Difference between revisions of "What Is Property?"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
m (Mhuben moved page What is property? to What Is Property?) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==The Nature of Property== | ==The Nature of Property== | ||
| − | Property is a set of coercively enforced | + | Property is a specific set of rights that are coercively enforced. Without coercive enforcement, there are no rights, there are only claims. Property is only as strong and secure as its enforcement, which is why property enforcement is generally by coercive social organizations such as governments, clans, feudal systems, etc. Individuals generally cannot create and maintain property because they are not nearly as powerful as social organizations. Thus, in modern nations, governments create and maintain property. All property reduces liberty of all others by creating enforced duties to respect the property. This is a tradeoff, between the benefits of property and the reduction of liberty by duties. |
For a general overview of the nature of rights, see: [[What Are Rights?]] | For a general overview of the nature of rights, see: [[What Are Rights?]] | ||
| Line 120: | Line 120: | ||
#Alienation: The right to sell or lease management and exclusion rights. | #Alienation: The right to sell or lease management and exclusion rights. | ||
| − | ==Why don't we have full liberal rights?== | + | ==Do animals have property?== |
| − | The property relationship enforced by society is NEVER the full liberal rights desired by libertarians because (a) society retains the [[Hohfeld’s typology of rights|Hohfeldian POWER]] to change the deal however desired and (b) some of the pre-existing rights and externalities of rights can be very expensive (c) enforcement of rights is costly: both directly due to costs of enforcement and due to the injustice of violating the Lockean Proviso of "leaving enough and as good for everyone else." | + | Often people think of behaviors of animals (such as territoriality) as being indicative of animal property. Possession is a better description. While an animal might protect its nest, does it really have the other rights that comprise property according to Honoré above? No. And with the exception of a very few social species, there is no social enforcement of possession. Apparently, only humans have property. |
| + | |||
| + | ==Why don't we have full liberal property rights?== | ||
| + | The property relationship enforced by society is NEVER the full liberal property rights desired by libertarians because (a) society retains the [[Hohfeld’s typology of rights|Hohfeldian POWER]] to change the deal however desired and (b) some of the pre-existing rights and externalities of rights can be very expensive and (c) enforcement of rights is costly: both directly due to costs of enforcement and due to the injustice of violating the Lockean Proviso of "leaving enough and as good for everyone else." | ||
For (a), if government is paying for rights enforcement, it gets to make the rights it wants. That can include rights to enter with a warrent and eminent domain for example. For (b), existing commonlaw rights may lead to easements and limitations due to nuisance. For (c), enforcing rights is costly, and the more perfect the enforcement the more costly. Intellectual property is enforced through private lawsuits to prevent the cost of the enforcement of those rights unless it is profitable. | For (a), if government is paying for rights enforcement, it gets to make the rights it wants. That can include rights to enter with a warrent and eminent domain for example. For (b), existing commonlaw rights may lead to easements and limitations due to nuisance. For (c), enforcing rights is costly, and the more perfect the enforcement the more costly. Intellectual property is enforced through private lawsuits to prevent the cost of the enforcement of those rights unless it is profitable. | ||
