Property theories
Property theories are systematic attempts to explain the emergence and justification of the social institution of property .
The right to personal belongings is usually not called into question. However, there are controversial positions with regard to the ownership of land and, since industrialization , the ownership of the means of production . The question of whether and to what extent ownership arises from social responsibility is often discussed under the heading of “ social responsibility of property ” . Theories of property are therefore often part of political philosophy , especially of state theories . With the differentiation of the sciences since the 19th century, independent perspectives have developed in economics , political science and sociology .
Property is at the same time an object of theological social ethics , the science of history or social anthropology . As a legal term, property is subject to both private and public law .
Systematics
Depending on the point of view, the authors of property theories orient themselves more towards the economic community , the political structures of a society or the cultural traditions ( religion , ethics , law ). One can often distinguish theories of property according to whether they are individualistic or collectivistic . Some theories assume that by nature , or in prehistory and early history , there was no private property. It is further asserted that individual property ( private property ) is the main cause of wars and other violent conflicts. Among the collectivist property teachings include various utopias of Plato's Politeia about the traditions of the founder of Stoicism Zeno of Kition , Thomas Morus ' Utopia up to the sunshine state of Tommaso Campanella rich. With industrialization , anarchist or socialist models of society emerged in the modern age , especially those of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Karl Marx , which criticized above all the ownership of the means of production and the unequal distribution of goods . In addition to the protagonists of actually existing socialism , religious groups such as some Anabaptist groups such as the Hutterites , the Jesuits in Paraguay , Shaking Quakers or the kibbutz movement tried to put these ideas into practice.
Most authors of property theories assume a right to private property. This is based either on a practical agreement, as with Aristotle , Thomas Aquinas , David Hume and the advocates of the theory of rights of disposal, or on a natural law , as for example with Samuel von Pufendorf and Hugo Grotius , on the human right , as John Locke assumed or after Immanuel Kant on the law of reason . Concepts of property are often linked to theories of social contract and constitutional law. After the establishment of a legitimate origin of property, one differentiates between the following theories:
- original occupation
- Primary acquisition takes place through the appropriation of abandoned objects (compare original property acquisition and occupation economy ). All other acts are derived acquisition ( exchange , purchase , inheritance , robbery ).
- Acquisition through work
- The real value of natural resources is low. The creation of the value of a good is connected with the work that is put into changing and using the good. So the right to property is given to those who invest their labor in an object.
- Legalization of existing conditions in the state
- Ownership claims have developed historically in social practice. The institution of property serves to create security, includes the recognition of existing structures and regulates the transfer processes.
The occupation theory is historically the oldest conception that can be traced back to antiquity . Its disadvantage is that it is politically largely neutral and can be used both for the establishment of a liberal state and for an absolutist rule and for an order following the community principle. For this reason, John Locke drafted the concept of labor theory , because on its basis an interference by the state in individual rights could no longer be justified. This theory prevailed in the Enlightenment and became a dominant paradigm into the modern age. Only recently did a pragmatic view, as in Hume's work , and the Kantian “law of reason” gain importance. In contemporary literature, Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld and Tony Honoré 's view of property as a “bundle” of rights and duties in a democratic constitutional state is increasing . It comprises different components depending on the author, for example:
- "The right to own ( English right to possess ) - the only physical control over a thing. If the thing is incorporeal, possession can also be understood metaphorically ;
- The right to use ( English right to use ) - the personal use of the thing in the narrower sense, ie excluding points three and four;
- The administrative right ( English right to manage ) - the right to determine the use of the property, eg by way of the granting of a license ;
- The right to the income from the use of property ( English right to the income );
- The right of the consumption or the destruction ( English right to consume or destroy );
- The right to modify or change the property ( English right to modify );
- The right of disposal ( English right to alienate ) - transfer "inter vivos" or Dereliktion ;
- The right to security ( English right to security ) - protection against expropriation ;
- The right of inheritance ( English incident of transmissibility );
- The absence of time barriers ( English incident of absence of term );
- The prohibition of (deliberately) harmful use ( English prohibition of harmful use );
- The seizure ( English liability to execution ) - the realization of the property by way of foreclosure ;
- The other, supplementary provisions ( English residuary character ) - there are those standards that have expired or abandoned property rights to the reversion of (temporary) rules (provisions on the legal succession, the adverse possession , the whereabouts of the discontinued property and the like.. ). "
The task of a property system is to determine which of the elements come into play and to what extent, who may be the owner (only natural or legal persons ) and what should be considered property (personal property, means of production, intellectual property , yes or no).
In many constitutions of the modern age, the protection of property is treated as a fundamental right , i. H. the constitution contains the protection of property as a principle, without determining its content. The material content of the rights and obligations associated with property as well as the limits of property use is left to the determination in the individual laws. This also includes determining the extent of the social liability of property .
Such a constitutional regulation enables the content of the concept of property to be updated within laws according to changed social conditions and values , without having to intervene in the constitutional principle as such. Characteristics of property are not only the assignment of an object to a person and the arbitrary power of disposal, but also the demarcation of the respective property system. “When speaking of the content of property, it is based on the idea that the legal system stipulates the extent to which the owner must allow interference with his rights, that is, property only takes shape through the interference norms. Only these constitute property as a legal entity. "
history
When considering the theories of property in history, the economic, legal and political framework conditions of the time are important. The authors had a certain worldview or social model in mind and usually wanted not only to explain and justify the phenomenon of property, but also intended to create an ideal image within the framework of more tense political theories and to influence social development.
Antiquity
The traditional reflection on the meaning of property begins with the works of Plato and Aristotle in ancient Greece . Society at that time was still predominantly organized on an agricultural basis. Even in the polis of Athens the people were more involved in agriculture than three quarters. Society was dominated by the nobility and large landowners , even if the reforms of Kleisthenes had enabled the citizens to participate in the decisions of the polis. The family households ( oikos ) were the social and economic core . This household also included slaves who were bought or who had come to Athens in the course of colonization. The debt slavery was by the laws of Solon abolished. In the Oikos everything was subordinate to the householder, who exercised the rights of the owner over the entire property , wife, children and slaves, but was also responsible for their well-being. A special feature was the social order in Sparta , where property was allocated by lot and was inalienable. Instead of gold and silver, iron was used as money , and there were communal meals for the Spartians ( Syssitia ).
The ancient Greek philosophers were strongly anchored in the community of all free citizens within the polis. This and the idea of integrating people into a harmoniously ordered cosmos was what they oriented their thinking about the good life . The modern, freedom-oriented perspective of individualism was alien to them. While the sophists and Socrates were still actively involved in political discourse, Plato and Aristotle concentrated on teaching and developing their theories. With Plato the question of the right order in the community was in the foreground, which he answered with the concept of an ideal state . The role of the individual was hardly important. The constitution of property is tied to the structure of the social order. Justice comes from doing right . Aristotle was more skeptical about educability. He tried to develop right structures and rules from the given, which should become generally binding. Property is therefore a question of the purposeful, reason-based human thought and action.
The philosophy that followed in Hellenism was influenced by the great empires of Alexander and Rome . Even if the cities remained largely unaffected in their internal administration, the socially and politically significant environment became much larger and more complex. There was no longer any direct influence of the philosophical schools on politics. The Stoa accordingly concentrated on the personal attitude of the individual, to whom it advised a cosmopolitan attitude to life guided by reason and serenity . In the Roman Republic, legal issues came to the fore when it came to the regulation of property.
Plato
Plato's examination of property in the Politeia does not refer to the actually existing society, but is the blueprint for a just , successful state called utopia as an analogy to the just, happiness-oriented soul - i.e. an alternative to the real conditions. In this ideal state, every adult person occupies the appropriate position. So there is the subsistence level of the craftsmen and farmers who also have property in this state. The guards (armed forces) ensure the cohesion of the state. They have no property because the pursuit of property does not serve the community. Rather, the guards get their livelihood from society, and in return their entire area of life, including their home, is accessible to the public. Even the philosophers (apprenticeship), who are suitable for Plato after education and training to lead the state, remain without property. In his late work, the Nomoi , Plato dealt with the question of what the state order of a colony that was yet to be founded should look like. Here he deviated from his ideal and envisaged a distribution of the property. This is, however, even, and the land cannot be sold, it can only be inherited or transferred to someone who does not own land.
Aristotle
Similar to Plato, for his student Aristotle the goal of human life was good , not wealth, which is only a means to achieve this goal. Aristotle rejected the acquisition of wealth for its own sake, the art of making money ( chrematistics ). The institute of property does not come from the natural order, but is the result of human reason . Ownership was not required in the original oikos. Only when the population grew to specialize, did the exchange between households arise. In village communities and in the polis, individual property is preferable to communal property, because personal property results in greater care for property. Second, private property corresponds to the principle of performance. Furthermore, ownership clearly regulates responsibilities so that disputes can be avoided. Personal property is for enjoyment in the community and is a prerequisite for the virtue of freedom of movement. Common ownership therefore only makes sense where it is used jointly and requires joint financing.
Roman Empire
The earliest codification of law in ancient Rome was the Twelve Tables Law , which had the purpose of regulating the conflicts between the landowning patricians and the plebeians . Purchase contracts were regulated here in a very formalized way as libral files . As in Greece, Roman society was organized in households ( dominion : property, right of possession). The landlord, the Pater familias , was the unrestricted owner. Adult sons were also not legally competent if they lived in their father's house, even if they were married and had children. The pater familias was even able to sell his children into slavery. He could inherit his property without restriction by will. If there was no will, the succession was in the male line.
There was no formal definition of property in Roman law, but there were various forms of property. In addition to the domination related to the household, a distinction was made between property linked to the person, the proprietas. Furthermore, there was a right of participation (ius in realiene) that allowed certain uses. A distinction from property was possession (possessio). In principle, property was absolute in terms of having, possession, use and fruiting (habere possidere uti frui licere) and also unlimited in the air and underground (usque ad coelum et inferos). From the description “meum esse aio” (I claim that it is mine) it can be deduced from practice that the definition in § 903 sentence 1 BGB largely corresponds to the content provision at the time of Cicero .
Cicero dealt with the establishment of property. For him, private property originally arises through occupation :
- “But there is no private property through nature, but either through earlier occupation (as with those who once came to unoccupied areas) or through victory (as with those who seized it in war) or through law, agreement, contract or go ”.
The Romans regarded the land of the conquered provinces as the property of the Roman people and thus established the right to a land tax ( tribute ). The Romans already knew of an immission ban (see § 906 BGB), i. H. someone could not use his property arbitrarily if he thereby impaired the property of others, e.g. B. by drainage ditches, the water of which drained on unfamiliar ground.
In the philosophy school of the Stoa , a reason-oriented, measured life was emphasized. External values are of secondary importance for a meaningful life . Wealth was not regarded as a suitable measure of the importance and dignity of a person, which are of the same nature regardless of class and origin. Seneca clearly described this attitude:
- “No one else is worthy of God than someone who despises wealth. I do not forbid you to own it, but I want to make sure that you own it without trembling: You can achieve that in one single way, if you are convinced that you can live without it, if you always regard it as almost disappearing. "
Above all, wealth arises from greed and is the cause of some evils.
Patristic
In the early church in Jerusalem , according to Acts 2 and 4, property was given up in favor of a community of property . However, when the near expectation of the Christian return did not come true, property arose again in the early Christian communities. However, a new view of property developed in patristicism through the spread of Christian-Jewish ideas, according to which natural law is to be equated with divine law. In the Old Testament the land is handed over to man for administration - but it remains the property of God. For the church fathers like Clement of Alexandria , the question of the correct use of property, taken from the Stoa , was in the foreground. Critical to the ownership of land expressed as Laktanz . Basil of Caesarea , John Chrysostom or Ambrose of Milan emphasized that wealth stands in contrast to the fact that earthly goods are given to all people in the same way. Basil shaped the image of a seat in the theater. This is a common good, even if someone who has just taken possession of it calls it his own. On the other hand, the commandment to give to those in need implies that property exists at all. As a consequence, many church fathers demanded that property that goes beyond their own needs be passed on to the poor. According to Pauline teaching, the rich in the community have a duty of care towards the poor. ( "One carries the burden of the other" , Gal. 6, 2)
middle Ages
Among the Teutons , the status of the fortified farmers and the institute of the commons had developed. This structure was replaced in the early Middle Ages at the time of the Carolingian Empire by the formation of the knighthood , through which central rule could be better secured. The medieval ownership structure was shaped by manorial lords , which existed either as fiefdoms (right of use granted by the sovereign) or less widespread as allodies (inheritable property). Property in the cities, but also the sometimes very large property of the monasteries, was mostly property (allod). Agriculture was usually self-sufficient. There were free and unfree peasants. The bulk of the people lived as servants or day laborers . There was the form of bondage linked to the person as serfdom and the basic bondage linked to the ground. While in Italy the cities gained a counterweight to the landowners early on, urban structures only gradually emerged north of the Alps. Trade and market law developed in the cities, and fairs , merchants' guilds and craftsmen's guilds came into being in Flanders . A high point in the High Middle Ages was the founding of the Hanseatic League .
Property was or is often identified by so-called house brands , for example coats of arms and brands . The boundary stones dating back to the Hermes cult are used to mark real estate . William the Conqueror introduced what is probably the first land register for land in England in 1086 , the Domesday Book . Independently of this, the medieval German cities kept city registers , forerunners of today's land registers.
The revival of Roman law was of particular importance for legal history in the Middle Ages, initiated by research by lawyers at universities, above all at the University of Bologna . This also had an influence on the canonical church law represented by the decretists , which was systematically summarized in the Decretum Gratiani . In the 14th century, a definition of property that corresponds to the modern understanding is found for the first time. For the Italian lawyer Bartolus , property was "the right to fully dispose of a physical thing (land or movable property), unless a law forbids it."
Due to the diverse performance obligations in the inconsistent feudal system, the concept of land ownership in the Middle Ages can hardly be compared with the modern understanding of the term. Fiefdoms had the upper property (dominium directum) and received a basic rent in kind, services or money, but had to let their farmers and tenants do it if they fulfilled their duties. The tenants as owners had sub-property or usable property (dominium utile) and found legal protection through so-called trades . The legal relationship originally consisted of the personal relationship between masters and dependents. It was only gradually replaced by the right bound to the thing with (hereditary) possession, use and burdens. There were shared ownership as the modern leasehold similar right to use the emphyteusis , the separation of ownership of the building and on the ground ( Superficies ) or borrowing from country ( precarium ). Intangible property existed in the form of rights (" righteous ") such as the sovereignty of the courts and regalia . The first corporations ( Societas Maris in the 13th century and Karat-Gesellschaft in the 15th century) emerged in Genoa , in which ownership in the form of shares was no longer geared towards the disposal of the property, but towards the income (similar to the basic rent) . The legal protection of the property was u. a. expanded by the " embarrassing neck court order " of Charles V , with which, above all, legal certainty in criminal law was strengthened.
The great thinkers of the Middle Ages were primarily theologians who dealt with the relationship between faith and the world. They were all trained through church education and members of religious orders who did not know an individual wealth, in some cases even rejected it. Beginning with the investiture dispute , the Middle Ages were shaped by the conflict over supremacy between secular rulers and the church. The discovery of the Aristotelian scriptures in the western world had a great influence on thought. Above all, the Dominicans around Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas tried to integrate these into the church's teachings. The determination of the relationship between faith and reason led to intensive discussions about the interpretation of divine law, natural law and civil law, a subdivision that was already known in the Stoa (lex aeterna, lex naturalis and lex humana). The Franciscans, more oriented towards Augustine , with Duns Scotus and Ockham as outstanding representatives, were more skeptical of the idea of integration . They emphasized the different spheres of faith (theology) and knowledge (philosophy) that must be brought into the right relationship. The shaping of positive law and thus of property rights became more of a political task for them. All parties agreed, however, on the Christian imperative of social responsibility for property and called for generosity towards the poor. In the late Spanish Scholastic period, the Salamanca School dealt particularly with questions relating to the flourishing economy at the time. In the property question, she refined the teachings of Thomas, took into account the criticism of Duns Scotus and above all linked the idea of the first acquisition with the idea of the social contract.
Thomas Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas did not develop his own theory of property, but dealt with the subject in his Summa Theologica in the context of the question of law and justice . He took a mediating position between the teaching of Aristotle and the conceptions of patristicism. Accordingly, property is not to be justified by natural law :
- “Everything that is against natural law is prohibited. But according to natural law all things are common property; but this commonality contradicts own ownership. So man is not allowed to acquire an external thing. "
However, property is still permissible based on the law of reason :
- "That is why own possession is not against natural law, but is added to natural law on the basis of the discovery by human reason."
Thomas named three reasons of reason for property that can already be found in Aristotle: On the one hand, property leads to greater care for things. Second, ownership clearly regulates responsibilities. And finally, a property system ensures legal security. Since property is divine according to natural law, earthly property is committed to the common good. and there is a strict duty to give alms. Human need takes precedence over property rights.
Ockham
An important step in the development of the conception of property is the teaching of Wilhelm von Ockham , who defined as property what can be sued in court. The biblical authority to use things establishes an individual right to create property that is protected from unauthorized access. Property is acquired through the subjective decision of the person. It is thus detached from divine natural law, which man can only recognize within the framework of his limited reason, and is based on agreement. The legitimation of property does not come from natural law, but from positive international law (ius communis). The only natural right that Ockham recognizes is the right to preserve oneself. From this arises the claim of the poor to receive at least as much from the rich as they need to live. Natural law also means that all people are free, even if international law permits slavery. Especially with regard to slaves and the position of women, he opposes the tradition since Aristotle, which was still represented by Thomas Aquinas.
Spanish late scholasticism
.jpg)
As a bridge between the Middle Ages and modern times, considerations about property of the Spanish late scholasticism , especially the school of Salamanca , played an important role. Their representatives were in the tradition of Thomas Aquinas, whose teachings they further developed, especially in questions of economics. Francisco de Vitoria stated in a comment on Thomas that property is based neither on divine nor on natural law, but on human law. According to Vitoria, private property serves to implement the natural law requirement to live in peace. Therefore private property is an implementation of natural law, even if it cannot be derived directly from it. With this thesis he wanted to resolve a contradiction in Thomas' thinking, in which the earth was given to humans by nature as common property, while on the other hand reason suggests the expediency of private property. From Duns Scotus , Vitoria took the idea of the social contract and linked it to the question of property by starting from an initial (not explicit) partition contract by which people had agreed on the principle of private property through occupation.
Similar to Vitoria, Luis de Molina also argued that private property does not contradict common property under natural law. It can be agreed voluntarily, it is not necessary. Accordingly, Molina classified the initial occupation as an unnecessary agreement. After that, private property can also be abolished again by agreement. Property regulations are subject to human disposition. Joseph Höffner emphasized the importance of the Spanish late scholasticism for the modern age in 1947: “With the deeper understanding of the Spanish scholastics, it will become increasingly clear that they were the most important source for Hugo Grotius , and that Grotius even derived not a few of his system-forming thoughts from them has scooped. The fame of Grotius is largely due to the disappearance of the Spanish scholastics. "
Early modern age
The growth of cities that began in the late Middle Ages, the increasing number of universities being founded, the invention of printing , the discovery of America , the Renaissance and humanism characterize structural changes in society at the beginning of the early modern period . Thought became more secular , the Church resisted with the Inquisition , but had to accept its loss of power through the Reformation , the development of the natural sciences and the formation of the nation states. The dominant form of rule in the 17th and 18th centuries was absolutism . The subsistence economy began to disintegrate. The structures of feudalism were gradually softened by city rights , village regulations and the transfer of jurisdiction to the parishes. In rural areas, groups of resettlers such as heuerlings or Kötter and Bödner emerged . The economy became more complex with pre-industrial modes of production such as home work and first manufactories and an expanding market economy . The differentiation of natural law led to a more individual legal understanding of property. The transition to mercantilism and physiocratism developed . During this time, intellectual property emerged as a new form of property, initially as privileges , then also protected by patent law (Venice 1474, Great Britain 1623, France 1790). The mountain orders of the 15th and 16th centuries also fall under the scope of privileges . The questions copyright were first settled in the 18th century.
Criticism of property in 17th century England can be found among the Levellers , who advocated greater equality in parliament. Even more radical were the Diggers with their leader Gerrard Winstanley , who tried to establish a Christian form of early communism in the country.
With the secularization of the early modern period there is an effort to base the arguments solely on reason. An important impulse came from Hugo Grotius , who tried to systematize his legal doctrine according to the “mathematical method”, drawing on the various legal traditions of canon law and Roman and Germanic law . Other important thinkers in this line were Samuel von Pufendorf , whose textbook was regarded as a basic work up to the time of Kant, and the school educator Christian Wolff , for whom property formed the basis of the system of natural law, on which contract law, family law and building up domestic law, constitutional law and international law. For the natural rights activists, the acquisition of property through occupation was still a matter of course. Their aim was to use systematic legal principles to achieve greater legal certainty and thus greater independence of law from the church as well as from the arbitrary setting of positive law by the absolutist rulers.
In contrast, the political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes , for whom the law was an instrument to limit people's striving for power, is without recourse to tradition and consistently rationalistic . From personal experience, peace and security were more important to him than freedom and justice. He did not recognize an over-positive right . The limits drawn by Hobbes by absolutism were increasingly repressed by the claim to individual rights in the course of the Enlightenment. With John Locke there is a strong subjectivation of natural law (live, liberty & property as human rights). With his theory of the creation of property from work, directed against absolutist claims, as formulated by Robert Filmer , he took into account the fact that on the one hand land was distributed and recorded in cadastres and on the other hand the bourgeoisie, like himself, built property through successful economic activity . Accordingly, Thomas Paine pointed out critically that the inherited privileges of the nobility and the royal family were based on original violence. The orientation of property to the common good no longer played a role with Hobbes, and hardly with Locke. Rousseau is quite different, who made the right to private property dependent on the service of the common good and on the general will. In this contrast between Locke and Rousseau, the modern conceptions of property are reflected: the greatest possible freedom of ownership as the predominant dogma in the USA, limitation of property rights through social obligations in continental Europe. In the Scottish school, on the other hand, especially with David Hume and Adam Smith , the question of the usefulness of property was in the foreground. They renounced an idealizing justification through natural law and thus became forerunners of utilitarianism and masterminds of a market economy . A further strengthening of the subjective perspective can be found in Immanuel Kant , for whom personal freedom is expressed in property as external mine and yours. Locke's labor theory of property, which he had drafted as an argument against interference by an absolutist government, met with major criticism from Kant. For the latter, the organization of property rights was solely a question of a reasonable republican order.
reformation
_workshop_-_Martin_Luther_(Uffizi).jpg)
Martin Luther , who particularly emphasized the importance of the Bible as a basis (sola scriptura), concluded from the commandment “You shall not steal” that property is a fundamental part of Christian life. Those who have nothing cannot give anything to the poor either. At the same time, however, he emphasizes that nobody should hang his heart on property.
- “Your goods are not yours; you are a conductor, set about distributing them to those who need it. "
True faith breaks away from worldly things.
- "Yes, there must be a great fervor and fiery love that burns so that man can let go of everything, house and farm, wife, child, honor and property, body and life, yes, despise and trample on that he only keeps the treasure, which he does not see and is despised in the world, but is carried forward only in the mere word and believed with the heart. "
What one has should be enjoyed as God's gift.
- "Oh yes, that would truly be a fine life, eat and drink what God bestows, until [be] happy with your wife, just don't let it go as if that were your consolation."
Luther was also a sharp critic of the abuse of property by usury .
John Calvin made a stronger distinction than Luther between divine laws and secular rule, which are "two completely different things". The connection is made through faith. Through conscience man is so overwhelmed by the “power of truth that he cannot help but affirm the legal principles of what is just and just.” The earthly area of law is based on natural law, according to which the rights to life and property are inviolable . Calvin also saw a justification in the eighth commandment, which requires that the property (suum cuique) of the other be left untouched. What is special about Calvin's teaching is the teaching of predestination . Through a godly life, man can obtain the grace of God. The expression of such a life is the worldly success achieved with a sense of duty and work. In his work The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism in the Early 20th Century, Max Weber derived the thesis that the pursuit of profit and capitalism were promoted in a special way from this attitude .
.jpg)
Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes , who philosophically supported absolutism , advocated the thesis in the Leviathan that as a result of the war everyone against everyone in the original state “there is neither property nor rule, nor a certain mine and yours, but that everyone only owns what they gain can, and for as long as he can claim. ”A strong ruler is required to enforce property and justice, which for Hobbes are primarily expressed in legal certainty and freedom of contract . Such a position arises in the Hobbesian social contract , in which the individual transfers his or her freedom rights to a central, all-powerful ruler. As the absolute ruler, he lays down laws and enforces them. The legal positivism , which was still limited by the ability to know the reason in Occam, becomes the sole scale. No one other than the sovereign can restrict the right of the owner . But the citizen has no right to prevent him from doing so. Hobbes' idea of the original state as a thought model and the social contract resulting from it signifies a revolution in legal and political philosophical thinking that influences the discussion up to the present day.
Grotius
For Hugo Grotius , natural law meant that man can recognize the commandments of God, the creator of nature, with the help of “right reason” (rectae rationis). Therefore there are legal rules with all civilized peoples. The right to one's own person is innate , while property is an acquired right. Grotius assumed an original condition with community of property, which dissolved because people no longer lived on the basis of charity . The state was formed through a contract that could also be concluded tacitly.
- “[T] he society has the purpose of using common forces and working together to preserve everyone's own (ut suum cuique salvum sit). Obviously, this would also take place if property (dominium), as we now understand it, were not introduced. Because life, limbs and freedom (vita, membra, libertas) would then also belong to everyone, so that they cannot be attacked by another without unjustly. Likewise, the right of the owner would be (ius (...) esset occupantis) to use the things at hand. "
Grotius stood in the tradition of the theory of occupation, based, like Hobbes, on the idea of the social contract, but equated property with the right of the person to freedom and life. With Grotius, political philosophy was still compatible with absolutism as long as the ruler observed and upheld the rights attached to the person.
Curl
After the Civil War and the Glorious Revolution (1688), the bourgeoisie in England, despite setbacks, had grown so strong that it was able to enforce the sovereignty of Parliament against the king with the Bill of Rights . The two treatises on the government of John Locke form a pamphlet against the power of the king in favor of the bourgeoisie, written 1680–1682 and published anonymously only in 1690 for security reasons. According to Locke, God has given the world to human beings for common use and "also given them the reason to use it for the greatest advantage and convenience of their lives." (II § 23) Reason commands "that no one else, there everyone." are equal and independent, are supposed to damage one's life and property, one's health and freedom. ”(II § 6) Locke saw the position of property as a fundamental right in a similar way to Grotius or Samuel von Pufendorf . However, property does not arise from a contract, but is based solely on positive natural law.
In the justification of property, Locke went a completely new way with his theory of work. Man is by nature entitled to appropriate a part of nature for the purpose of self-preservation. This also results from the divine instruction to subdue the earth . He fulfills this commandment through work. By working on a natural good, man brings part of himself into the object. Natural goods have little value without work. In nature, water does not belong to anyone, but in a jug it has undoubtedly become property. (II § 29) The value of the land also arises largely through work. (II § 43) The acquisition of property, that is, the appropriation of nature finds its limits where man can no longer consume what nature has gained through work.
- “As much land a person plows, plants, tills, cultivates and as much of the yield he can utilize, that much is his property. Through his work he sets it apart from the common good. ”(II § 32) Contrary to what Marx interpreted later, Locke's labor theory assumes that a free man's own work can also be sold for a certain period of time for wages. (II § 85) This means that the worker becomes the property of another. (II § 28)
In a second step, Locke explained the creation of wealth. Decisive for this are the possibility of exchange and the institution of money. By exchanging the result of the work, for example apples for nuts, people get something less perishable. He is allowed to own this, even if he does not use it directly. This is especially true for non-perishable goods such as gold, silver and diamonds. (II, § 46) Through the money an agreement was reached between the people, according to which the property can be kept indefinitely. The protection of the property thus created has a fundamental function for the formation of the state:
- "The great and main goal, why people form a state and place themselves under a government, is the preservation of their property." (II § 124)
So property already exists before the formation of a state. Accordingly, the state treaty does not mean that the ruler can dispose of the property of his citizens at will.
In contrast to Hobbes, with Locke the natural rights to life, liberty and property bind state power. Interventions in property by the state always require the consent of the citizens. (II § 139) Locke explained the different wealth with different industriousness and different individual requirements of the people.
Locke's labor theory does not contain any justification of the social obligation of property as it was previously demanded by the church fathers, Thomas Aquinas or Grotius. It accommodated the liberal theorists of the subsequent period because economic growth harmonized with it in the developing market economy , while the occupation theory assumed a fixed stock of goods, but had no explanation for their increase and the resulting distribution issues.
Rousseau
.jpg)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau had a critical view of property, but considered it indispensable for freedom . The formation of property leads to the fact that the person leaves the original state.
- “The first one who fenced in a piece of land and said boldly: 'This is mine' and found such simple-minded people who believed that became the true founder of civil society. How many crimes, wars, murders, sufferings and horrors would one have spared the human race if he had torn out the stakes or filled the ditch and called out to his peers: 'Don't listen to this deceiver. You are all lost if you forget that the fruits belong to everyone and the earth to none. '”(Discourse, 173)
Rousseau characterized property as the cause of “unrestrained passions”: “Competition and rivalry on the one hand, conflict of interests on the other, and always the hidden desire to make one's profit at the expense of others: all these evils are the primary effects of property and the inseparable wake of emerging inequality ”. (Discourse, 209) On the other hand, he describes property as “the most sacred of all civil rights, in certain respects even more important than freedom itself [...] because property is the true foundation of human society and the true guarantor of the citizens' obligation. "
Due to the increasing industrialization and the effects of absolutism in France, Rousseau was confronted with a significantly greater inequality than before Locke, from whom he adopted some theoretical elements, but also clearly distanced himself from him. He diagnoses: “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains” (CS I 1) Rousseau, in contrast to Aquin or Grotius, for example, renounces a teleological “determination” of man through divine or natural law. The amalgamation through a social contract is based solely on the weighing of reason. As a free person, no one will agree to an order that takes away his freedom, as was still possible in the concepts of Hobbes and Grotius. The task is:
- "'Find a form of association that defends and protects the person and property of each individual member with all its common strength and through which everyone, by uniting himself with everyone, obeys only himself and remains just as free as before." That is the fundamental problem, the solution of which is the social contract "(CS I 6., p. 18)
Possession, which can only be secured through individual violence, becomes a right in the social contract that is limited, but which in the bourgeois state is free from the arbitrariness of others, i.e. civil freedom is only granted.
- “What man loses through the social contract is his natural freedom and an unlimited right to everything he longs for and what he can achieve; what he receives is civil liberty and ownership of all that he has. In order not to be mistaken in this balancing act, it is necessary to clearly distinguish natural freedom, which finds its limits only in the strength of the individual, from civil freedom, which is limited by the common will , and property, which is only one The consequence of the strength or the right of the first owner is that of property that can only be based on an explicit title. "(CS I 8)
Rousseau justifies the creation of property in a similar way to Locke on the basis of work: “Only the work that gives the farmer a right to the product of the field that he tilled gives him a right to the land, at least until the harvest, and so from year to year - which, since it creates uninterrupted possession, easily turns into property. ”(Discourse, 203) Property is therefore not an original, but an acquired object. The original owner is the community, which only allows the citizen to own it. (CS I 9, pp. 23-24) This requires a justification:
- “In order to justify the right of first ownership of any piece of land, the following conditions are generally required: First, that this area has not yet been inhabited by anyone; second, that one only takes as much property as one needs to subsist ; and thirdly, that one does not take possession of it through an empty ceremony, but through work and cultivation , the only property that must be respected by others in the absence of legal titles. "(CS, III 369, I 9)
In the republican state of Rousseau, civil liberty is limited by the common good. Correspondingly, a democratic decision can intervene in the distribution of income and progressive taxes can create greater distributive justice .
- “He who only has what is simply necessary does not have to contribute anything; the taxation of those who have superfluous things can, in an emergency, go up to the sum of what exceeds what is necessary for them "
Paine
The book "Common Sense" by Thomas Paine from 1776 contributed significantly to the American independence movement and influenced the Declaration of Independence of the United States of July 4, 1776. Paine called for a constitution analogous to the Magna Carta . “Freedom and property, but above all the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, must be secured for all people.” In the text “Rights of Men” he rejected any form of slavery: “Man has no property People, any generation still has ownership of the following generations. "
Paine made a distinction between natural rights that humans have because of their existence and civil rights that they confer on society under the constitution. Through this transfer, every citizen becomes the owner of the company and is entitled to its benefits ("rightly draws on the capital") In a text proposal for the French National Assembly, he formulates:
- “The preservation of the natural and non-statute-barred human rights is the ultimate purpose of all political associations; these rights are freedom, property, security and resistance to oppression. ”And:“ Since the right to property is inviolable and sacred, no one can be deprived of it unless the public, legally established need so requires and under the Condition of a fair and predetermined compensation. "
For Paine, monarchical governments emerged from robbery and violence and derive their legitimacy from this. Therefore he rejects a hereditary monarchy in principle: "A hereditary crown, a hereditary throne or whatever fantastic name one may give the thing, allows no other interpretation than that people are inheritable property."
Paine continues to polemic against the interests of the House of Lords :
- "For the same reasonable reason you could make a legislative house entirely of people whose business is renting out real estate, you could also make one of tenants, or bakers, brewers, or any other class of citizens."
According to Paine, property or taxes should not be a criterion for giving someone the right to vote: “When we consider the number of ways in which property can be acquired without merit or lost without crime, we should consider the idea of making it a criterion of rights, spurn. "
French Revolution
Much as Locke is credited with influencing the American constitutions, particularly the Virginia Bill of Rights of 1776, Rousseau's writings influenced the French Revolution . Article 17 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 states:
- "Since property is an inviolable and sacred right, it cannot be deprived of anyone unless it is clearly required by the public necessity established by law, and just and prior compensation is given."
This liberal idea of property rights was enforced by smashing the privileges and the traditional property rights of the clergy and the nobility , and the third estate freed itself from the burden of feudal rights. The private property of the clergy and many noble families was confiscated, the upper ownership of the king and the nobility was abolished and feudal power structures were smashed. The French Revolution thus fought for civil property rights as an expression of individual freedom at the expense of the property rights of the previously privileged classes.
Robespierre took Rousseau's position in a well-known speech on property, but also stressed that regardless of the poor, the constitutional article on property seems to favor the "rich, speculators , usurers and tyrants ". His proposal to amend the constitution, although not implemented, read:
- “Article 1 - Property is the right of every citizen to freely dispose of that part of the property that is guaranteed to him by law.
- Article 2 - The right of property, like any other right, is limited by the obligation to respect the rights of one's neighbor.
- Article 3 - Property must not affect the security, freedom, existence or property of our fellow human beings.
- Article 4 - Any property or trade that violates this principle is unfair and immoral. "
Hume
The skeptic David Hume explained the transition from the natural state to the rule of law with reference to Cicero and explicitly against Hobbes from historical practice as an evolutionary process. Accordingly, he interpreted the creation of property as a social and psychological process. Property is the expression of scarcity and habituation. When someone has owned an object for a long time, familiarity and a sense of possession arise. Laws are the legalization of social practice in the state, whose task it is to ensure justice through the protection of freedom and property. Laws about property must not be arbitrary, but must reflect human life. Complete equality is destructive.
The institutions of property and inheritance are designed to promote useful customs and skills in society, enliven trade that increases wealth, and are based on trust that promises will be kept. By stating that nature knows neither mine nor yours, Hume opposed Locke. Analogies to the establishment of property are not valid. On the one hand, property arises from original possession. Second, from long-term possession as common law . Civil law regulations are aimed at expediency. This includes the rules of inheritance and contract as the only permissible ways in which property, once acquired, can be transferred.
Kant
Immanuel Kant's property theory is systematically integrated into his moral philosophy, so it is based on the categorical imperative and is carried out in the first part of the Metaphysics of Morals , in the Metaphysical Foundations of Legal Doctrine . To determine property, Kant distinguished between the internal and external "mine and yours". The inner mine and yours is the right to one's own person, which is expressed in freedom and exists by nature. Characteristics of the inner mine and yours are equality, self-possession, innocence and freedom of action . Property as the external mine and yours does not exist from nature, but is acquired, because it requires the consent of another, because property affects the other's sphere.
.jpg)
- "What is legally mine (meum iuris) is that with which I am so connected that the use that another would like to make of him without my consent would harm me." (RL, AA VI 245) Property differs from sensual possession by being an intelligible property that can only be imagined by the mind.
It is theoretically possible to regard any external object as property; for otherwise “freedom would deprive itself of its arbitrary use of an object by setting usable objects beyond all possibility of use.” (RL, AA VI 245) According to Kant, the first acquisition is therefore an occupation, a possession , in such a way that something is declared property on the basis of an arbitrary act. However, this is only a theoretical consideration, a thought model. Kant was not interested in the empirical origin of property. For property rights, it is irrelevant whether an item is in physical possession or whether it is necessary for self-preservation. It is crucial that a physical act, be it the first grasping, be it the formation through work, per se does not justify a right against another person. If one declares an object to be mine, this means "imposing an obligation on all others that they would not otherwise have." (RL, AA VI 247)
The right to property thus also includes the restriction of the rights and freedoms of all other people. Therefore, no object can become property without the consent of all others. What is needed is the mutual imposition and recognition of duties , an " a priori united will of all". (RL, AA VI 223) Property is therefore primarily not a relationship to a thing, but rather expresses a relationship between people. Things as such are incapable of any liability; they have no rights. Kant did not recognize the arguments for the establishment of property through work alone.
- "When it comes to the question of the first acquisition, the processing is nothing more than a sign of possession, which can be replaced by many others that require less effort." (RL, AA VI 265) The working theory going back to Locke is based on a "secretly prevailing deception to personify things and as if someone could make them binding through work related to them, not to serve anyone other than him, to think of a right against them directly;" (RL, AA VI 269)
Because property, as an expression of freedom, excludes others from the power of disposal , a right is required with which one can enforce the claim. “So there can only be an external mine and yours in a civil state.” (RL, AA VI 256) Property without state authority is only provisional . Property is not legitimized if it restricts others in their freedom without their consent, so that it is "not determined by any public (distributive) justice [distributive justice] and is not secured by any power exercising this right." (RL, AA VI 312) From this it follows that the formation of property necessarily leads to a republican state. Property as a result of the law of common sense can be shaped through due process in a republican state. It becomes a “bundle” of positive rights and duties.
Modern
At the turn of the 19th century, following the USA and France, a number of states adopted a republican constitution based on fundamental rights . In Prussia , peasant bondage was abolished in state domains in 1799 . With the Prussian reforms of 1807, the ministers Stein and Hardenberg laid the basis for personal freedom and free property through the edict on the liberation of the peasants . In a number of countries, civil law has been adapted to new needs on the basis of Roman law (law of reason ). This corresponded to the desire of the liberal movement for greater legal security and limitation of the decrees of the ministries. However, the free rights of disposal over property formulated therein did not mean the abandonment of the social connection of property. Rather, the common good of property was retained in a large number of public law regulations (tenancy law, forest law, neighborhood law, etc.).
The advancing industrialization created a workforce in the cities that worked in factories , but also in mines and large metal processing companies. Inadequate social conditions led to a pauperization of increasing parts of the population and the emergence of the social question . The feudal class society developed into a class society in which ownership of the means of production made a significant impact on one's position in society. It was not until the second half of the 19th century that social legislation began and has been progressing since then gradually reducing the conflict situation between the haves and the haves in the western industrialized countries, and with increasing prosperity people began to talk more about classes and later also about milieus . A broader middle class emerged, which in turn formed wealth and property.
In Russia, on the other hand, the revolution of 1917 led to the formation of a socialist state in which ownership of the means of production was suppressed. In addition, after the Second World War the Soviet Union expanded its sphere of influence to include a number of Eastern European countries and the People's Republic of China was established . These forms of government, which were based essentially on state property , were also associated with considerable restrictions on individual freedom and ultimately could not prevail against the open societies of the western industrialized countries.
In addition to the property right, which only relates to physical objects, the rights to intellectual creations, the so-called intellectual property , have been gaining in importance since industrialization . At the present time, this applies beyond the question of copyright law to the ownership of natural processes in genetic engineering or of immaterial goods such as software.
The economic dynamism that set in with the liberalization of the markets also shifted theoretical discussions about property. Already in the second half of the 18th century there were vehement critics of the property structures with the early socialists . The philosophers of German idealism , Johann Gottlieb Fichte and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel , deviated from liberalism and assigned the state a constructive role in civil society. The exclusively liberal state in the sense of Locke, Adam Smith , Jean Baptiste Say or David Ricardo is an “emergency and intellectual state” (Hegel, Grundlinien , § 183). In this, on the one hand, there is an "accumulation of wealth" (§ 243), on the other hand, through the "sinking of a large mass below the level of subsistence", the feeling of "right, justice and the honor of surviving through one's own work" , lost. (§ 244) For Hegel, the state combines morality and law at the highest level and is thus the “reality of the moral idea”. Its function is therefore not only to secure the realization of interests and freedom, but also to limit and coordinate the individual freedoms in the state community. While Fichte conceived a highly dirigistic state to establish distributive justice, Hegel hardly had any socio-political consequences. The critical reaction of the anarchists ( Pierre-Joseph Proudhon , Mikhail Alexandrowitsch Bakunin , Pjotr Alexejewitsch Kropotkin ) and especially the communists around Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels , whose social counter-concept called for the abolition of property, was quite different .
In the first 70 years of the 20th century, there were no fundamentally new theories of property, but a more differentiated view. Liberalism finds its counterpart in utilitarianism , in welfare economics or in the Austrian school . In sociology, Max Weber , Bourdieu and Luhmann examine the function of the institution of property and work out the connection between social power and wealth. Only the Theory of Justice (1971) by John Rawls triggers a new debate in political philosophy in which the question of property is discussed in connection with (social) justice. The moderate " egalitarian liberalism " of Rawls is contrary to both liberals ( Robert Nozick , James Buchanan ) and by the oriented to the common good communitarianism . Similar to Rawls, Catholic social teaching and the empowerment approach mediate between individualism and collectivism. In economics, the influence of property on economic activity is particularly emphasized by the New Institutional Economics.
At the beginning of the 21st century, the dispute over the question of property has turned more into a question of distributive justice and the permissible scope of private property. Labor law, co-determination, tenancy law, environmental legislation and public control represent clear barriers to the power of disposal over property. In the discussion between egalitarianism and liberalism , property and the basic principles of social legislation are mostly assumed.
Early socialists, cooperative members and others critics of private property
At the end of the 18th century, criticism of the developing capitalist conditions began. The social philosopher William Godwin called for an even distribution of property. Thomas Spence campaigned for the socialization of the property. William Thompson criticized the fact that the distribution of ownership of the means of production prevented workers from enjoying the fruits of their labor and suggested cooperative solutions. The British entrepreneur Robert Owen is counted among the early socialists . At first he carried out important social reforms in the inherited New Lanark cotton mill and called for the means of production to be socialized. He tried to implement his utopian model in the experimental, cooperatively organized community settlement (“New Harmony”). Important French early socialists were Henri de Saint-Simon , founder of the influential school of thought of Saint-Simonism named after him and pioneer of Catholic social teaching, and Charles Fourier , who in his writings called for the economy to be organized on a cooperative basis while at the same time developing new forms of libertarian life . Romantic philosophers, such as Franz von Baader , also criticized the social situation of workers. In the USA, advocates of the idea of equality such as the labor leader Thomas Skidmore ( The Rights of Man to Property , 1829) or the radical liberal Orestes Brownson ( The Laboring Classes , 1840) called for a confiscatory inheritance tax because everyone should have the same starting position from birth.
Spruce
In the subject philosophy elaborated by Johann Gottlieb Fichte , the individual's right to self-determination is emphasized even more than in his predecessors Locke and Kant:
- “We are our property: I say, and I assume something twofold in us: an owner and a property. The pure I in us, reason, is the master of our sensuality, of all our mental and physical powers; she may use them as a means for any purpose. "
In an early work in 1793, Fichte followed the theory of work unreservedly, according to which the formation of form represents submission to one's own purposes: "This formation of things under one's own strength (formation) is the true legal basis of property."
A few years later he emphasized in the text "Basis of Natural Law" that it is part of the essence of man to live together. Therefore, the "principle of legal assessment" reads:
- "Everyone restricts his freedom, the scope of his free actions through the concept of freedom of the other, (so that the other, as free at all, can exist.)"
The reason for property is no longer work, but the right to one's own person, through which someone naturally determines an object (as an original right) for his own purposes. The natural relationship of property results solely from the relationship of the rational subject to an object. Limiting the right to property means limiting the right to freedom of a subject. This is only possible with the consent of the subject. Subsequently, Fichte developed a three-stage contract theory based on the property contract. Second, it is agreed that the law can also be enforced. In the third stage, the right to enforce is finally transferred to the state.
The original right to one's own person enables people to influence the objective world through their actions. To be free means to be in control of your actions. Fichte therefore does not see property as a right to an object, but as a right to act. The limit of freedom determines the limit of property ownership. Real estate, for example, arises from power. The limit is the extent to which the state allows the use of land. This means that several people can have ownership of an object.
With this action-oriented concept of property, Fichte anticipated the fundamental ideas of the theory of rights of disposal . The action-theoretical dimension of property, as sketched by Fichte, can also be found in the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court together with the labor theory term Lockes: “Within the framework of fundamental rights, property has the task of ensuring freedom for the bearer of the fundamental right in the area of property law and thus to enable him to shape his life independently (BVerfGE 24, 367 [389]). The guarantee of ownership complements the freedom of action and design (BVerfGE 14, 288 [293]), in that it primarily recognizes the stock of assets acquired through their own work and performance. "( BVerfGE 30, 292 [334])
From man's original right to his personality and freedom it follows at the same time that he has a non-relinquishing right to his own existence: "Being able to live is the absolute inalienable property of all people." the transfer of the security of life: "It is the principle of every reasonable state constitution: Everyone should be able to live from his work." From this, Fichte concluded that the state has the task of ensuring the subsistence level of the individual:
- “Everyone owns his civil property only insofar and on the condition that all citizens can live on theirs; and it ceases to the extent that they cannot live, and it becomes their property. "
According to Fichte, the poor person has a statutory right to such support. In return, the state can monitor “whether everyone in his sphere works as much as is necessary to live.” On this basis, Fichte later developed detailed proposals for the establishment of distributive justice by the state in the “commercial state” and other writings would lead to the cessation of foreign trade and a state-socialist planned economy .
Hegel
In the basic lines of the philosophy of law , Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel described property as an end in itself, which is an expression of the outer sphere of freedom. (§ 41) For him, the power of disposal made the difference between property and possession:
- "The side, however, that as free will I am in possession of an objective and only hereby real will, constitutes what is truthful and legal in it, the determination of property." (§ 45)
He made a distinction between common property and private property, a term he coined. Private property has priority.
- “The idea of the Platonic State contains the injustice against the person, being incapable of private property, as a general principle. The idea of a pious or amicable and self-enforced fraternization of people with a community of goods and the banishment of the private property principle can easily be presented to those who misunderstand the nature of freedom of spirit and justice and do not grasp it in its specific moments. "(§ 46).
However, Hegel saw the possibility that objects of property “must be subordinated to higher spheres of law, a community, the state”. (§ 46) He rejected demands for fair distribution and minimum standards of care because they could not be justified objectively:
- “One cannot speak of an injustice of nature through the unequal distribution of property and property , because nature is not free and therefore neither just nor unjust. That all people should have their livelihood for their needs is partly a moral and, expressed in this vagueness, well-intentioned, but, like the merely well-intentioned in general, nothing objective; partly livelihood is something other than property and belongs to a different sphere , civil society. "(§ 49)
Originally, according to Hegel, property arose partly through "taking possession", through "direct physical seizure", "formation" or "mere designation". (§ 54) The shaping through work is "the most appropriate taking of possession of the idea because it unites the subjective and the objective". (§ 56) In a developed society, the forms of original appropriation largely disappear. The acquisition of property takes place according to positive law by contract.
- “Just as right in itself becomes law in bourgeois society, so too does the direct and abstract existence of my individual law, which has just been transposed into the meaning of being recognized as an existence in the existing general will and knowledge. The acquisitions and actions of property must therefore be undertaken and endowed with the form which that existence gives them. The property is now based on a contract and on the formalities that make the same of evidence capable and legally binding. "(§ 217)
A special feature of Hegel is that he spoke on the question of intellectual property.
- "Knowledge, sciences, talents, etc., are of course peculiar to the free spirit and an internal part of it, not an external one, but just as much it can give them an external existence through expression and alienate them (see below), whereby they come under the determination of Things are set. So they are not first something immediate, but only become so through the mediation of the spirit, which reduces its interior to immediacy and exteriority. "(§ 43)
The mental achievement that a person acquires is first of all part of the inner personality. Property only arises when it is transferred to the external world, not through the work itself, but through labeling as one's own. Hegel thereby distances himself from the widespread theory that intellectual property is based on work. Copyrights can be partially released for use and yet remain essentially the property of the author. Copyright serves in particular to promote intellectual achievements:
- “The merely negative, but very first advance of the sciences and arts is to secure those who work in them against theft and to allow them to protect their property; how the very first and most important promotion of trade and industry was to secure it against robbery on the highways. "(§ 69)
Proudhon
The anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon was best known for the catchphrase “property is theft”. In his book “What is property? Investigations into the foundations of law and rule ” (1840) he criticized the traditional theories about property as a prerequisite for income without work :
- Property is not based on natural law because many are excluded from property and it is the subject of constant social conflict. There is no substantively acceptable justification for the transition from the original common property to civil individual property.
- The first occupation is no justification for property, because if the number of the population increases, this division would have to be carried out again, otherwise the distribution would be unjust.
- Invested labor does not lead to property, because the fruits of labor (for example the harvest) are not to be equated with property itself (land, means of production).
- The established civil law gives no justification for property because it cannot name a cause.
Both the theory of occupation and the theory of work initially assume equality. But property has the property that it leads to inequality. Therefore Proudhon's basic thesis is: "Property is impossible because it is the negation of equality."
Proudhon is particularly critical of the fact that one can profit from property without doing anything. However, value is created solely through work. Profits that are not based on work therefore represent an exploitation of people by people. Cooperation creates higher added value than the sum of the individual actions. The capitalist takes advantage of this by not passing on the cooperation agreement but keeping it. That is why ownership of the means of production leads to unjust enrichment. Property is rigid through inheritance and distributed in support of the hierarchical order. Greater justice is obtained if one distributes property evenly and adjusts the distribution to the prevailing circumstances. He therefore suggested that the ownership of the land should be left with the municipalities as superior ownership and that it should be given to smaller tenants for a limited period.
Much less radical than the Marxists, he turned against their communism:
- “Communism is inequality, but in the opposite sense than property. Property is the exploitation of the weak by the strong; Communism is the exploitation of the strong by the weak. "
According to Proudhon, communism primarily endangers freedom. He saw the solution in a society that is organized according to the principle of reciprocity ( mutualism ). There is no central government there and the only obligation is to comply with treaties. In doing so, he primarily had “voluntary workers' associations” in mind, which form a self-administered “federal” property. The demand of other anarchists such as Bakunin or Kropotkin for the collectivization of land and means of production cannot be found in Proudhon. In his polemic against Proudhon, “ The Misery of Philosophy ” , Karl Marx criticized him as a “petty-bourgeois ideologist” who neglected the historical dimension in particular.
Marx
For Karl Marx, property was originally common property:
- "Because the human being does not originally face nature as a worker, but rather as the owner, and it is not the human being, qua single individual, but rather, as soon as one speaks to some extent of the human existence of the same, tribal person, horde person, family person, etc."
Marx's criticism was primarily aimed at ownership of the means of production, not personal property.
- “Private property, in contrast to social, collective property exists only where the equipment and the external conditions of work belong to private people. Private property has a different character depending on whether these private individuals are workers or non-workers. "
For Marx, property has historically been the instrument that established the relationships of power. So the father, who has regarded the family as property since primitive society, the slave owner the slaves, the landlord the serfs in feudal society, so also the capitalist the dispossessed worker in capitalism.
Capitalist society is preceded by a process of transformation from feudalism :
- “The process that creates the capital relation can therefore be nothing else than the process of separating the worker from property in his working conditions, a process that on the one hand transforms the social means of life and production into capital and, on the other hand, transforms the direct producers into wage laborers. So- called original accumulation is nothing but the historical process of separating producer and means of production. It appears as "original" because it forms the prehistory of capital and the mode of production corresponding to it. "
Marx described this prehistory as the violent repression of feudal rule by capitalism .
- "The immediate producer, the worker could have his person only after he had left off, tied to the soil and another person serf or hearing to be. In order to become a free seller of labor who carries his goods wherever there is a market, he also had to have escaped the rule of the guilds, their apprenticeship and journeyman regulations and restrictive work regulations. [...] The industrial capitalists, these new potentates , for their part had to displace not only the guild master craftsmen, but also the feudal lords who were in possession of the sources of wealth. From this point of view their rise presents itself as the fruit of a victorious struggle against feudal power and its outrageous prerogatives as well as against the guilds and the fetters that they put on the free development of production and the free exploitation of man by man. "
In bourgeois society, property is the cause of the alienation and exploitation of the worker: “Capital has agglomerated the population , centralized the means of production and concentrated property in a few hands. The workers, who have to sell themselves piece by piece, are a commodity like any other article of trade and are therefore equally exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition and all fluctuations in the market. "
Marx and Engels therefore saw communism primarily as a project for the "abolition of private property".
In addition, Marx opposed the linking of the concepts of freedom and property. The traditional liberal concept of freedom, as represented by Locke or Smith , includes the freedom of the possessing citizens, the bourgeoisie , but not the freedom of the citizens (citoyen). This egoistic freedom is based on the interests of the capitalists.
- “The freedom of the egoistic person and the recognition of this freedom is rather the recognition of the unrestrained movement of the spiritual and material elements, which form the purpose of his life. Therefore man was not freed from religion, he received religious freedom. He was not released from property. He received freedom of property. He was not freed from the selfishness of trade, he was given freedom of trade. "
According to Marx, freedom only arises in a community when everyone has the means “to develop their talents in all directions. […] In the real community, individuals gain their freedom in and through their association [union] at the same time. ”Freedom does not offer a state-free individual sphere, but participation in the community in which there is no longer any ownership of the means of production.
Weber
The sociologist Max Weber viewed property from the perspective of social relationships , which he described as "open" when nobody is prevented from participating in social activity . If, on the other hand, this participation is restricted or subject to conditions, he spoke of “closure”. A closure always takes place when those involved expect an improvement in their chances of satisfying their needs. A closure inwards, that is, within a group, is what Weber called Appropriation . For him, rights were therefore an appropriation of opportunities.
- "Chances appropriated hereditary to individuals or to hereditary communities or societies should mean: 'property' (of individuals or communities or societies), externally appropriated: 'free property'."
Ownership is thus an instrument for regulating procurement competition. This restricts the power of disposal over goods.
Kelsen
Even for the prominent representative of systematic legal positivism , Hans Kelsen , there was no natural law, but only legal rules that arose in the course of social development. For Kelsen , the theory of subjective law had an ideological function that primarily had the purpose of protecting the rule of the haves. By institutionalizing property as a right in rem, i.e. related to a thing, the fact that it has a social effect is obscured by excluding others from using a thing.
- “The concept of a subjective law that is different from and independent of objective law becomes all the more important when that, ie the legal system that still guarantees the institution of private property, is recognized as a changeable and constantly changing, created by human willfulness [...]; especially when this order is created in a democratic process. The idea of a law that is different from objective law and independent of it in its existence, but which is no less, perhaps even more 'law' than that, is intended to protect the institution of private property from being abolished by the legal system. "
Von Mises
The economist Ludwig von Mises emphasized the functional character of property in the market economy .
- “Wealth, property and possessions are social functions in the market economy that are assigned or withdrawn to the individual by referendum. In their capacity as consumers , individuals are sovereign; in their capacity as producers, they are subject to the will of the consumer. As producers, you have to put up with the whims and unreasonableness of consumers if you don't have the intellectual power to change your masters' minds. "
Historically correct for von Mises was the description that property in history, especially in the time of lordly societies, was appropriated through violence and distributed unfairly. This inequality is not a result of a market. With the advent of the market economy in modern times, however, this inequality has been largely eliminated. Because the capitalist has to constantly adapt to the market and to the needs of his customers. Owners who do not follow this rule will be automatically expropriated by the market. Historically, the establishment of a market economy has brought about a democratization of society and redistribution. Parliamentary systems and modern democracies are the consequence, not the prerequisite, of a market economy.
- “The development of the market economy with its method of economic calculation also brought something new to the field of political constitution. Modern democracy is the attempt to realize the sovereignty that the individual has in the market, as far as possible in politics. "
Von Mises fought vehemently against what he believed to be false assumptions of the widespread criticism of capitalism . The often invoked powerlessness of consumers against the abuse of advertising is nothing more than the ideologically determined assertion that consumers are unable to make independent judgments.
- "The highlight in the intellectual arsenal of anti-capitalism is the doctrine of the terrible dangers of the supposedly unstoppable progressive monopoly in capitalism ."
On the one hand, the question arises as to which monopolies have even emerged without a market disturbed by government intervention. Such influences arise from customs duties and prescribed prices. As an example, von Mises cited the US agriculture, which is subsidized with billions, and the immense effort involved in enforcing production quotas:
- “The main difficulty, as in any attempt to enforce monopoly prices, lies in the quota problem. The immense administrative apparatus of the richest state, supported by the courts and the police, turns out to be powerless to carry out the restrictions on production ordered by law. The farmers do not participate. They probably want higher prices for their produce, but they are not prepared to restrict their own production. As everywhere, the monopoly pricing policy fails because of the quota issue . "
Human freedom without private ownership of the means of production was unthinkable and impracticable for von Mises. And he assessed state intervention in the economy primarily as patronizing the citizens.
- “In the free market economy, consumers have priority. Ownership of the means of production is, so to speak, a mandate that society has given the owners with the obligation to use it in such a way that the most urgent of the unsatisfied desires of consumers are satisfied as cheaply and as cheaply as possible. The governments, on the other hand, are striving for a constitution in which they alone have to determine what, how and by whom is produced and how much may be used by each individual. "
Catholic social teaching
The Catholic Social Doctrine follows on from Thomas Aquinas and regards property as a necessary factor for the realization of individual freedom, but at the same time emphasizes the social obligation of the right to property and underlines the dangers of “modernism”. A first systematic discussion of the question of property can be found in the encyclical Rerum Novarum by Pope Leo XIII. In this, on the one hand, the reasonableness argument of Thomas Aquinas is used, on the other hand, Locke's theory of work is included and, finally, reference is made to the tenth commandment . In this encyclical, the state has the task of a socio-political corrective that opposes “depressed and unworthy existence” (RN 2), but has to respect individual property. The social encyclical Quadragesimo anno from 1931 states:
- “On the one hand, the denial or weakening of the social function of property rights leads to individualism or at least close to it; on the other hand, the misjudgment or undermining of its individual function drives collectivism or at least lets its standpoint neglect. If this is disregarded, the moral, legal and social modernism that we warned in the circular at the beginning of our pontificate is going downhill . "
The document Gaudium et Spes at the Second Vatican Council describes the social connection of all property in an even more comprehensive way.
- “That is why a person who avails himself of these goods should not only own the external things that he legitimately possesses as his personal property , but must at the same time regard them as common property in the sense that they are not only for him, but also can be of use to others ”.
On the other hand, it highlights the positive aspects of private property that - also as ownership of the means of production - contributes to the "self-portrayal of the person" and creates "the absolutely necessary space for the independent organization of the personal life of each individual and his family"; the right to property must be seen as “a kind of extension of human freedom”.
Pope Paul VI In his encyclical Populorum Progressio 1967 emphasized the aspect of distributive justice:
- “The common good therefore sometimes calls for the expropriation of property, if it is because of its size, its little or no use, because of the misery the population experiences because of it, because of the considerable damage suffered by the interests of the land, the common good obstructing the way. The council made this very clear. And it has made it no less clear that available resources are not simply left to the arbitrary will of people and that there must be no place for selfish speculation . "
religious
The radical democratic socialist, social psychologist and psychoanalyst Erich Fromm dealt critically with the subject of property, especially in his work to have or to be. A major break in history occurred with the modern age . Protestantism and capitalism have isolated and unsettled people as individuals . He now finds his support in property:
- “I and my property could not be separated from each other. Man's clothes and his apartment were part of the self as well as his body, and the less he had the feeling of being someone, the more important was his property to him. "
Reputation and power are also based, at least in part, on property. This equation of possession and I since the beginning of modern times has led to a changed identity :
- “The definition was no longer: 'I am what I think', but rather 'I am what I have'. And that meant: 'I am what I own'. [...] This includes not only his body, but also his house, wife, children, his ancestors and friends, his reputation, his work, his country, his horses, his yacht, his bank account. "
Man discovers himself as a commodity that has its price on the labor market. Modern society is based on the three pillars of private property, profit and power. A “wanting to have” and an “obsession with possession” arise because “the 'drive to acquire' owes its impressive role to a large extent only to the particular high esteem of property in bourgeois society.” The orientation towards having leads to an existential fear. On the other hand, people compensate for this fear through consumption , which gives them a feeling of power and a feeling of freedom, which in turn is based on property. The greed for possessions can become so great that people do not shy away from violence .
- “In the existence of having, man finds his happiness in superiority over others, in his awareness of power and, ultimately, in his ability to conquer, rob and kill."
Fromm warned against a naive hope for peace, because "as long as the peoples consist of people whose main motivation is having and greed, they will necessarily wage war."
Against having, Fromm put the idea of an attitude that is connected to being, as he saw it realized in Meister Eckart , Spinoza , Karl Marx or Albert Schweitzer . One model that expresses this attitude is the Sabbath , where greed and possessiveness are ignored.
- “On the Sabbath man completely ceases to be an animal whose main occupation is to fight for survival and to maintain his biological life. On the Sabbath man is fully human and he has no other task than to be human. "
The Sabbath is a time of peace and a harbinger of the " Messianic Era ". Fromm sees this as "the never-ending Sabbath: the day on which property and money are just as taboo as grief and sadness, [...] as the day of man who anticipates the future of mankind."
Rawls
For the liberal political philosopher John Rawls , the right to property, as he explains in his main work Theory of Justice (1971), is one of the fundamental freedoms to which every person is entitled without restriction according to the first and highest of his two principles, unless these freedoms do not Freedoms of others are restricted. This does not say anything about the distribution of property. According to the second principle, social and economic inequalities are only permissible to the extent that the least beneficiaries of a society benefit from them. The second principle implies that redistribution is only justified if it benefits the least favored. In an open market economy, this can mean that redistribution is to be avoided if this affects growth and thus general prosperity. In any case, the subsistence level must be ensured through the distribution . The criterion of an egalitarian redistribution proposed by Rawls ties property rights to the benefit of the least favored and thus considerably restricts property's inherent freedom of action .
Nozick
Robert Nozick presented a libertarian “theory of entitlement” in his work Anarchie, Staat, Utopia , first published in 1974 , an alternative to Rawl's more egalitarian concept. The freedom is an absolute natural right. Redistributions in the state are illegitimate interventions in freedom and are therefore unjust. According to Nozick, the freedom to handle one's goods in any way is ensured by three principles:
- First, property is acquired through the appropriation of goods that have not previously belonged to anyone (principle of justice in acquisition)
- Second, the transfer of existing property takes place through contracts (principle of justice in transfer)
- Third, any acquisition that does not conform to principles one and two is unjust and must be corrected (principle of rectification of justice).
- “A person's property is just if he is entitled to him in the sense of the principles of just appropriation and transfer or the correction of injustices (in terms of the first two principles). If the possessions of each individual are fair, then the total amount (the distribution) of the possessions is fair. "
Nozick takes the case of a basketball player as a famous example: under the fictional state that everyone has the same wealth, hundreds of thousands decide to watch the basketball player's games and transfer part of their wealth to him as an entrance fee. As a result, the basketball player is a lot richer, while everyone else is a little poorer. However, none of the above principles are violated and therefore, according to Nozick, the overall distribution of wealth is fair. State intervention (e.g. through taxes) to redistribute wealth is therefore unjust and illegitimate.
The tasks of the state should remain limited to external and internal security and the enforcement of the law. The social contract has the task of determining the limits of state intervention. Nozick leaned closely on Locke to justify his theses. Man's right to himself and to his own body is inviolable. Man thus has property in himself. The person also includes man's actions, which accordingly also fall into the sphere of property. The actions also include the creation and increase of goods. Thus the results of the actions also belong to the human being. Nozick does not have conditions restricting the freedom of property as in Locke. Due to a wide range of criticism directed primarily at the exclusion of non-owners, Nozick later admitted that his theory did not adequately address questions of care and solidarity .
Buchanan
According to economist James M. Buchanan , property is of fundamental importance to the place of man in society. In 1975, following on from Hobbes' doctrine of contract, he carried Limits of Liberty with his work . Between Anarchy and Leviathan (Limits to Freedom) contributed to the development of the New Political Economy . His thesis on human maturity is:
- "By describing his property rights, a person is defined as a ' person '." (GdF 13)
Property is a social institution through which conflicts of interest are resolved. It has a similar regulatory function as other rights that set limits to “natural anarchy”. Even in a “pre-state society”, people differ in their dispositions, skills and interests. He therefore strictly rejects equality as a principle of the distribution of property.
- “A person who lives in a society is circumscribed by his rights to be able to do certain things at a certain time and in a certain place. (...) Furthermore, it must be stated that a distribution cannot possibly be egalitarian, even under idealized conditions. "(GdF 14)
Equality of rights necessarily leads to inequality of distributions. Accordingly, equality of distribution means unequal treatment of people.
- "The norm of equality before the law is derived directly from the identification and precise description of persons as persons and does not include equality as a fact, nor does it presuppose equality as a condition for the legitimacy of equal treatment." (GdF 17)
One of the options for action is exchange , which can consist, for example, of exchanging work for goods or money.
- “An economic exchange is facilitated by mutual agreement on property rights.” “The exchange partners may differ in many ways. When exchanging themselves, however, they face each other as equal partners. ”(GdF 24)“ In a social system in which the rights of the individual to act are precisely defined and recognized, the free market offers the maximum scope for personal eccentricities for which individual freedom in its most elementary meaning. "(GdF 25)" 'Equal freedom' as a norm or rule of social interaction has little or no sense as long as the individuals are not first determined by recognized action limits. "(GdF 27)
Rights such as property are therefore not absolute, but are linked to limits that are determined by the community. The political problem lies in the criteria according to which these barriers are determined or where the limits of the determination of such barriers by the community lie, i.e. how the power of the collective is limited.
- "So if a constitutional treaty is concluded that defines the individual in terms of their property rights, and if these rights also include membership of a political community, which in turn is allowed to make collective decisions according to rules below the unanimity requirement, then in the preliminary stage every person must be in have agreed to possible restrictions of their legal sphere. "(GdF 63)
An individual only grants such consent if the constitutional treaty ensures that fundamental rights cannot subsequently be revoked by majority decisions. In doing so, Buchanan criticizes legal positivism insofar as it considers restrictions on constitutional fundamental rights to be legitimate with reference to majority decisions . (GdF 74/75)
waltz
Property experiences a completely different assessment with Michael Walzer , a leading representative of communitarianism , who particularly criticizes the central role and universal validity of freedom and calls for social liberalism. In his well-known work Spheres of Justice , published in the American original in 1983 . In a plea for plurality and equality , Walzer emphasizes that distributive justice must not be reduced one-dimensionally to possession and property. He distinguishes himself from both Rawls and Nozick and characterizes eleven areas, so-called spheres, in which different principles of justice apply with different meanings, including - important for the determination of property - membership and belonging, security and welfare, money and goods, offices, hard work, upbringing and education, kinship and love, recognition and political power.
Walzer speaks of a "complex equality" of people and rejects strict "material equality" as "totalitarian". People have different talents and a wide range of skills. One can make good money, the other can write books well. With money you can buy almost anything, material goods, admiration, relaxation, sex, education or medical care. If only those people who have the talent to earn money have access to all these possibilities, while all others are at least partially excluded, then that is implausible and immoral. The mere limitation of the power that can be exercised with money is an essential argument for radical redistribution.
Empowerment Approach
For the economist Amartya Sen and the philosopher Martha Nussbaum, the problem of property is linked to the question of the conditions for a “good life” in their concept of the chances of realization ( qualification approach ). A good life is based on positive freedoms that enable self-determination. Sen names (1) political freedoms, (2) economic institutions, (3) social opportunities, (4) transparency and (5) social security as fundamental instrumental freedoms. The extent to which these freedoms are given determines the degree of chances of realization (capabilities) that someone can have.
To the realization chances of the individual in the economy, Sen counts the availability of resources , the conditions of exchange and the distribution. According to Sen, property is one of the basic elements of human freedom, but it is not an absolute value. He criticizes Nozick's concept of property, which is based solely on the limitation of state power. In a society based on Nozick's principles, it is fundamentally possible for people to starve to death even though there is enough food. The various freedoms are therefore to be brought into a balanced relationship to one another, albeit on the basis of private property. Because, according to Sen, the denial of personal property is a “flaw in society”. For a functioning structure of society, the market is the best form of organization to ensure freedom of exchange. However, it is important to correct market failures, especially in the area of public goods.
- “It has never been more important to take a critical look at the usual views and attitudes in matters of political economy. Today's prejudices in favor of pure market mechanisms have certainly needed to be checked and, in my opinion, to be partly rejected as wrong. But we must be careful not to fall back into the follies of yesterday, in the refusal to recognize the advantages, even the necessity of the market. We have to look closely and decide what is more sensible in each case. "
Following Aristotle, Martha Nussbaum emphasizes in a similar way as Sen that “prosperity, income and property are simply not good in themselves.” Rather, these goods receive their value “when the goods are placed in the service of people's lives and actions It is a matter of determining basic human qualifications that are to be ensured by the social order.
- “The question of property has to be, quite simply, which forms of property best serve this goal; To achieve a certain level. ”Property must not hinder people's right to the satisfaction of their basic needs . People in need should have the right "to feed on other people's crops without being punished."
On the other hand, Nussbaum draws attention to the fact that property promotes what they consider to be the right to individuality. With property, people are able to create a private space.
Luhmann
For the sociologist Niklas Luhmann , property is an institution that arose historically to cope with the phenomenon of the scarcity of goods. Property also means non-property and is expressed by the code having / not having.
- “That and how property works as a code cannot be adequately understood if one understands property in the sense of the traditional term as legally protected property rule (dominium). Rather, what matters is the difference between property and non-property. "
Access to an item is only possible with the consent of the owner. According to Luhmann, theories of the establishment of property must necessarily lead to paradoxes . He regards the occupation theory as a paradox insofar as the act of first seizure is actually an injustice which is then used to justify a right.
Property enables the exercise of power , especially in organizations . Property has a different effect depending on the functional area of a company. In the legal system, it is used to clarify property conflicts using legal programs. In the economic system, property is the primary coding alongside the secondary coding of economic action through money (numbers / non-numbers), which has largely become established in developed societies. Property is a prerequisite for money.
Bourdieu
The sociologist Pierre Bourdieu largely replaces the term property with that of the power of disposal. In his main work " The fine differences " (1979) he describes the determining factors for the position of people in social space . To analyze social structure he uses the term class , but gave it a meaning different from Marx and Weber . According to Bourdieu, a class is an ensemble of actors with homogeneous living conditions. The ownership of the means of production as a differentiating factor takes a back seat with Bourdieu. An important determinant of class formation in society is “ economic capital ” as the power to dispose of money and property.
- "The economic capital can be converted directly into money and is particularly suitable for institutionalization in the form of property rights [...]"
Bourdieu emphasizes that the economic dimension is not enough to capture the social position and the power connected with it. In addition to economic capital, it also formed the categories of social , cultural and symbolic capital. Each class has different proportions of these individual types of capital.
The social capital consists of the network of social relationships of the respective individual. The cultural capital arises in the context of socialization through the incorporation of education in particular, but also of attitudes, behavior and fears, essentially in the family. It becomes objectively visible through the acquisition of cultural assets such as pictures, books, encyclopedias, instruments or machines in which knowledge and theories are handed down. Education is institutionalized in educational qualifications, titles and positions that someone has achieved. Every form of capital is accumulated labor. By using work and the time factor, one can convert cultural or social capital into economic capital. The symbolic capital is based on the possession of the other types of capital, leads to personal reputation , social prestige , determines the habitus , the position in the area of lifestyles and the economic, social and political position.
The successful actors who have a wide variety of capital and who represent new lifestyles in their social milieus achieve what is known as a gain in distinction in the class struggle, which is primarily a cultural struggle . In doing so, however, the hegemonic classes mostly succeed in adapting to the new conditions and stabilizing their rule. The freedom to bring about social change is limited, according to Bourdieu. This is due to objective factors such as political, social and economic structures and historical circumstances. Added to this are subjective influences such as illusions about reality and, for example, restrictions on the possibilities of thinking and acting based on nationality, gender or worldview. These barriers mean that fundamental economic and political upheavals are not impossible, but they are very difficult and can only be achieved to a limited extent.
Theory of disposition rights
A new approach to the question of property has arisen from the theory of property rights within the framework of the new institutional economics . Ownership of things is viewed as the classic case of a right of disposal. From an economic point of view, property is associated with the following rights:
- Use of a thing (usus)
- Income that makes one thing possible (usus fructus)
- Change of a thing (abusus)
- Exclusion of use by others
- Transfer of ownership of the thing.
The establishment of a right of disposal such as property is based, similar to Hume and Smith, on its usefulness. The proponents of this theory refer to the arguments already mentioned by Aristotle . An essential function of property is the individual protection against insecurity.
From an economic point of view, the personal use of a thing by the owner is particularly favorable, because then there are no transaction costs and the fruits of the labor in the case of changes in the sense of Locke go into the thing without restriction. If, on the other hand, use and ownership diverge, as is the case with the leasing of land, transaction costs arise that reduce the value of the right of disposal. One consequence is conflicts in the sense of the Principal Agent Theory . It is similar with common property . If several people jointly own something, their use must be regulated between the owners. This results in transaction costs and possibly external effects , because use by one owner restricts the possibility of use by the other owner.
Property economics
The economists Otto Steiger and Gunnar Heinsohn criticize the classical and neoclassical economic theories as well as Keynesianism . All of these approaches show a wrong understanding of the concept of property. In traditional economics, according to Heinsohn / Steiger, all economic activity is traced back to exchange. Money is seen as an aid to simplify exchange and to make real goods comparable. In this view, property is functionally equated with possession and assumed as a framework condition for theories. Heinsohn / Steiger also reject the new institutional economics with the theory of rights of disposal, since this too does not cover the essential characteristic of property, its pledging . In this respect, this concept is only a differentiated variant of the neoclassical.
For Heinsohn / Steiger, traditional economic activity is just managing resources according to certain rules. Ever since the distinction between property and property existed, the economy has been able to develop dynamically. Possession enables a good to be used. That was sufficient for the primitive and early societies ( hunters and gatherers , tribes), but also for the feudal societies based on rule and the states of real socialism . Only the property society enables freedom. Property is an abstract right that individuals can dispose of independently of property. It can be pledged and, if it is used as security, it can be foreclosed if it is not performed.
- “The property society no longer uses the traditional instruments of domination to regulate the use of resources. Above all, it protects property as a legal title and the owner as the bearer of this title, to which possession - i.e. the right of disposal over use - is subject. It inevitably protects the right to enforcement against the property of a debtor who has not fulfilled his obligations and has thereby reduced the property of the obligee. "
Money can only come about when there is property, because money comes from credit . Loans are granted on the basis of a promise of repayment and on the basis of collateral that not possession but only property can provide. The borrower remains in possession of the security, for example a piece of land, and can use it, but no longer use it in any other way, through repeated pledging or (free) sale. The lender can no longer use the goods given and receives a “liquidity premium for property”. The interest arises from the temporary loss of the ability to dispose of property. This liquidity premium is the real drive for profit-oriented business.
- “The fulfillment of the additional property claim made in the interest claim on the debtor forces the production of more property than has temporarily come into his possession through the loan agreement . The interest demand resulting from the liquidity premium on property thus forces a surplus in production - profit . It is this interest-based profit that makes the accumulation typical of the property economy possible. "
Usually money represents real property. However, there is a risk of inflationary money creation . Heinsohn / Steiger speak here of “arbitrary money”: “However, when issuing government debt , it does not take into account whether the property potential of its citizens is already encumbered for their personal loans and insofar as the state with all its sovereign powers could no longer find any more penetrative property with the citizens . In this case, when backing banknotes by taking in government bonds, property actually does not exist and the currency is hollowed out. ”The task of a central bank is to limit the money supply primarily to the property that is available in society.
The Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto , who is close to property economics, advocates the thesis that one of the main causes of poverty in developing countries is the inadequate security of property. In extensive studies, de Soto has worked out that the less privileged have substantial property and shares in companies, but cannot document this through formal property rights. This informal property ties up “dead capital” because it cannot serve as security for investments and is also less fungible than legally protected property. Developing countries do not have, such as the Western industrialized countries, a historically mature infrastructure for documentation of property by land registers , cadastre , register of companies, etc. It should also be registered property essential for a stable social and political order. It enables improved environmental protection, for example by preventing soil erosion , because legitimate owners have a great interest in maintaining the value of their property.
See also
literature
- Reinhard Brandt: Theories of property from Grotius to Kant. Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart 1974, ISBN 3-7728-0412-8 .
- Manfred Brocker : Work and Property. The paradigm shift in modern property theory . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1992
- Jürgen Ebach , Zeev W. Falk and others: Property . In: Theologische Realenzyklopädie (TRE). Volume 9, de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1982, ISBN 3-11-008573-9 , pp. 404-460 (history in Judaism and Christianity as well as theological ethics).
- Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig (Ed.): What is property? Philosophical positions from Plato to Habermas . CH Beck, Munich, 2005, ISBN 3-406-52826-0 .
- Friedrich Engels : The origin of the family, private property and the state . MEW Text available online
- Ursula Floßmann : Concept of property and land management in historical change. Institute for Local Science, Linz 1976.
- Gunnar Heinsohn and Otto Steiger: 1996 Property, Interest and Money: Unsolved Riddles in Economics. Reinbek near Hamburg, ISBN 3-89518-494-2 . (5th edition. Marburg 2009, ISBN 978-3-89518-721-6 ).
- Arnold Künzli : Mine and yours. On the history of ideas of hostility to property . Bund-Verlag, Cologne 1986, ISBN 3-7663-0916-1 .
- Hannes Siegrist, David Sugarman (ed.): Property in international comparison (18th – 20th century) . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1999, ISBN 3-525-35793-1 .
- Dieter Schwab : Ownership. In: Otto Brunner , Werner Conze , Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts . Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 2, Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 1975, pp. 65-115.
- Schwäbisch Hall Foundation (Ed.) Culture of Property. 2006, ISBN 3-540-33951-5 .
- Christian Spiess: Social ethics of property: philosophical foundations - church social proclamation - systematic differentiation. LIT Verlag, Berlin / Hamburg / Münster 2004, ISBN 3-8258-7467-2 .
Web links
- Jeremy Waldron: Property. In: Edward N. Zalta (Ed.): Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
- Private property as a principle of regulatory policy
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe : The foundations of the property theory
- Hardy Bouillon : Economic Freedom. Property and welfare state in Kant , published in Enlightenment and Criticism 2/1999, pp. 10–26
- Christoph Engel: The social function of property , Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Heidelberg 2002
- Carola Lentz : Ancestral Land or State Domain ?: Controversies about soil in West Africa (= working papers; Institute for Ethnology and African Studies, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz ). Inst. For Ethnology and African Studies, 2002 ( Google Books ).
- Oswald von Nell-Breuning : Property and power of disposal in modern society (PDF file; 62 kB)
- Eberhard Schockenhoff: Prof. Schockenhoff November 11, 2008.pdf Ethics of Property (Catholic Social Teaching)
- C. Schott: Wedding ceremony and yes: from the handover of the bride to the civil wedding . Verlag für Standesamtwesen, 1992, ISBN 978-3-8019-5646-2 ( online [accessed April 20, 2014]).
- Harald Wiese: Script Institutional Economics (PDF file; 974 kB)
Individual evidence
- ^ Christian Egbert Weber: Economy and Society in the United States of America. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1961, p. 66.
- ^ Hans Josef Wieling : Property law: property, possession and rights to movable property. Vol. 1, Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York 1990, ISBN 3-540-51706-5 , p. 462
- ↑ Werner Sombart : The order of economic life. ; Reprint of the 2nd edition from 1927 in Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg / Wiesbaden 2007, p. 21, ISBN 978-3-540-72255-7
- ^ Bernd Andreae: Agriculturalography. Structural zones and types of farms in world agriculture. De Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1977, ISBN 9783110085594 , pp. 69 ff. And 295 f. as well as the epoch-making succession of agricultural operations in steppes and dry savannas. (= Writings of the Society for Economic and Social Sciences des Lanbaues eV, Volume 14), Landwirtschaftsverlag, Münster-Hiltrup 1977, pp. 349–352
- ↑ Pascal Oberndörfer: The philosophical basis of copyright law. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2005, p. 16.
- ↑ Joshua Getzler (2009) Plural Ownership, Funds, and the Aggregation of Wills , in Theoretical Inquiries in Law 10.1
- ↑ List taken from: Pascal Oberndörfer: The philosophical basis of copyright. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2005, pp. 129–130, who in turn refers to: Lawrence C. Becker: Moral Basis of Property Rights. In: J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman (Eds.): Property. 1980, pp. 187-220; the translation of the original list can be found by Manfred Brocker: Arbeit und Eigen. The paradigm shift in modern property theory. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1992, pp. 395–396.
- ^ Hans Vorländer: The constitution. Idea and story. 2nd Edition. Beck, Munich 2004, pp. 56-62.
- ↑ Ursula Floßmann: Concept of property and land management in historical change. Institute for Local Science, Linz 1976, p. 131.
- ^ Rudolf Jettmar: Wealth formation, a position determination. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1980, p. 20.
- ↑ Victor Ehrenberg : The State of the Greeks, Artemis , 2nd edition. Zurich 1965, p. 38.
- ^ Ernst-Wolfgang Bockenförde: History of legal and state philosophy: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. 2nd Edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, p. 130.
- ^ Aristotle: Politics . Pp. 1257-1263.
- ^ Otto Kimmich: Keyword property. In: Staatslexikon. Law - Economy - Society. Volume 2. Herder, Freiburg 1995, p. 161.
- ^ Tiziana J. Chiusi: Structures of Roman property in the mirror of rhetorical-philosophical texts by Cicero. In: Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig (Ed.): What is property? Beck, Munich 2005, p. 59.
- ^ Cicero: De officiis . I, p. 21.
- ^ Tiziana J. Chiusi: Structures of Roman property in the mirror of rhetorical-philosophical texts by Cicero. In: Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig (Ed.): What is property? Beck Munich 2005, p. 68.
- ↑ Seneca: Ad Lucilium epistulae morales. II, 18, 13
- ↑ Christian Spieß: Social ethics of property. Lit, Münster 2003, pp. 17-20.
- ↑ Michael Schäfers: Prophetic Power of Church Social Doctrine? Poverty, Work, Property and Business Criticism. LIT, Münster 1998, pp. 145, 176.
- Jump up ↑ Property and Wealth in the Early Church. In: Martin Hengel: Studies on early Christianity. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2008, pp. 353-423.
- ↑ Dietmar Willoweit: On the development of the concept of property in medieval and modern jurisprudence. In: Historical yearbook. 94: 131-156, 132 (1974).
- ↑ Gertraude Mikl-Horke: Historical sociology of the economy. Oldenbourg, Munich 1999, p. 167.
- ↑ Otto Kimmich: Keyword property , in Staatslexikon. Law - Economy - Society. Volume 2. Herder, Freiburg 1995, p. 162.
- ↑ Gertraude Mikl-Horke: Historical sociology of the economy. Oldenbourg, Munich 1999, p. 217.
- ^ Ernst-Wolfgang Bockenförde: History of legal and state philosophy: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. 2nd Edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, p. 233.
- ^ Ernst-Wolfgang Bockenförde: History of legal and state philosophy: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. 2nd Edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, pp. 288–289.
- ^ A b Ernst-Wolfgang Bockenförde: History of legal and state philosophy: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. 2nd Edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, pp. 292-293.
- ^ Thomas Aquinas: Summa theologica. Book II, Part II, Question 66, Article 2. On Natural Law
- ^ ST II / II, q. 66, loc. 2, ad 1.
- ^ ST II / II, q. 66, loc. 2, co., See also Mundraub , Fringsen .
- ^ Matthias Kaufmann: Property in the Middle Ages. In: Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig (Ed.): What is property? Beck, Munich 2005, p. 80.
- ↑ Jürgen Miethke: Ockham's political theory. In: Wilhelm von Ockham: Dialogus, excerpts from political theory. Selected translated and provided with an afterword by Jürgen Miethke. Darmstadt 1992, pp. 220-221.
- ↑ Antiquity and the Middle Ages. In: Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde: History of the legal and state philosophy. 2nd Edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, p. 310.
- ↑ Daniel Deckers : Justice and Law. A historical-critical examination of the doctrine of justice of Francisco de Vitoria. Academic Press, Friborg 1991, p. 181.
- ^ Manfred Brocker: work and property. The paradigm shift in modern property theory. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1992, p. 48.
- ^ Manfred Brocker: work and property. The paradigm shift in modern property theory. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1992, p. 50.
- ↑ Joseph Höffner: Christianity and human dignity. The concern of Spanish colonial ethics in the Golden Age. Paulinus-Verlag, Trier 1947, p. 300.
- ↑ Stephan Wendehorst, Siegrid Westphal (ed.): Reading book Old Reich. Oldenbourg, Munich 2006, p. 201.
- ^ Johann Braun: Introduction to the Philosophy of Law. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, pp. 268-270.
- ^ Samuel Pufendorf: Eight books on natural and international law. 1711 ( De Jure Naturae et Gentium libri octo. 1688)
- ^ Johann Braun: Introduction to the Philosophy of Law. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, p. 297.
- ^ Johann Braun: Introduction to the Philosophy of Law. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2006, p. 181.
- ↑ Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig: Introduction. In: Andreas Eckl, Bernd Ludwig (Ed.): What is property. Philosophical positions from Plato to Habermas. Beck, Munich 2005, pp. 12-28, 22.
- ^ Hans-Jürgen Prien: Luther's business ethics. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1992, p. 189; Martin Luther: works edition , 51, 384, 4
- ↑ Martin Luther: works edition. 16, 514, 15, (Ecclesiastes on Ex 20, November 5, 1525); quoted from Albrecht Peters: Commentary on Luther's Catechisms. Volume 1: The Ten Commandments. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1990, p. 268.
- ^ Martin Luther works edition , 32, 457, 28 (Ausl. Mt. 5-7, 1530/32); quoted from Albrecht Peters: Commentary on Luther's Catechisms. Volume 1: The Ten Commandments. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1990, p. 268.
- ↑ Martin Luther: works edition. 47, 361, 23 (Ecclesiastes on Mt. 19, 23ff of November 7, 1537); quoted from Albrecht Peters: Commentary on Luther's Catechisms. Volume 1: The Ten Commandments. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1990, p. 268.
- ↑ Volker Heise: The Calvinistic Influence on Humanistic Legal Thought. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2004, p. 109.
- ↑ Volker Heise: The Calvinistic Influence on Humanistic Legal Thought. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2004, p. 123.
- ↑ Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan or substance, form and power of an ecclesiastical and bourgeois state. Fischer, Frankfurt 1989, p. 98.
- ↑ Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan or substance, form and power of an ecclesiastical and bourgeois state. Fischer, Frankfurt 1989, p. 248.
- ↑ Georg Geismann: Kant as the perfecter of Hobbes and Rousseau ( Memento of the original from January 30, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 65 kB).
- ^ Hugo Grotius: De iure belli ac pacis. 1625. I, 2,1,5, quoted from Reinhard Brandt: Theories of property from Grotius to Kant , Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart 1974, pp. 38-39.
- ↑ Ada Neschke-Hentschke : Human rights - human rights doctrine - natural justice. In: Klaus M. Giradet, Ulrich Nortmann (Hrsg.): Human rights and European identity: The ancient foundations , Steiner, Stuttgart 2005, pp. 123-134, here p. 127.
- ^ Walter Reese-Schäfer : Classics of the history of political ideas. From Plato to Marx , Oldenbourg, Munich 2007, p. 83.
- ^ Quotations based on the edition commented on by Ludwig Siep, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 2007
- ↑ Karl Marx: Theories about the surplus value. MEW 26, 342: "The one limit is the limit of personal work"
- ↑ Pascal Oberndörfer: The philosophical foundations of copyright law. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2005, pp. 30–31.
- ^ Manfred Brocker: work and property. The paradigm shift in modern property theory. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1992, pp. 350–351.
- ^ Manfred Brocker: work and property. The paradigm shift in modern property theory. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1992, pp. 121–122.
- ↑ Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Discourse on Inequality. translated and explained by Heinrich Meier, Paderborn 1990, p. 173.
- ^ Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Treatise on the political economy. In: Political Writings. Volume 1. Paderborn 1977, p. 38.
- ^ Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Contract Sociale (CS), I 1. Dt. From the articles of association or principles of constitutional law , Reclam, Stuttgart 1977
- ^ Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Treatise on the political economy. In: Political Writings. Volume 1. Paderborn 1977, p. 56.
- ↑ online-Text, 32, no. 193 ( Memento of the original from December 16, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 888 kB)
- ↑ online-Text, 12, no. 36 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 847 kB)
- ↑ online-Text, 62, No. 3 II or 63, No. 3 XVII ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 847 kB)
- ↑ online.Text, 22, no. 17 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 997 kB)
- ↑ online-Text, 57, No. 3 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 997 kB)
- ↑ online-Text, 107, no. 157 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 997 kB)
- ↑ Ursula Floßmann: Concept of property and land management in historical change. Institute for Local Science, Linz 1976, pp. 79–83.
- ↑ Maximilien Robespierre: Speech on property from April 24, 1794 before the National Convention. In: Maximilien Robespierre, Selected Texts , ed. by Manfred Unruh with an introduction by Carlo Schmid , 2nd edition. Hamburg 1989, pp. 394-407, here p. 399.
- ↑ David Hume: An investigation on the principles of human morality , Meiner, Hamburg 2003, pp. 24-25.
- ↑ David Hume: An Inquiry into the Principles of Human Morality. Meiner, Hamburg 2003, p. 18.
- ↑ a b David Hume: An Inquiry into the Principles of Human Morality. Meiner, Hamburg 2003, p. 30.
- ↑ David Hume: An Inquiry into the Principles of Human Morality. Meiner, Hamburg 2003, p. 31.
- ↑ David Hume: An Inquiry into the Principles of Human Morality. Meiner, Hamburg 2003, p. 38.
- ↑ Immanuel Kant: The Metaphysics of Morals. First part. Metaphysical foundations of legal theory. Academy edition Volume VI, based on the Bonn Kant corpus
- ^ Wolfgang Kersting : Freedom of property and social justice. In: Otto Depenheuer (Ed.): Property , Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 2005, pp. 43–60, p. 48.
- ↑ Georg Geismann : Kant as the perfecter of Hobbes and Rousseau ( Memento of the original from January 30, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 65 kB) , 16
- ^ Manfred Brocker: work and property. The paradigm shift in modern property theory. Scientific book society. Darmstadt 1992, p. 395.
- ↑ Ursula Floßmann: Concept of property and land management in historical change. Institute for Local Science, Linz 1976, p. 91.
- ↑ Ursula Floßmann: Concept of property and land management in historical change. Institute for Local Science, Linz 1976, p. 75.
- ^ Christian Spiess: Social ethics of property: philosophical foundations - church social proclamation - systematic differentiation. LIT Verlag, Berlin-Hamburg-Münster 2004, p. 188.
- ↑ Jens Beckert: Unearned assets. Sociology of inheritance law. Campus, Frankfurt 2004, p. 205.
- ↑ Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Contributions to the correction of the public's judgments about the French Revolution [1793], in: Works, first supplementary volume: Staatsphilosophische Schriften , ed. By H. Schulz and R. Strecker, Leipzig 1919, p. 82.
- ↑ Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Contributions to the correction of the public's judgments about the French Revolution [1793], in: Works, first supplementary volume: Staatsphilosophische Schriften , ed. By H. Schulz and R. Strecker, Leipzig 1919, p. 83.
- ↑ Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Basis of the natural law according to the principles of the science of science [1796], ed. By F. Medicus, Hamburg 1979, 112; GA I 3, 411 (GA = Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Complete Edition , edited by R. Lauth, H. Jacob, H. Gliwitzky, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1962ff, I = works, II = post-processed writings, III = letters)
- ^ Johann Braun: Freedom, Equality, Property. Basic questions of law in the light of JG Fichtes philosophy. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 1991, pp. 18-19.
- ↑ Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Basis of natural law according to the principles of science. In: Johann Gottlieb Fichtes all works, ed. By IH Fichte , Berlin 1845/46, Fotomechanischer Reprint Berlin 1971, Volume VI, pp. 37–288, here p. 212; GA I 4, 21
- ↑ Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Basis of natural law according to the principles of science. In: Johann Gottlieb Fichtes all works, ed. By IH Fichte , Berlin 1845/46, Fotomechanischer Reprint Berlin 1971, Volume VI, pp. 37–288, here p. 213; GA I 4, 22
- ↑ Johann Gottlieb Fichte: Basis of natural law according to the principles of science. In: Johann Gottlieb Fichtes all works, ed. By IH Fichte , Berlin 1845/46, Fotomechanischer Reprint Berlin 1971, Volume VI, pp. 37–288, here p. 214; GA I 4, 23
- ^ Walter Euchner : History of ideas of German socialism, part I. In: Walter Euchner, Helga Grebing , Frans Josef Stegmann, Peter Langhorst, Traugott Jähnichen, Norbert Friedrich: History of social ideas in Germany. 2nd Edition. VS-Verlag, Wiesbaden 2005, pp. 15–354, here pp. 55–57.
- ^ Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel: Basic lines of the philosophy of law. text
- ↑ Pascal Oberndörfer: The philosophical basis of copyright law. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2005, p. 105.
- ↑ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: Property is theft , online text
- ↑ What is property? 2nd chap. § 1
- ↑ What is property? 2nd chap. § 21
- ↑ What is property? 3rd chap. § 4
- ↑ What is property? 2nd chap. § 3
- ↑ Chapter 4, last sentence
- ↑ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: What is property? 201, quoted from: Klaus von Beyme: Political Theories in the Age of Ideologies . Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden 2002, p. 673.
- ↑ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: Theory of Property, published posthumously
- ^ Karl Marx: On the Critique of Political Economy (manuscript 1861–1863). Part 1, in: Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels: Complete Edition (MEGA), Dept. II, Vol. 3.1, Dietz, Berlin 1976, p. 88.
- ^ Karl Marx: Das Kapital , Volume 1, MEW Vol. 23, p. 789.
- ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Volume 1, MEW Vol. 23, p. 742. ( online )
- ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Volume 1, MEW Vol. 23, p. 743.
- ↑ Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels: Manifesto of the Communist Party. MEW Vol. 4, p. 468.
- ↑ Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels: Manifesto of the Communist Party. MEW 4, p. 475.
- ^ Karl Marx: On the Jewish question. MEW Vol. 1, pp. 347-377, here p. 369.
- ^ Karl Marx: The German Ideology. MEW Vol. 3, p. 74.
- ^ Max Weber: Economy and Society . (WuG) 5th edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 1972, p. 23.
- ↑ WuG, p. 37.
- ↑ Hans Kelsen: Pure legal theory . 1934, pp. 43–44, quoted from: Johann Braun: Rechtssphilosophie im 20. Jahrhundert. Beck, Munich 2001, pp. 37-38.
- ↑ Ludwig von Mises: Property in the market economy ( Memento of the original from December 8, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (EiM), monthly sheets for free economic policy 10:12 (Dec. 1964) pp. 725–729.
- ↑ EiM, S. 726th
- ↑ EiM, S. 727th
- ↑ Ludwig von Mises: Monopolies - Poetry and Truth ( Memento of the original from October 20, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (MDW). Monthly sheets for free economic policy 11: 1 (Jan. 1965) pp. 40–47 (This article is the continuation of the article published under the title “Property in the market economy” in issue 12/1964.)
- ↑ MDW, p. 42.
- ↑ MDW, p. 47.
- ↑ Quadragesimo anno 46
- ^ Gaudium et spes , No. 69
- ^ Gaudium et spes , No. 71
- ↑ Populorum progressio , No. 24
- ^ Arnold Künzli: Mine and yours. On the history of ideas of hostility to property. Cologne, 1986, p. 574.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: The fear of freedom. Zurich 1945, p. 122.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: Psychoanalysis and Ethics. Frankfurt 1978, pp. 150-151.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: Analytical social psychology and social theory. Frankfurt 1970, p. 27.
- ^ Arnold Künzli: Mine and yours. On the history of ideas of hostility to property. Cologne, 1986, p. 578.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: To have and to be. Munich 1979, p. 83.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: To have and to be. Munich 1979, p. 111.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: You will be like God. Reinbek 1980, p. 160.
- ↑ Erich Fromm: To have and to be. Munich 1979, pp. 57-58.
- ↑ John Rawls: Justice as Fairness. A new design. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 2006, p. 78.
- ↑ John Rawls: A theory of justice, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1979, p. 101.
- ↑ John Rawls: A theory of justice, Suhrkamp. Frankfurt 1979, p. 311.
- ^ Wolfgang Kersting: Freedom of property and social justice. In: Otto Depenheuer (Ed.): Property , Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 2005, pp. 43–60, here pp. 55–57.
- ^ Robert Nozick: Anarchy, State, Utopia. Munich 1974, p. 146.
- ↑ Peter Koller: On the Critique of the Libertarian Property Concept. Using the example of Robert Nozick's theory ( memento of the original from August 8, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 2.1 MB). In: Analysis and Critique 3 (1981), pp. 139–154.
- ^ R. Nozick, From the right, good and happy life, Munich / Vienna 1991.
- ↑ James M. Buchanan: The Limits of Freedom: Between Anarchy and Leviathan (GdF). Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 1984, p. 13.
- ↑ GdF, p. 24, see also GdF 239
- ↑ Michael Walzer: In Defense of Equality. In: Radical Principles, New York 1980, pp. 237-256, here pp. 240-241.
- ↑ Michael Walzer: In Defense of Equality. In: Radical Principles, New York 1980, pp. 237-256, here p. 249.
- ↑ Amartya Sen: Economy for the people. Paths to Justice and Solidarity in the Market Economy. Hanser, Munich 2000, pp. 24-70.
- ↑ a b Amartya Sen: Economy for the people. Paths to Justice and Solidarity in the Market Economy. Hanser, Munich 2000, p. 140.
- ↑ Martha Nussbaum: Justice or The Good Life. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1999, p. 35.
- ↑ Martha Nussbaum: Justice or The Good Life. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1999, p. 67.
- ↑ Martha Nussbaum: Justice or The Good Life. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1999, p. 68.
- ^ Niklas Luhmann: The economy of society. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1988, p. 189.
- ↑ Detlef Krause: Keyword property. In: Luhmann Lexicon. An introduction to the complete works of Niklas Luhmann . P. 140.
- ↑ Niklas Luhmann: The origin of property and its legitimation - a historical report. In: Werner Krawietz, Antonio A. Martino, Kenneth I. Winston (eds.): Technischer Imperativ und Legitimationskrise des Rechts , Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1991, pp. 43–57.
- ^ Niklas Luhmann: The economy of society. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1988, p. 196.
- ↑ convertible
- ^ Pierre Bourdieu: Economic capital, cultural capital, social capital. In: Social Inequality , ed. by Reinhard Kreckel : Schwartz, Göttingen 1983, pp. 183–198, here p. 185.
- ^ Rudolf Richter, Eirik Furubotn: New Institutional Economics. An introduction and critical appreciation. 3. Edition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2003, p. 89.
- ↑ Gunnar Heinsohn, Otto Steiger: Property, Interest and Money: Unsolved Riddles of Economics. 6th edition. Metropolis, Marburg 2009 ( table of contents ), as well as this .: Property economics. Metropolis, Marburg 2006 ( table of contents )
- ^ Gunnar Heinsohn, Otto Steiger: Property Economics. Metropolis, 2nd edition. Marburg 2008, p. 47.
- ↑ Gunnar Heinsohn, Otto Steiger: Property, Interest and Money: Unsolved Riddles of Economics. 6th edition. Metropolis, Marburg 2009, p. 18.
- ^ Gunnar Heinsohn, Otto Steiger: Property Economics. Metropolis, 2nd edition. Marburg 2008, p. 13.
- ^ Gunnar Heinsohn: Patriarchy and money economy. In: Waltraud Schelkle, Manfred Nitsch (eds.): Rätsel Geld , Metropolis, Marburg 1995, p. 233.
- ↑ Gunnar Heinsohn, Otto Steiger: Property, Interest and Money: Unsolved Riddles of Economics. 6th edition. Metropolis, Marburg 2009, p. 231.
- ↑ Gunnar Heinsohn: Foreword to the second edition. In: Gunnar Heinsohn, Otto Steiger: Property Economics. Metropolis, 2nd edition. Marburg 2008, p. 8.
- ↑ Hernando de Soto: Freedom for capital! Why capitalism doesn't work worldwide. Rowohlt, Berlin 2002
- ↑ An overview can be found in Hernando de Soto: Dead Capital and the Poor in Egypt. In: Hans-Joachim Stadermann and Otto Steiger (eds.): Verpflichtungsökonomik. Property ', Freedom and Liability in the Money Economy (with a biographical appendix), Metropolis, Marburg 2001, pp. 33–79, here p. 56.
- ↑ Hernando de Soto: Dead capital and the poor in Egypt. In: Hans-Joachim Stadermann and Otto Steiger (eds.): Verpflichtungsökonomik. Property, Freedom and Liability in the Money Economy (with a biographical appendix), Metropolis, Marburg 2001, pp. 33–79, p. 52.
