• FiniteBanjo@feddit.onlineEnglish
      41·
      5 days ago

      It’s definitely anti-land-ownership, which is a little silly because if nobody has any claim to a property then it immediately incentivizes people to trash places and then move on to a place where somebody else was living and maintaining. It’s already illegal for people to do that and it still happens.

      Maybe a nice middle ground is limiting land ownership or heavily taxing multiple land ownerships to make it an instant financial loss to do so.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        6·
        5 days ago

        There are ways to incentivize people to care for common resources. See the work of Eleanor Ostrom. Not to mention I’ve seen plenty of private property that is totally trashed.

        Land ownership (or more accurately, expropriation of land by the wealthy) is one of the biggest roots of all other forms of oppression. Because you can’t enslave people if they can just go opt out and live off the land. Many slaves historically did exactly that but the modern state makes this far more difficult today.

        • FiniteBanjo@feddit.onlineEnglish
          43·
          5 days ago

          It’s always a fucking book with you people. Are you really incapable of making a point on your own? Go read Apex Calculus, it’ll explain my stance to you.

          Isolated self-reliant communities exist and they are often extremely selective with who they admit because it’s hard work and not everyone is cut out for that.

          • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
            31·
            5 days ago

            okay. let’s take a step back then away from the books. go have a conversation with an indigenous person about how land-management was done prior to colonization. you might learn some things about how european property rights are a uniquely insidious thing that make up the current hegemonic understanding of how the world works.

            then, when you’re ready, go read a history book about the violence that was enacted in order to establish the manors, baronies, and lordships that came to underlie Europe’s mercantile and then later capitalist systems of oppression. much of what you are taking as an obvious given about how land management works and should work is extremely recent, and much to the detriment of the local ecologies and ecosystems you think will be better protected as private land.

            the reason people are consistently pointing you to somewhere you can learn something is because you are perpetuating wrong and harmful mistruths about the world, how it works, and how it should work.

            • FiniteBanjo@feddit.onlineEnglish
              11·
              5 days ago

              Oh great somebody summoned the fucking quill to the discussion. Comrades gonna recommend more anarchocommunism books, now.

          • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
            31·
            5 days ago

            Ostrom is a social scientist so I’m just pointing to her years of research documenting communal resource management across the world and throughout history. It’s not about argumentation, it’s about evidence. I’m not able to replicate her years of research.

            You don’t need to read any books but if you are interested, I can provide you with articles or videos. Doesn’t sound like it though.

    • lath@piefed.socialEnglish
      3·
      5 days ago

      Not really a good thing. Ownership is fake, a social contract established between people to avoid conflict or enforced through the threat of conflict. It’s not even something guaranteed to be recognized from one person to the next, let alone the often changing governments.

      It’s really a form of control and way of extracting value. You work the land, maintain it and pay taxes. But it can be taken from you at any point, for any reason.