PROPERTY AND HUMAN WELL BEING

 

The power to control a portion of the material objects is the very foundation of power and authority. Ownership of property is therefore a source of power and the realization of the human will, human ego and human desires. Human life involves the use of material resources and as such some form of property relations is a necessity for life.

 

All human societies face the problem of determining which of their resources available for use are to be used, and by whom, when, and under what conditions. Controversy over resource use persists in almost every society because resources are limited in terms of peoples' insatiable demand for them.

 

Given that all human beings at birth inherit the physical basis of life, it could be argued that EASY ACCESS TO and CONTROL OF material resources establishes the basis of inequality between people, men and women, the rich and poor and the weak and strong.

 

Liberal Concept of Property.

 

The liberal school of thought equates property to private property and describes it as a natural right of every human being that no government or state may interfere beyond what is necessary to maintain the institution itself (Locke, Honore).

 

Private property is often described in terms of “the inalienable and exclusive right of individuals to exclude others from the use or benefit of some material resources”. Individual rights to property include the right to possess, use and manage, derive income and capital, to security against appropriation and to sell or bequest some material resource to another person or group of persons. It is argued that private property is essential to the full development of the individual.

 

Public Interest Concepts Of Property.

 

The public interest theories separate a property right (a person's right to rule over things) from a personal right (an individual's right to liberty) and make attempts to achieve both for the individual through the collective effort of society.

 

Common property systems are rights that guarantee that every individual cannot be excluded form the use or benefit of a resource. Common property regimes consist of well-defined groups of authorized users, rules and institutional arrangements that define and establish the use of things. The authorized users have the right to exclude non-members and exercise both rights and duties in regard to the "common resources" No individual is specially privileged in terms access to any resource.

 

Even though the right to use material resources in a common property system lie in the public domain, the system fairly remains a private property in that every individual member has an enforceable claim to the use of some resources.

 

In a State property system the state or its agency, creates and keeps the rights to property in the interest of individual members of society. In a collective property system, the problem of allocation is resolved by a social rule that recognizes the use of material resources to be determined by the collective interest of society as a whole

 

DEFINING PROPERTY: the problems

 

In common usage property refers to MATERIAL THINGS but in law, property refers to RIGHTS, rights in or to things. When we offer a house for sale, we only offer the LEGAL TITLE, which is the exclusive right to the house we are selling.

 

What distinguishes PROPERTY from mere physical or material possessions is that property is a claim that is recognized by all members of the society and enforced by the state. Private property is a right which is vested in individuals, and as such it requires the recognition and protection of all members of the society for its existence. Property as an “enforceable claim” then implies that property is a political relation between persons.

 

The claim by an individual without the consent of the whole group of people alone is not enough to establish the private ownership of a property.

 

What is Private Property?

 

Property is not a thing but the title to such a thing; the enforceable right contained in the title that constitutes property. As a right, property assumes a definition involving not only rights and privileges, but also a complex bundle of relations, duties and obligations as well. A right to some material object becomes a relationship between one or more individuals whose consent is necessary for the establishment of that right. Even though the right to property is an individual claim to material objects, it is a claim enforced by society and as such property is created by society.

 

JUSTIFICATIONS FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY

 

Why is there a need for Justifying Property?

 

This is because the enforceability that makes resource a LEGAL right, itself depends upon a society’s belief that it is a MORAL right. The legal right must therefore be grounded in a public belief that it is morally right. The production of wealth is co-operative but consumption of goods is necessarily separate and individualistic. It is important to encourage individuals’ originality and invention. Giving to certain individuals the power to direct and organize the work of others is essential.

 

1) Economic Justification of Private Property Rights.

 

The classical liberal view is that private property is a necessary condition for the generation of wealth and therefore essential for operation of the capitalist economy. Initiated by Hume and expanded by Bentham, the economic justification influenced the development of Neo-classical theories of economic development and currently forms the basis of the Economic views of Conservative Politicians.

 

The concept assumes that individual rational members of society are prompted by self-interest and as such enter into production to make profit. In a free market therefore, rational individuals compete so that in the end productivity is maximized and resources are allocated to where they would be utilized with maximum efficiency. If the market is to operate fully and freely to locate labor and resources efficiently, then all resources need to be Privately Owned and Managed by individual self-seekers.

 

Misgivings:

 

Ø      The expansion in production and consumption of goods in parts of the world has not totally resulted from the institution of private property regimes.

Ø      The market system is not efficient in either allocating resources or distributing the benefits of production.

Ø      A law that merely protects people in their possessions but does nothing to regulate acquisition and distribution of wealth could be of little use.

Ø      Private ownership of property does not always lead to higher productivity or efficient allocation of resources.

Ø      Private individuals, motivated by self-interest are often eager to sacrifice social interest for immediate profits. They generally refrain from investing in projects that bring great benefits to the society as a whole.

Ø      The elimination of an unsuccessful competitor from the market, even though a gain for the business community, represents a great loss to the society in terms of reduced output, higher price and a waste of capital

Ø      The growth of corporations with huge capital has increased the chances of market monopoly under which the individual (or a corporation) uses unfair means to own property.

 

2) Labor Justification for Private Property Rights

 

Private property is sometimes justified on the grounds that an individual is entitled to what get produced under his initiative, intelligence, and general effort. Locke was one of the early writers who argued for the labour theory of property acquisition. Locke was of the opinion that it is only when the individual appropriates what nature has given in common that the raw stuff of nature becomes useful. Accordingly, labor puts a distinction between what exists in common for common use and what an individual comes to own so that by using one's labor to remove bits of the common resources that nature provides for all, one fixes his or her rights in those things.

 

Misgivings:

 

Ø      Under the bonds of social interdependence characteristic of modern society, no individual member of society can justly claim that his or her wealth is entirely created by unaided effort of other people.

Ø      To argue that a person has the right to all that his labor produces means that other people are under a moral obligation to let him enjoy all that his labor produces even if it brings disastrous consequences to society.

Ø      Reliance on the market system to induce the allocation of resources including the labor of others deprives workers the right to alienate their labor

Ø      People who do not have access to capital or land loose the product of their labor. Even those who sell their labor to others for a wage in a modern industry loose a substantial part of the product of their labor and the possibility of owning what they have mixed their labor with.

Ø      A person’s right to the fruits of his labor involves the negation of that right in the non-inheritors of the property.

Ø      The practise of bequeathing property to heirs who have done little about the property cannot be justified under the labor theory of property.

Ø      Locke’s theory of labor only worked out for Americans as typical instances of people who live under conditions where land is abundant. In a modern day society, people have to agree to a disproportionate and unequal possession of the earth under this labor theory

 

3) First Occupancy as a Basis for Private Property.

 

The first occupant of the property acquires a sacred right to the ownership of it for all eternity.  Kant believed that a first occupant brings out distinctiveness that introduces value into the property. The first occupancy defence was cited by the Greeks and Romans and provided part of the moral justification for the European conquest of the Americas, Africa and other former colonized states of the world.

 

Misgivings:

 

Ø            More wealth has been accumulated by conquest, through the labor of many individuals and by several forms of manipulation and coercion than by first occupancy.

Ø            With the first occupancy argument, appropriation becomes exploitation and the right of all to appropriate becomes the right of the powerful few to appropriate and exclude the original inhabitants.

 

4) Personal Liberty argument for Private Property.

 

Under this theory, private property is regarded as essential for the creation and protection of the inalienable rights of every individual. Philosophers including Kant argued for the rights of the individual against the state, and Hegel saw private property rights as the individual's way of objectifying himself or herself and realizing external freedom. In a society where material well-being is highly valued, the power to control part of the materials from which the well-being is derived forms the foundation of individual happiness.

 

Misgivings:

 

Ø            An individual's exercise of a right impinges upon the right of others.

Ø            Domination over material things is also domination over fellow human beings. Owners of capital and land have the right to make economic decisions for others in the society. 

Ø            Individual property rights in a market economy resemble a privilege and not a right. A right calls for a corresponding duty so it is only under a privilege that an individual may have an exclusive right to a property.

 

Theories and Economic Systems

 

Ø            Liberal Theorists defend private property (CAPITALISM)

Ø            Socialist Theorists argue for some form of state or collective property regime (SOCIALISM),

Ø            Liberal Democratic Theorists argue for a modified form of private property system (WELFARE STATE) in which government intervenes in the allocation of material resources to secure some self-sufficiency for the weak, unemployed and underprivileged members of society.