> Considering possession of land is one of the leading causes of war, I would hardly see property as a vehicle for peaceful conflict resolution. Peaceful confl

> Considering possession of land is one of the leading causes of war, I would hardly see property as a vehicle for peaceful conflict resolution. Peaceful conflict resolution only works when all parties to the conflict desire peace. In the presence of a conflict among peace-desiring parties, property is the notion that one party has the right to determine disposition of the tangible item in question. If they didn’t have a concept of property that they all assented to, then they would be more likely to fight about it. > Money in exchange for property as a lubricant for exchange of property (or the ownership and control over that property) is a vehicle for peaceful conflict resolution. The right to exchange for consideration presupposes property rights. You’re agreeing with the OP