Property: Mainstream and Critical PositionsC.B. MacPherson University of Toronto Press, 15. 12. 1999. - 210 страница The legitimate role of the state in relation to property and the justification of property institutions of various kinds are matters of increasing concern in the modern world. Political and social theorists, jurists, economists, and historians have taken positions for and against the property institutions upheld in their time by the state, and further dehate seems inevitable. This book brings together ten classic statements which set out the main arguments that are now appealed to and places them in historical and critical perspective. The extracts presented here – all substantial – are from Loeke, Rousseau, Bentham, Marx, Mill, Green, Veblen, Tawney, Morris Cohen, and Charles Reich. A note hy the editor at the head of each extract highlights the arguments in it and relates it to the time at which it was written. Professor Macpherson's introductory and concluding essays expose the roots of some common misconceptions of property, identify current changes in the concept of property, and predict future changes. Macpherson argues that a specific change in the concept (which now appears possible) is needed to rescue liberal democracy from its present impasse. Property is both a valuable text on a crucial topic in political and social theory and a significant contribution to the continuing debate |
Из књиге
Резултати 1-5 од 29
... limited understanding, of what property is. The other one is more serious. It is a genuine misconception, which affects the whole theoretical handling of the concept of property by many modern writers. Both usages can be traced ...
... limited, is a right of individuals. This point needs some emphasis, for it can easily be lost sight of. The fact that we need some such term as 'common property,' to distinguish such rights from the exclusive individual rights which are ...
... limited period and on certain conditions, than in the case of an outright sale, but in both cases what is transferred is an enforceable exclusive right. Yet we still speak of property as the thing itself. How did this current usage ...
... limited to certain uses of it and was often not freely disposable. Different people might have different rights in the same piece of land, and by law or manorial custom many of those rights were not fully disposable by the current owner ...
... limited and not always saleable rights in things were being replaced by virtually unlimited and saleable rights to things. As property became increasingly saleable absolute rights to things, the distinction between the right and the ...