It was their ancestors' to begin with, and the Chilean government had no right to forcibly displace them in order to give to Swiss settlers, "If you look in here, you'll see. Everything the Luchsinger's got from the state, was paid for" (Luchsinger - DW Documentary 36:16). This is why the Swiss have no substantiated claim to the land, because even though they got it from the Chilean government, it wasn't theirs to give. The land rightfully belongs to the Mapuche. Although I typically would never side with a quote-on-quote "aggressor," violence has proven itself, time and time again, as a very effective motivator for those who oppose it. I think the Mapuche are very well justified to use violence in this situation, because they have been ignored, and even wrongfully imprisioned, for trying to acquire their rightful land through traditional, legal means.

There doesn't seem to be an easy way out, for anybody, in this situation, because the Mapuche are the rightful owners of the land, but the descendants of the settlers have never known anywhere else as home, even if most of the older generations tend to speak in German, "The younger generation tend to converse in Spanish, while their older relatives speak reasonable German, although they have lost the Swiss dialect" (DW Documentary 7:34). But a good first step would be for the Chilean government to accountability for its actions, or else there can never be an end to the battle for the land.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the film, it is very clear that the land belongs to the Mapuche. I understand that the Swiss were given this land but the Chilean needs to make this right by making a compromise. It would be unfair to make the Swiss leave but then this would be also be unfair to not give any land back to the Mapuche. A possible solution that the government could make, would be a slow "phase out" of the Swiss from this land and relocate them somewhere else. By simultaneously moving the Mapuche back into their land.

# data[].attributes.body
Upon watching the film, I believe it is very evident that the land in question belongs to the Mapuche. Not only do the settlers have np rights to the land, but the Chilean people and ancestors have been living on the land for many years. "We've always had good relations with our neighbors. Our family have been living living in this region since 1908. That's nearly a hundred years"(Luchsinger- DW Documentary). Juan Tralcal continues to state that the land was owned rightfully by their ancestors, so it should be theirs by birth right (5:45).  Many of the Chilean people have little to no land, and the ones who do can barely make enough for a living off of it. So, while I do not justify the violence the Machupe have committed, I do understand the grounds on which they did so. Not only do they have Swiss settlers buying land that is rightfully theirs, but it was sold to them by a government that has little to no regard for the people whom it once belonged to. "The land in question is controlled by the settlers and the Luchsinger are a prominent example of this. That's why they (the government) want them in prison"(Luchsinger- DW Documentary). On top of this, the government led action against the Machupe is created under the disguise of "Anti-Terrorism legislation", which allows the Pinochet dictatorship to stop protests and other forms of free speech. The Pinochet's lenience with human rights violations, helps to explain why they felt justified in giving the Machupe very little to no compensation for the land that was taken from them. As someone who believes the land rightfully belongs to the Machupe, it is difficult to say what the right course of action is, however any impact that could be made should start with major governmental reform and legislative change. However this is highly unlikely to happen under the current dictatorship.

# data[].attributes.body
From my outside perspective the Chilean Land War is a war that has no correct solution. It seems as though the Chilean government is primarily at fault, and are responsible for stoking the fire on both sides as the documentary claims. I don’t agree with the Mapuche peoples violent political approach, but I still believe they are in the right nonetheless. My biggest reasoning for this is because of the fact that their ancestors lived there before and were practically scammed away from their lands. This is very close to what happened to many indegenous people in the United States, with the end result being the same. The only somewhat viable solution I see is for the government to step in, possibly from pressure from different powers around the world, and create a settlement that will leave both sides happy. I do think that the Mapuche people should get their land back, but I still beli
eve that the government is liable in terms of blame and damages, and I also think that  the most likely way to create any long lasting solution is via the government.

# data[].attributes.body
The land clearly belongs to the Mapuche, but at this point it doesn't seem at all viable to kick either party off the land. While its clearly unjust that the Mapuche have been removed from their land it would be a further perpetuation of that issue to outright remove the Swiss Descendants from the land. Both the Swiss Descendants and the Mapuche people, see the land as their home. This fact cannot be changed, and violence only supports the Swiss stance that the Mapuche don't deserve the land. If the Mapuche retake their land violently they become the aggressors, but if they just sit by they stand to lose even more. The catch-22 that the people of rural Chile face is hardly unique, but its not one that can be forced through. One could make the argument that legal avenues don't work for the Mapuche, and that would be correct (the young activist group still couldn't free the Mapuche adults who were in prison for attacking the Swiss settlement), so the path forward for the Mapuche would likely have to be on an interpersonal level. Asking an already dysfunctional government to step in and exercise executive power in what is a localized dispute wouldn't work. The issue however with interpersonal resolution is the distinct cultural differences between the two parties, and opinions on how the land should be used. The Mapuche believe in what is essentially subsistence farming, taking only what you need from the earth, and then letting it heal, whereas the Swiss Farmers are trying to turn a profit. It seems to me that the only path forward for the two parties is to attempt to split the land equally, and work to understand each others point of view on the situation and use of land (Dispel the ideas that the mapuche are lazy and and the Swiss are racist and aggressive colonizers. By the same token, I believe that its useless to argue about how the Swiss acquired the land, they are there now). Only be creating a shared community can the two peoples really reconcile the past and move on. Its an imperfect sentiment, that's mildly insulting to the Mapuche, but it seems other avenues have failed them.

# data[].attributes.body
After watching the video I have come to the conclusion that land belongs to the Mapuche. The documentary made good arguments for why the land could belong to either side, but the argument for why the land should be returned to the Mapuche was stronger. The Chilean government is mostly at fault for the conflict because of their poor handling of the land dispute. The state gave significant advantages to the wealthy and powerful .  "The violence started with the state against the Mapuche people. It was the state that brought the settlers here. The state started the war with the pacification of arrow konya and forcing us to live in small areas”, one of the Mapuche people explained. It was also stated in the documentary that the Mapuche were lazy and unproductive with the land they had, so they shouldn't have the right to more. This argument, made by the European settlers, was unjustified and unreasonable. The Mapuche had a symbiotic and sacred relationship with nature, and the way that they used the land should not determine if it is rightfully theirs.   Additionally, the Lutchsinger family claimed that they owned the land because their ancestors had settled it 140 years ago, and had continued to legally expand on it. However, the Mapuche lived on the land for hundreds of years, and were there before the settlers and the Lutchsinger family. The documentary talked about how the Mapuche thrived on their land before the settlers came.  Their traditions, culture and lifestyle prospered.