The material conditions of non-domination: Property, independence, and the means of production

2021 ◽  
pp. 147488512110506
Author(s):  
Alexander Bryan
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
Economic Independence ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Domination Property ◽  
Intuitive Judgments ◽  
Material Conditions ◽  
Republican Theory ◽  
Property Regimes ◽  
Property Regime ◽  
Means Of Production

While it is a point of agreement in contemporary republican political theory that property ownership is closely connected to freedom as non-domination, surprisingly little work has been done to elucidate the nature of this connection or the constraints on property regimes that might be required as a result. In this paper, I provide a systematic model of the boundaries within which republican property systems must sit and explore some of the wider implications that thinking of property in these terms may have for republicans. The boundaries I focus on relate to the distribution of property and the application of types of property claims over particular kinds of goods. I develop this model from those elements of non-domination most directly related to the operation of a property regime: (a) economic independence, (b) limiting material inequalities, and (c) the promotion of common goods. The limits that emerge from this analysis support intuitive judgments that animate much republican discussion of property distribution. My account diverges from much orthodox republican theory, though, in challenging the primacy of private property rights in the realization of economic independence. The value of property on republican terms can be realized without private ownership of the means of production.

scholarly journals Fascism: Left, Right, or Neither

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Gindler
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
The Political ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Individual Freedom ◽  
Proper Place ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Wealth Redistribution ◽  
Political Spectrum ◽  
The Right ◽  
Means Of Production

The article discusses fascism's place on the political spectrum. At present, there is no consensus among political scientists and economists on that issue, as it has been extraordinarily politicized and distorted during ideological struggles among various currents of socialism. From the very beginning, fascism was depicted by Marxists as belonging to the Right, while Fascists themselves wanted to build a society that transcends the Left-Right paradigm. However, few voices in academia have noted that practical implementation of the fascists’ ideas, inherited from the works of revolutionary and national syndicalists, exhibited predominantly leftist characteristics.The ambiguity of placing fascism in its proper place on the political spectrum can be confidently resolved by applying three primary factors that govern political spectrum polarization: attitude to private property, scope of individual freedom, and degree of wealth redistribution. The article argues that fascism is a particular current of non-Marxian socialism that utilized collectivization of consciousness and wealth redistribution as the main paths toward socialism rather than outright expropriation of private property or means of production. Simultaneously, it is acknowledged that private property rights were inhibited by the fascist state, even though de jure they were permitted.The fascist ideal of the “alternate way” had a logical inconsistency that produced an unstable equilibrium between labor and capital as well as between the man and the state. The politico-economic structure predictably collapsed to the left in the course of building a new society. Therefore, fascism could be correctly called the Right of the Left.

scholarly journals Property Regimes

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Canfield
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Global Markets ◽  
The Political ◽  
Economic Systems ◽  
Important Field ◽  
Financial Capitalism ◽  
Property Regimes ◽  
Property Regime

Property regimes refer to the political, legal, and economic systems through which societies order their relationships between people with respect to valued things. Anthropologists and legal scholars have long been engaged in a dynamic dialogue about the organization and practice of property regimes. However, whereas legal theory has been uniquely concerned with ownership and private property as a system for allocating scarce goods and resources, anthropologists have investigated how property is constructed and shaped by everyday practice, illuminating how the distinctions between law and practice mutually constitute power relations. This chapter reviews how anthropologists have attended to aporias of property theory by ethnographically analysing conflicts and transformations between property regimes. It surveys anthropological insights into three continuing processes of property regime transformation: decolonization, privatization, and enclosure. In addition, it analyses two emergent processes around which property claims are being reconfigured: dematerialization and rematerialization. The dematerialization of property through informational and financial capitalism is occurring at a time when industrial modes of carbon-dependent accumulation are facing ecological limits brought on by climate change. However, technologies of informationalization and financialization are also rematerializing property regimes by constructing new calculative devices and global markets for increasingly limited natural resources. How these emerging regimes shape social relations between people, the distribution of social entitlements, and the boundaries between persons and things offers an important field of ethnographic enquiry.

Liberty and Socialism

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Educational System ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The Other ◽  
Intellectual Freedom ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
The One ◽  
Means Of Production

This chapter examines whether socialism may be more consistent with liberty than capitalism is. It concentrates on two issues, one related to property and the other to education. It first considers whether the abolition of private property rights in the means of production would in itself be an assault on freedom. Some defenders of socialism, as well as its critics, think of socialism as the search for justice, welfare, or fraternity at the expense of freedom—or “bourgeois freedoms.” The chapter proceeds by discussing whether a “no-ownership” regime would allow room for greater or lesser intellectual freedom, for a more or less libertarian educational system. It argues that serious socialism must be concerned with constitutional issues, and especially with issues of decentralization, on the one hand, and the protection of individuals against maladministration, on the other.

Property in the Kibbutz: Old and New

2018 ◽  
pp. 58-78
Author(s):  
Abraham Bell ◽  
Gideon Parchomovsky ◽  
Benjamin Weitz
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Unique Property ◽  
Free Market Economy ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
System P ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
Property Regime ◽  
Israeli Kibbutz

In this chapter, we discuss the unique property norms that emerged within the Israeli kibbutz and the challenges to which they gave rise. Originally, the prevailing property regime in kibbutzim reflected a deep commitment to socialist ideology. All property was owned by the collective and individual members only held licences or permits to use kibbutz property. With time, as Israeli society has moved towards a free market economy and following a series of financial crises, most kibbutzim have abandoned the strict ban on private property and have gradually gravitated towards a system of private property rights. This transition has given rise to intricate legal challenges. It forced kibbutzim to adopt a system of allocating private property rights to their members in assets and has required Israeli courts to grapple with unique property arrangements that existed solely within kibbutzim and effectuate them within the formal legal system.

Legitimation of Private Property in the Means of Production in Ukraine

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 64-87
Author(s):  
Volodymyr Reznik ◽  
Oleksandr Reznik
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
Psychological Adaptation ◽  
Social Recognition ◽  
Private Enterprises ◽  
Private Land ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Basic Hypothesis ◽  
Ideological Attitudes ◽  
Means Of Production

This article explores the sources of legitimacy of private property in the means of production in Ukraine. The conceptualization of legitimacy of private property was made by analyzing theoretical approaches to the study of the foundations of private property relations in Western countries. The application of these approaches tests economic utilitarian, psychological, and sociocultural explanations of legitimacy of large and small private enterprises and private land in the process of activation of post-communist transition of Ukrainian society. The basic hypothesis was that the process of legitimation of private property in the means of production proceeds by uniting utilitarian and psychological adaptation with sociocultural agreement of ideological attitudes. This hypothesis was verified with the help of created legitimacy indices by comparison of linear regressions and data of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) of Ukraine for 2013 and 2017. The results indicate that the hypothesis has been held true only concerning legitimacy of small private enterprises. They have acquired a moderate extent of legitimacy owing to the fact that besides the factors of adaptation, social recognition has increased at the expense of people who support the multiparty system and the liberal and mixed methods of regulation of the economy. In contrast, the existence of large private enterprises and private land has not acquired the corresponding sociocultural foundation.

LAND PLOT AS AN OBJECT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav Vovk
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Rich Country ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Land Plot ◽  
Government Supervision

Russia is a resource-rich country, and great changes are being made today in order that land and its resources are used for the benefit of any citizen of our state. Under the circumstances government supervision (control) over the optimal use of territories gets the essential role. The rights that are contained in land reform give owners, landowners, land users, and employers extensive powers concerning independent land management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document