The Private Landed Property Delusion

quackquack

Active member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
273
As you prepare to make your 25th thousanth and some what post, maybe you may be better setting up your own site to argue with yourself about stuff that don't matter. I'm new here, but you are a running joke, reposting against yourself, and genearally polluting the capatisist derived Internet. Either start saying something new, or quit the pollution.

Queue a 17 post fight with yourself, on the value of free stuff for everyone...
 
Last edited:


Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
As you prepare to make your 25th thousath and some what post, that you may be better setting up your own site to argue with yourself about stuff that don't matter. I'm new here, but you are a running joke, reposting against yourself, and genearally polluting the capatisist derived Internet. Either start saying something new, or quit the pollution.
You certainly named yourself well.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Of course, this disconnection of the human being from the land is parallel to the disconnection of the worker from his or her labour, and is very much part of the same process. In the Gaelic clan system, people worked together in teams, such a team was known as a meitheal. Work was, of course, to ensure the supply of food and other necessities, but was much more than this. It was also an expression of solidarity and belonging to the clan, and an expression of the person, him or herself.

Under the capitalist regime, labour is seperated from the land, from the community, and seperated from the worker who carries it out. It becomes a sellable commodity, just like any other commodity. It is simply sold to the highest bidder in return for other commodities, which are equally disconnected from any community or person.

So, we see that private property breaks the person from the land, from the community, and from his or her own working activity.
 

farnaby

Well-known member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
1,937
So we see that the relationship between the landowner and the land is broken, and needless to say, the great majority of the population have no connection with the land whatsoever, and little or no connection between each other.
These three statements may be true but there's a few huge leaps to finding causation between them. Anyone who found their livelihood in pre-capitalist urban centres started to be disconnected from 'the land' simply because they did not need their own or their own community's land to put food on their table. And this disconnection hardly caused social atomisation in a time of parish, guild and other forms of society.

Private land ownership may have increased the speed at which owners, farmers and residents pass through land but it is hardly a sufficient cause for the alienation you describe.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
These three statements may be true but there's a few huge leaps to finding causation between them. Anyone who found their livelihood in pre-capitalist urban centres started to be disconnected from 'the land' simply because they did not need their own or their own community's land to put food on their table. And this disconnection hardly caused social atomisation in a time of parish, guild and other forms of society.

Private land ownership may have increased the speed at which owners, farmers and residents pass through land but it is hardly a sufficient cause for the alienation you describe.
You are correct, a chara, in saying that private land ownership is not sufficient, in itself, to go from clan society to the slave society of the Roman empire, to feudalism, and then to capitalism. For that to happen, the connection between the lord and the peasants has to be broken, the guilds have to be stripped of their monopolies, and the ban on usury has to be lifted, slavery abolished, and labour has to be considered as labour time and made equivalent to money. But, the change from clan connection with the land to the private property of the individual is the first and most fundamental break.
 

Vote_No_on_Everything

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
1,139
I think you are mostly correct on this Cael, though I have observed farmers with small farms who are sentimenly attached to their land in the sense that they are driven by an impulse to work it & maintain it, (ie weeding, fencing, repairing, tending crops, etc) even when they are making nothing out of it. A sort of 'Bull McCabe' breed who would not sell the land or a site on it for all the gold in Fort Knox. I can see some sense in allowing these people who 'care' for the land to own it.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
I think you are mostly correct on this Cael, though I have observed farmers with small farms who are sentimenly attached to their land in the sense that they are driven by an impulse to work it & maintain it, (ie weeding, fencing, repairing, tending crops, etc) even when they are making nothing out of it. A sort of 'Bull McCabe' breed who would not sell the land or a site on it for all the gold in Fort Knox. I can see some sense in allowing these people who 'care' for the land to own it.
Yes, that is absolutely correct, a chara. And I would say most farmers feel that way. But that feeling is really the same as the clan attitude to land. As Marx points out, at every stage of development, the older stages dont disappear, but are integrated into the new. Private ownership of the land is not necessary for love of the land. Nor does it prevent it. Private property, as an institution, does not include love of the land itself. The clan system does and is based on that love of the actual land itself.

The argument against leaving the land in the hands of its current owners is that they are a very small group of people. Most of the people of the Western world are now totally seperated from the land. And, as I claimed above, this means that they are seperated from each other. Society now doesnt really exist. I might also say that private property has atomised even the farmers. Rural isolation and loneliness is now a chronic problem - with some farmers even afraid to marry incase the wife would take half the land.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Just on the change from the clan system, as found in Ireland before 1600, and the feudal system as practiced in Europe and later in Ireland. Marx points out that in a clan system, the whole clan feels connected to the god or deity who founded the tribe, but do not consider themselves direct descendents. The Taoiseach is elected, usually by the elders of the clan. It is not automatic who the Taoiseach will be. A major change happens with the coming of despotic systems such as the Roman empire. Here the king \ emperor claims a direct family line, or filiation, with the god. This automatically breaks the clan system, as the people are now outside witnesses to the drama of the imperial family, and of course, the only function of the people is to provide for this family and its court. The land ultimately belongs to the despot, so the connection between the people is now based on the despot, not the land. This system of thought is carried over into the feudal Christian period, where the kings and their lords do not claim filial connection with God, but claim to have been chosen by God to rule and own the land. But still, although the peoples direct connection to the land is gone, and is now mediated through the lord, still the people are connected to each other, via the lord. And that includes the trades guilds, not just the agricultural workers \ peasants.

It's only when this final connection is broken, when the connection between people is utterly broken, and when they become loose and atomised agents, selling their labour time for a going rate, without prejudice, to whoever will buy it, and when the buyer of that labour has no more responsibility to the seller of labour beyond paying the agreed price for his\her labour time, that modern capitalism can begin. The capitalist system is not interested in the human beings who generate labour time, only in the labour time itself as a tradable commodity. Any connection between the human beings who generate the labour time, and, in turn, buy commodities in their role as consumers, when recognised at all, is viewed as a threat to the system and strongly discouraged.
 
Last edited:

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Actually, on the point of filiation, Marx points out that filiation still exist within the capitalist system, but it is not the filiation of father and son, or god and monarch, but of capital and its interest\rent:

"Instead of simply representing the relations of commodities, it [capital] enters now, so to say, into private relations with itself. It differentiates itself as original value from itself as surplus-value; as the father differentiates himself from himself qua the son, yet both are one and of one age: for only by the surplus-value of £10 does the £100 originally advanced become capital, and so soon as this takes place, so soon as the son, and by the son, the father, is begotten, so soon does their difference vanish, and they again become one, £110."

Das kapital. Vol. 1.


So, Capital is felt to beget itself, leaving humanity utterly on the outside. We see this mentality all the time, when capitalist economists talk about "the economy" as if it were some kind of autonomous being, outside the rational control of the human race. Indeed, we are often told that we must make sacrifices to this strange beast.
 
M

MrFunkyBoogaloo

Brief summary, rubbish !!

When the waters saw it god it blushed !!
What exactly is it that you find rubbish about Cael's posts? We all realise you're new here but perhaps you could, point-by-point, make your case against Cael's very well made ones.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
It is quite sad but this is how the affairs of the world are governed in

Accredited online business degree
Indeed it is. And, for the most part, what business students are taught is superstition and magic. Take the idea of private landed property, it has no more basis in reality than the midevel idea that the earth is flat, or that kings are directly chosen by God. Of course it has effect, but so did the Spanish Inquisition.
 

Conor

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
5,149
Indeed it is. And, for the most part, what business students are taught is superstition and magic. Take the idea of private landed property, it has no more basis in reality than the midevel idea that the earth is flat, or that kings are directly chosen by God. Of course it has effect, but so did the Spanish Inquisition.
Cael, that's a spambot.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304

Amma7

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
19
Chance would be a very fine thing for most of us; try renting from a bad irish landlord.

You need a dose of reality.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Chance would be a very fine thing for most of us; try renting from a bad irish landlord.

You need a dose of reality.
Is there any such thing as a good landlord, a chara?
 

Jack White

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
1,705
Is there any such thing as a good landlord, a chara?
:lol:

I must say Cael, that over the passage of time, I have grown into a certain admiration for you, a kind of fondness even.

I enjoy your posts a great deal, and your optimistic view of the dignity of the fundamental human condition often stops me in my tracks.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top