Issues of Private Property

Todd William pointed out that I didn’t clearly address issues of private property in the book. I’ll address them here.

Private property and ownership are legal concepts. They are structured as part of the legal system. In a Celebration Society, this will be the Charter supported by specific laws regarding property and ownership, enforced by the Judiciary.

Ownership of land will be the basic connection between a person and a Celebration Society. (There will also be a legal structure, the Family Corporation, which will allocate assets among those who together constitute a “family”.) Owner(s) of land will have the right to build specific kinds of residences and other structures, consistent with a condominium agreement. (That agreement will specify types of structures that are permitted and occupancy requirements.)

Ownership of means of production will mean that one can produce whatever is desired, consistent with the Charter and laws, on one’s residential land, or in owned or leased facilities that are zoned for production.

In my view, a Citizen must have their primary residence in the celebration society of which they are a Citizen. The society will provide for all basic needs of Citizens, including the use of a small condominium apartment in the downtown area. So, if a Citizen loses ownership of their land, they will still have the apartment, which cannot be lost since they do not individually own it.

In general, I see private property as being more respected in a Celebration Society than is commonly the case in advanced Western societies. There should be clear rules regarding rights and the enforcement of those rights. Barring fraud or significant violation of law, I see no ordinary basis for depriving an owner of their property. Should one choose to emigrate from the society, one would be free to take along all portable assets and sell other assets such as land, consistent with the Charter and laws. (For example, one might be permitted to sell land only to qualified person(s) on a waiting list for city-state residency.)

Eminent domain will likely be a carefully restricted power; to be used only in cases of necessity. (Since a Celebration Society will be a planned development, with little further development of infrastructure once the society is built other than technological improvement, I see this as a lesser issue than in typical sprawling societies that are frequently evolving their infrastructure.)

In a Celebration Society, private property will remain a reality for so long as people find it useful. The society itself will be created as a voluntary collaboration amongst owners in the acquisition and development of land and infrastructure. I expect this to take a condominium structure. During the early years of transition from capitalism, people will trade and transact in a capitalist manner, using either the national money recognized by the society or other money (such as complementary currencies) favored by those transacting.

Even in a full Celebrationist system of production, there will be certain unique goods and services and others not economical to produce locally; for example, due to economies of scale. In such cases, people will continue to transact in a capitalist manner. However, over time, I expect scaling issues and the attribute of uniqueness to fade both in actuality and in its perceived value.

(Once everyone can enjoy an identical copy of a masterpiece or 4K-acuity full wall displays of natural beauty, the demand for original artworks and prime real estate locations will diminish. Further, natural beauty will be encouraged and prevail throughout the society, and it is likely that the most beauteous natural features will be reserved by the owners as parks for common enjoyment.)

Once full Celebrationist production is in effect, prices of all manner of products and services should plunge towards zero. With automated production of all necessities for the Citizens (and possibly residents) assured by the government, the need for personal means of production will fall away. It will remain an option for those so inclined, but at that point there will be no evident continuing value in private ownership of means of production.

Means of production is, of course, distinct from products themselves. People want products either for their utility or status, so those need to be considered separately. Likewise, there will soon be widely available VR experiences which will in future substitute for actual experiences and physical products in many cases. (This is discussed in the book.)

One important distinction is between ownership and governance. Anyone who is prepared to support the Charter may own property in a Celebration Society. They might not even need to live there, though there may be condominium covenants assuring development and not raw land speculation, and likely others encouraging residency rather than absentee ownership. (I would favor this, but through “nudges”, as discussed elsewhere, rather than through law.)

Unlike ownership, governance will solely be by Citizens. Any resident (not an absentee owner) may pursue qualification to become a Citizen, and this will be encouraged. In my view, the society will function best if the percentage of non-Citizen owners is small, as there is always the possibility of divergent interests.

There will need to be provisions in the Charter protecting the ownership and other personal rights of non-Citizen owners. Since the Charter can be changed by supermajority vote of the Citizens or by unanimous vote of the Branches of government, non-Citizen owners could theoretically be at risk of expropriation of their land and other fixed assets. This is a matter that the society will need to address in its founding stages; I have no definitive solution. That said, the risk is no greater than, for example, in the United States.

In my view, the Charter will need to carefully define ownership in terms of both rights and responsibilities. If one owns something, they are also responsible for its upkeep and preventing any negative social effects from its use. (e.g., pollution). There is also the matter of what can be owned. While non-sentient assets are fine, as sentience increases the rights of that which is owned should increase. (Ownership of sentient beings is a separate issue that will be explored in another blog.)