4 ms·

> Property is the only way that we can build complex things. This assertion needs to be substantiated, even if it is true. You give an example of how property

by treyd 11mo ago

> Property is the only way that we can build complex things. This assertion needs to be substantiated, even if it is true. You give an example of how property "allows us to build complex things", but you don't prove that it's impossible for any other system of ownership or of mediating access to resources/"things" to allow that.

otterley 11mo ago
Fine. It's the only way we know of that unlocks the potential of building complex things. If you know of an alternative that is better, please tell us!
- __MatrixMan__ 11mo ago
  Consider a eukaryotic cell... fantastically complex, damn useful, came on the scene long before property.
labcomputer 11mo ago
> but you don't prove that it's impossible for any other system of ownership or of mediating access to resources/"things" to allow that. You can’t prove a negative, so the onus is actually on you to show an example of a working alternative that does not rely on property. And it has been tried in the 20th century. Several times, in fact. Despite all the industrial espionage committed by the Soviet Union (which saved them the resources to do the research themselves) and the slave labor of people who spoke or wrote about the “wrong” ideas (which surplus was given to the rest of the population), ordinary people in the USSR had much worse lives than those in the West.
- treyd 11mo ago
  The legal system in USSR also had the concept of property.
  - labcomputer 11mo ago
    Yes, it did[1]! Because they rather quickly discovered that you can’t build complex things without it. Which brings us back round to the original point! [1] But… they did make a go of it without property before discovering that it wouldn’t work. It turns out (shockingly!) that indentured serfs (who make the food) like the idea of land reform when it means they own the land. But they don’t like it so much when it means nobody owns the land. And when they are not happy then you have no food. And then those quotes about “x meals until y” start to have some salience. And then you start to think about the most effective way to use the number of bullets you have on hand (which is smaller than the number of mouths you need to feed).
- immibis 11mo ago
  The Soviet Union won the space race, but I'm not sure if they had property or not. They were a dictatorship, anyway, so we probably don't want to repeat that.

by treyd 11mo ago

otterley 11mo ago

Fine. It's the only way we know of that unlocks the potential of building complex things. If you know of an alternative that is better, please tell us!

__MatrixMan__ 11mo ago
Consider a eukaryotic cell... fantastically complex, damn useful, came on the scene long before property.

labcomputer 11mo ago

> but you don't prove that it's impossible for any other system of ownership or of mediating access to resources/"things" to allow that. You can’t prove a negative, so the onus is actually on you to show an example of a working alternative that does not rely on property. And it has been tried in the 20th century. Several times, in fact. Despite all the industrial espionage committed by the Soviet Union (which saved them the resources to do the research themselves) and the slave labor of people who spoke or wrote about the “wrong” ideas (which surplus was given to the rest of the population), ordinary people in the USSR had much worse lives than those in the West.

treyd 11mo ago
The legal system in USSR also had the concept of property.
- labcomputer 11mo ago
  Yes, it did[1]! Because they rather quickly discovered that you can’t build complex things without it. Which brings us back round to the original point! [1] But… they did make a go of it without property before discovering that it wouldn’t work. It turns out (shockingly!) that indentured serfs (who make the food) like the idea of land reform when it means they own the land. But they don’t like it so much when it means nobody owns the land. And when they are not happy then you have no food. And then those quotes about “x meals until y” start to have some salience. And then you start to think about the most effective way to use the number of bullets you have on hand (which is smaller than the number of mouths you need to feed).
immibis 11mo ago
The Soviet Union won the space race, but I'm not sure if they had property or not. They were a dictatorship, anyway, so we probably don't want to repeat that.