SUBJECT: POLITICAL THOUGHT: INDIAN AND

WESTERN

TOPIC: AN ANALYSIS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

SUBMITTED TO: PROF. POOJA RAGHAV

SUBMITTED BY: SUDHARSHINI K

REGISTRATION NO: 18BLA1048

OVERVIEW
Property is a general term used to define any article, item or thing owned with
the rights of possession, use and enjoyment which bestows upon the owner the
right to collateralize, encumber, mortgage, sell or transfer and exclude everyone
else from it. It can also be explained as rules governing the access to control of
land and other material resources. These rules through the passage of time have
been disputed in many aspects. When there exists disputes there would always
be a justification that follows. This article mainly focuses on the classifications of
property and the view of various political thinkers in this concept.

EVOLUTION OF PROPERTY
The evolution of property in the philosophical aspect has been explained in the
form of stories. These stories generally justify the need and use of private
property. The most acknowledged one is that of Locke. This story starts at the
state of nature when the land belonged to no one in particular. Individuals have
certain needs and the objects that fulfill these needs are provided by nature and
exist around the men. But the problem is that man doesn’t know that the object is
not for his use alone but others have use for these objects as well. So what would
man do? The option of waiting for a general meeting with all the people to
distribute resources will not be a solution. So man goes ahead and takes what he
needs and he mixes his labor with the resource. By doing this he upholds his
fundamental duty of self-preservation, at the same time increasing the value of
resources he works on for the benefit of others.

First part of the story talks about man acquiring the property according to his
need and the second part focuses on man trying to satisfy his needs upholding his
duties, thus growing individually and also as a society. The major premise of this
story is the individual’s ability to reason through the issues of who is entitled to
appropriate and use and exchange goods without the guidance of government.
Locke’s principle is largely based on utilitarianism and the concept of first
occupancy is considered to be a peaceful way out.

Not all the philosophers are of this view. David Hume gives a different story to
this process. Since time immemorial humans have been fighting for the resources,
so the distribution of the resources or the possession of the same would be
erratic, being driven by force and violence. Now there would be two options, This
fight might continue or it may stop and attain a sort of stable equilibrium in
which those in possession of significant resources and those tempted to grab
resources from others find that the marginal costs of further predatory activity
are equal to their marginal gains. Under these conditions, a middle ground
might be made available. Maybe everyone can gain, in terms of the curtailing
of conflict, the stabilizing of social relations, and the prospects for market
exchange, by an agreement not to fight any more over possessions.

While Locke’s idea seems more idealistic, Hume’s view seems more pragmatic.
It is more rational to depict the ancient age as a condition that was more
chaotic rather than a considering it a society of complete reason.

CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY
The concept of property can be divided into the following forms:

Common property:

This term is generally used to denote an article, object or a resource that is jointly
owned by all members of a community. The main aspect of this system is to
govern the resource by proper rules and regulations whose main motive is to
make these resources available for all the members of the society. Common
property are rival in consumption, i.e. use of the good by one would reduce its
consumption for the other. The aim of imposing any restrictions on its use is to
secure fair access for all and to prevent anyone from using the common resource
in a way that would negatively affect its use by others.

Collective property:

A collective property right is shorthand used for the idea that the territory of a
nation-state, and in particular the parts of that territory that are not private
property, are owned collectively by the people with the government acting as
their agent. It is a completely different idea from that of Common property. Here
the major decisions regarding the use of these resources are collectively taken by
the community who has the ownership of this property. These determinations are
made on the basis of the social interest through mechanisms of collective
decision-making.

Private property:

This happens to be the most a debated form of property. This concept functions
on the grounds that the major decision making authority of a particular property
is assigned to an individuals or family or firms. The person to whom a particular
resource is assigned (e.g., the person who found it or made it) has the complete
control over the object: it is for them to decide what should be done with it. In
exercising this authority, they are not understood to be acting as an agent or
official of the society. They may act on their own initiative without giving anyone
else an explanation, or they may enter into cooperative arrangements with
others, just as they like. They may even transfer this right of decision to someone
else, in which case that person acquires the same rights the previous owner had.

VIEW OF POLITICAL THINKERS

Plato:

Plato was an Athenian philosopher in the classical age in the ancient Greece. He is
considered as a significant figure in the Greek history and western philosophy.
Plato in his Famous work, “The Republic” mentions the need to abolish the right
to private property, especially for the Guardians and auxiliaries class. According to
him, people from these classes are meant to take part in the political activities of
the state, and giving these people the right to private property would serve as a
distraction for them. Also that this right contributes to the increase in corruption
which is not favorable. He argued that collective ownership was necessary to
promote common pursuit of the common interest, and to avoid the social
divisiveness that would occur when some grieve exceedingly and others rejoice at
the same happenings.

Aristotle:

Aristotle along with his teacher, Plato is considered to be the father of western
political philosophy. He provided a complex synthesis of the various philosophies
existing prior to him, and it was above all from his teachings that the West
inherited its intellectual lexicon as well as problems and methods of inquiry.

In his work The Politics, he criticized Plato’s view of abolition of private property.
He argued that the concept of private property promoted virtues like wisdom and
responsibility among the people. Aristotle also reflected on the relation between
property and freedom, and the contribution that ownership makes to a person's
being a free man and thus suitable for citizenship. In the Greek society, the
concept of freedom was considered to be the opposite extreme of slavery and for
Aristotle, to be free was to belong to oneself, to be one's own man, whereas the
slave was by nature the property of another.

Medieval Political Philosophers:

St. Thomas Aquinas

Thomas Aquinas was an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, catholic priest, and
Doctor of the church. He was an immensely influential theologian and jurist in the
tradition of scholasticism within which he is also known as the Doctor
Angelicus and the Doctor Communis.
Aquinas continued discussion of the Aristotlean idea that virtue might be
expressed in the use that one makes of one's property. He agreed with regard to
the private consumption of property but modified theological theory in finding
that the private possession of property is necessary. He gave detailed provisions
with regards to justifying private property.

He said that: it is natural and lawful for man to possess external things as his own;
theft and robbery are sins of different degrees, the latter being more grievous
than the former. However he justified theft if there is a necessity by stating that,
in cases of need all things are common property."

Modern Political Philosophers:

Thomas Hobbes:
Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher, considered to be one of the founders
of modern political philosophy. Hobbes is best known for his 1651 book
Leviathan, which expounded an influential formulation of social contract theory.

He was more involved in finding how the concept of property would have been
instituted. He stated that there was no natural ‘mine’ or ‘thine,’ and that property
must be understood as the creation of the sovereign state or at the very least the
artificial product of a contract entered into by all the members of the society to
bestow stability on the possession of external goods, and leave everyone in
peaceful enjoyment of what he may acquire by his fortune and industry. He
questioned as to how anything could belong or be owned by any one person. He
answered his question by introducing an unambiguously strong power in the
realm, which (or who) must declare the property to be a possession of someone.

John Locke:
John Locke was an English philosopher and physician, widely regarded as one of
the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers and commonly known as the
"Father of Liberalism”.
He was of the opinion that property could have been instituted in the state of
nature without any special conventions or political thinkers. He posed a moral
dilemma that is how to privatize the resources God has given for the people
equally. He clarified this problem combining the structure of the theory of first
occupancy with an account of the substantive moral significance of labor as
explained in the evolution of property.

CONCLUSION
The concept of private property has been a highly controversial phenomenon
through the ages. It can be justified over other alternative forms through the
consequentialist theory which states that people in general are better off when a
given class of resources is governed by a private property regime than by any
alternative system. Under private property, it is said, the resources will be more
wisely used, or used to satisfy a wider set of wants than under any alternative
system, so that the overall enjoyment that humans derive from a given stock of
resources will be increased.