Property is Force

It can't exist without it!

All property is force. I’m not saying that’s good or bad, I’m saying there’s no such thing as a fully voluntary property arrangement. What do I mean? Property is a restriction. More than it says what the owner can do, it says what non-owners can’t do. Take land, for example. If Person A owns a piece of land, Person A can bar anyone else from entering or occupying that land. Their right to decide who can occupy that land exists regardless of whether everyone else agrees with them. This is not a voluntary arrangement because everyone else is forced to abide by whatever rules Person A sets up for the land. Since it’s not voluntary, some person or entity is going to need to enforce this restriction. An entity like the government.

In the US, the government determines property rights. When someone buys a house, they’re issued a deed. That deed is a legal document describing who owns that home. If someone else tries to claim they own that house, they have no standing. If both parties claim to have a deed, the government decides which one of their claims is valid. Property rights exist because the government can universally resolve disputes and has the authority to enforce that resolution. If the losing party disagrees with the ruling, they either have to suck it up or find some other way to resolve the dispute. Even in the case of the latter, the government will usually still need to be involved.

Even though the government represents a universal force, this force allows for more peaceful resolutions. Property disputes can happen in courts where conflicts are resolved with words and evidence instead of bloodshed. Without the government or some other third party, who has the biggest guns defines property rights. In a capitalist society, that’s usually the person with the most money. They have the resources to afford the best weapons and to hire people to use them. If people don’t give up their resources willingly, the wealthy can deploy their private armies to take them by force. This is why anarcho-capitalism (an oxymoron, but that’s another conversation) and other forms of government based solely on “voluntary exchange” ultimately result in dictatorships of capital.

While allowing a third party to determine property rights has its advantages, it’s not a perfect system. That third party is vulnerable to corruption. Take the US, for example. The owner class in the US amassed so much wealth it was able to buy the government. What was supposed to be a neutral third party now rules in ways that favor its benefactors. One example of this was the Citizens United v. FEC (2010) ruling, which removed limits on corporate spending in politics under the guise of “free speech.” The five Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor removing the limits on corporate spending were appointed by presidents who favored the interest of the owner class—the same owner class that contributed to their campaigns. This happened again last month with the Supreme Court ruling against the Voting Rights Act—a ruling made by Justices appointed by a President favoring the owner class.

So, what can be done? Some people have proposed, and campaigned on, a constitutional amendment to reverse Citizens United v. FEC [1]. Others have argued states can circumvent the ruling completely by redefining what corporations are [2]. In my opinion, these are good for treating the symptoms but not curing the disease. The disease is corporations making too much money. If they had lower profits, they wouldn’t be able to spend money on SuperPACs to bribe politicians. How do we lower their profits? The best way would be to force them to pay their workers more. Unionization is the most accessible method to people now. In my opinion, the best way to reduce corporate money in politics is to democratize the workplace. Let the workers decide what’s done with companies’ profits. I’m sure bribing politicians will be the last item on the list!

Sources:

[1] https://www.npr.org/2016/02/14/466668949/presidential-candidates-pledge-to-undo-citizens-united-but-can-they

[2] https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-corporate-power-reset-that-makes-citizens-united-irrelevant/

Enjoying my content?