What are your views on private property?

[Yerda]

I'm actually all for it in many cases. I don't subscribe to most forms of socialism, however.

Do you have any opinion on the matter?

For example, I used to believe in the mantra property is theft. In some cases it seems that it certainly is, but I don't think it neccessarily or inherently the case.

Just for flavour, Proudhon said (I paraphrase), I don't believe in reform or revolution but prefer to watch private property burned in a slow fire.

 

[Laika]

I don't think there really are any moral "shoulds" on whether something should be owned privately or as public or social property as that sort of starts thinking one socio-economic system is more "natural" than the other. However, if there is a "should" for what is owned privately or by the public it should be based on what works and what maximises efficiency and gets results. Nowdays we think that private ownership is efficient but it's value-loaded by assuming that efficiency is the result of selfishness. of course human beings are more complicated and our motivations are diverse and conditioned to reflect cultural norms and change in response to technologies which change our behaviour (e.g. the internet). The same argument that public ownership would be more efficient than private has been made in the past- but the Soviets would have said it was due to the socialisation of production under capitalism meaning that social ownership was a better reflection of peoples actual relationships through common labour and therefore over-coming alienation and exploitation. I'm not swayed definitively either way as it is a self-consciously ideological choice, so I'm for a mixed economy of sorts based on a willingness to combine various economic motivations- selfish and selfless.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

For example, I used to believe in the mantra property is theft. In some cases it seems that it certainly is, but I don't think it neccessarily or inherently the case.

Just for flavour, Proudhon said (I paraphrase), I don't believe in reform or revolution but prefer to watch private property burned in a slow fire.

I'd say you're taking Proudhon a bit out of context. "Property is theft" was the first of 3 maxims on property. The latter two were "property is liberty" and "property is impossible". What he was saying is that property in the sense of landlordism and private ownership of the means of production is theft, but property in the sense of owning one's own home and means of production is liberty. Because these two opposite situations are conflated as "property", a unified concept of property is impossible.

 

[Sunstone]

I once read a proposal to abolish private property and replace it with 100 year leases. But I don't know how well that would work in practice. Just tossing that out there as one of the alternatives to private property.

In general, I think private property is a can of worms. There are both advantages and disadvantages to it. Some of the disadvantages can be reduced or eliminated by restricting the rights of property owners. That is, I don't think people should have unlimited rights to do whatever they want with their land. I wouldn't want, for instance, my neighbor to get into the lucrative business of storing radioactive waste on his or her property. Sorry, neighbor, but I don't think you have a right to risk having an accident that would leave the entire neighborhood creating babies with six arms, four eyes, and a quarter of a brain. Although, presumably, such brain-deficient babies would be "presidential material" these days.

On the upside, property owners tend to be politically conservative, so far as I've heard. By "conservative" I of course do not mean the sort of foolish radicals that masquerade as today's conservatives. I mean people who are genuinely interested in preserving the best political traditions. Societies need such people in order for those societies to be reasonably stable, just as societies need liberals and progressives in order to adapt to changing circumstances and move forward.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

On the upside, property owners tend to be politically conservative, so far as I've heard. By "conservative" I of course do not mean the sort of foolish radicals that masquerade as today's conservatives. I mean people who are genuinely interested in preserving the best political traditions. Societies need such people in order for those societies to be reasonably stable, just as societies need liberals and progressives in order to adapt to changing circumstances and move forward.

Whether it's an upside or not, I don't know, but certainly owning property makes me more conservative politically.
Whilst I was a socialist (rather than a communist) in college, I'd suggest that any movement to common property ownership needs to be seen and described as a process, rather than simply a desirable end goal.

Without putting too fine a point on it, I always find it hard to accept people making sacrifices for the greater good on behalf of others, when their own sacrifice is likely to be negligible.

 

[Aquitaine]

This may be an unrefined and ill-informed opinion, and I'm receptive with it since I honestly haven't given much thought in to this topic.
I support private property for "regular people" - the masses - to have "reasonably sized" properties. But when I see huge areas of land and giant manors (that were or are currently) owned by people through inheritance from wealthy ancestors who probably got their riches off our nation's (UK) involvement in colonialism and slavery, I tend to question the validity of their "right" to it.

I also wonder if a private citizen should be able to own natural resources, which instead could be turned over to public ownership for the benefit of everyone.

Again, I'm interested in hearing both ends of the argument and am willing to change my opinion on the subject.

 

[Sunstone]

What if there were no public roads, and you couldn't get from point A to point B without paying tolls?

 

[Aquitaine]

What if there were no public roads, and you couldn't get from point A to point B without paying tolls?

Good point. There clearly are different areas of society that should be either public/state owned and areas that should be privately owned.
Personally, I tend to think that utilities and transport (among other things) should be state owned.

 

[Yerda]

But when I see huge areas of land and giant manors (that were or are currently) owned by people through inheritance from wealthy ancestors who probably got their riches off our nation's (UK) involvement in colonialism and slavery, I tend to question the validity of their "right" to it.

What they have inherited was often originally appropriated in grand acts of theft and illegal enclosures.

 

[Thief]

I'm actually all for it in many cases. I don't subscribe to most forms of socialism, however.

Do you have any opinion on the matter?

For example, I used to believe in the mantra property is theft. In some cases it seems that it certainly is, but I don't think it neccessarily or inherently the case.

Just for flavour, Proudhon said (I paraphrase), I don't believe in reform or revolution but prefer to watch private property burned in a slow fire.

I'm not actually for it in all cases.....(as compared to 'don't subscribe to most forms'....)

but I have read ....Animal Farm...

and personal property is a tough line to draw
you say you want to borrow my gun?

but there is a religion quote.....
give half to anyone who might ask

should we then draw a better line for the term?

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

Iand personal property is a tough line to draw
you say you want to borrow my gun?

There's a difference between private property and personal possessions. When people talk about abolishing private property, they're talking about land ownership and the like. Nobody wants to communize literally everything in the world.

 

[MARCELLO]

The unfairness of private property holding is the inheritance way of it. When I die, why should my relatives enjoy owning my house ? As far as private property owning is limited to life long there is no big problem.

 

[Thief]

There's a difference between private property and personal possessions. When people talk about abolishing private property, they're talking about land ownership and the like. Nobody wants to communize literally everything in the world.

and then what would my gun be good for?
and then, the gun haters will say I don't need it and pass law I can't have a gun on common ground

 

[Midnight Rain]

I'm actually all for it in many cases. I don't subscribe to most forms of socialism, however.

Do you have any opinion on the matter?

For example, I used to believe in the mantra property is theft. In some cases it seems that it certainly is, but I don't think it neccessarily or inherently the case.

Just for flavour, Proudhon said (I paraphrase), I don't believe in reform or revolution but prefer to watch private property burned in a slow fire.

I am a strange sort of person when it comes to socialism. I think we should have socialist programs such as universal healthcare, publicly funded education, higher minimum wages, better disability programs, elder care, free water ect. I even support a plan proposed by a Texas town (of all places) that will go to a 100% green energy grid that is paid for through taxes. I don't think that will happen any time soon on a national level but I think it eventually will. Its necessary that it will.

I also think that it is the world's duty to produce scientists in research positions in order to further our understanding of the universe and make it better. We know its possible to create a 100% green energy grid for the whole world. We just don't know how yet. Its very possible that in a short amount of time we could have global free internet, green energy, water and enough food for every person in the world.

 

[illykitty]

I don't really have a firm stance on most things, and I admit this is an area where I have not really made such a decision. Also, even though I am on the left and socialistic, I'm not that well read about all the details. I just agree with things I read so far, the big pictures and the few details I have read from various sources (cause well, socialism isn't just one thing). I know more about alternative economic models (like RBEs) because I am fascinated by ideas of completely revolutionising our system. *Is an idealist.*

I'm probably just parroting what some others have said, but I dislike the idea of huge expensive property being passed down through generations and people owning far more than they need. I also have noticed it's becoming increasingly harder to purchase a house since they're all being bought by rich people for being let. It's an annoying issue because often letting a house or apartment is quite a bit more expensive (you can buy for around £800 a month but let is £1500!?!?) and you get no return (unlike a bought place, you cannot finish paying it off and live debt free).

Maybe the solution is indeed some kind of lease scheme, as like apartments but shorter amounts of time? But then, who do you pay this money to? Would the government/public own all properties and then the money paid for the lease is basically put back into the public so we can pay for schools and other public services? Hmm, I wonder how this would work.

Obviously, this is thinking in terms of our current system, with currency still being in place and not knowing what the future might hold. There are alternatives but I won't get into those.

Also I think it might be a good idea to clarify what is meant by property in the OP... Although a few posts down has mentioned it. Some people, who are not familiar with these terms, might jump to conclusions of it meaning you don't "own" anything. Why the heck would I want your toothbrush, when I have my own?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm an anarcho-communist, so I reject the concept of private property. Personal property is fine, though. To me, it's an outrage that in the poor areas, you have many boarded up, foreclosed, burned out, etc. houses and thousands of homeless people in the same area. The community should band together and retake those properties. Technically, I'm a squatter, myself. Due to experiences, I have a rather low opinion of landlords and wish the concept would be scrapped. It's a stupid holdover from feudalism.