The idea of private property, I believe has severely limited
our personal freedoms. That being said I also believe that the institution of
private property is entirely necessary for a modern society to exist. A modern
society must construct boundaries of what is and is not owned in order to curb
conflict over resources. Primitive societies, such as the Native American’s did
not have the concept of private property as we do today because they did not
need it. Their villages or clans were small enough that in order to survive
they needed to share what resources they had. Once a group of people had begun an agrarian
lifestyle, there becomes a need for private property as the resources need to
be designated to person who grew them. I feel that in this process wealth
begins to be created then power obtained. One person (or a small group) begins
to have much more than everyone else and things are needed to trade for that
grain. Before the agrarian lifestyle anyone who wanted food simply needed to go
forage it. However, because agrarian life can support so many more people there
becomes less resources for people to go forage and the person controlling the
harvested resource becomes very powerful. He can begin to dictate what is owned
by who and what the laws are.
In modern America
absolutely everything is owned. More than it just being owned it is constantly
for sale. If you have little or no money in America you have very little
freedoms. What do you do with your time with no money? You could go for a walk
in a publicly owned park, but you couldn’t use the resources for yourself. You
can purchase the rights to hunt for game, but you cannot hunt enough to feed
yourself and certainly not sustain a family. If you could afford your own
private property you could grow your own food. John Locke said that property (only
in the form of land I surmise) owned by anyone who “improved upon” it.
Therefore, according to Locke in his work, “On Property” anyone could own land
if they simply went into an area and built a house or farm. This work was the
backbone for the Homestead act of 1862
In conclusion, I feel that the lack of property is more
condusive to the happiness of a society that is hunter gather or perhaps even
animal husbandry, but once the agrarian lifestyle is introduced it forms new
problems pertaining to wealth that eventually will make that groups denizens
unhappy.
Is there something about the experience of ownership that drives us to lust constantly for MORE, I wonder, or is that a social construct that we've learned and could un-learn? A world without private property may be unthinkable now, but a more equitable balance between private and public goods seems entirely within reach. The push for green space and walkable cities is an example. But you're right, $ still makes the world go 'round - especially in the imaginations of Americans without it, how else account for Drumpf's appeal?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI can remember reading about Lewis and Clark's expedition and their meeting the Mandan Native Americans. I was surprised by the number of people in their villages. It made me wonder how they functioned as a society, how they kept order, took care of each other, whether they went for walks and contemplated the meaning of life? Did they think about what the future held and whether life would be better and easier for their children? How were women treated? Their private property was their tents and belongings, but the land was free except who decided which space could be occupied by whom?
ReplyDeleteHere's a link about the Mandans. https://www.nps.gov/knri/learn/historyculture/mandan.htm