Is there a reason to accept that the current, pertaining arrangement of property ownership is equitable? We normally grant property rights when they are reciprocated; we consent not to harm others, if we ourselves will not be harmed. With land, we consent to stay and remain away from the property of others but are we being reciprocated proportionately?
If we have not been granted a sufficiency of land then is it acceptable that we are expected to respect the property rights of others? In what sense can the person who is ejected from the property and land retaliate? And if there is not equitable means to retaliate then in what sense are the existing rights legitimate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment