• ‘Abolish ownership’ is a pretty simple talking point, how would you make it work in a legal sense?

    Who determines what is your responsibility vs the neighbor vs the city? How do you establish legal boundaries for purposes of theft, vandalism, or trespassing?

    Laws might seem cold (because they are) or inhumane (because they are) but they are also the thing that keeps society organized. And that makes them one of the most important human inventions. Rights are the result of laws.

    If you’re concerned about land prices, or people being ‘priced out’ of things, there are important alternate solutions to that kind of problem. Things like social services, improving education, breaking up super corporations, promoting healthy neighborhood design and small business, etc.

    • @paradx@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      I think one main argument of people that take the ‘abolish ownership’ seriously don’t mean the concept of owning things you need and use, but the concept of claiming ownership of property that you DON’T use and use that as a way of enacting power over others. So I would say it wouldn’t be throwing people out of their homes but that owning property you are not using your self would not be legal. You could grab land or an empty house and it would be yours as long as you need it. Of cause this will not get rid of all the problems and conflict that already exists in some form now, but it doesn’t have to be total chaos and lawlessness.