Seite - 139 - in Reflective Cosmopolitanism - Educating towards inclusive communities through Philosophical Enquiry

IN AND OUT THE PARk (MANUAL) 139 Leading Idea 3: Private property In this episode, a group of teens in a public park assume the right to appropriate a space and manage it as private property. It raises various questions. What is the difference be- tween public and private? Does being ‘public’ mean it belongs to everyone, to nobody, or to the state? And, along this line of reasoning, is there anything in the world that doesn’t belong to anyone, but that we cannot define as being public? The concept of property was problematized in political terms for the first time by the thinkers of the Enlightenment. Previously, the debate on property had been focused on what the fairest way was to distribute goods, but private property - both of things and of people - was considered to be inviolable. For instance, for centuries it was considered natural to conquer, buy, or sell human beings as slaves. At best, the question only concerned how one was to treat them. The idea that fellow human beings could be treated like things at one’s disposal was deeply ingrained in many “advanced” societies and has remained so until re- cently. Just think, slavery was abolished in the United States only in 1865. Considering the state of nature about which was discussed in Leading Idea 1, it is likely that there was a period in which humanity was living by hunting and gathering and private property didn’t exist. The birth of agriculture, and the consequent stability, probably furthered the appropriation of spaces for cultivation. This was, at least, the view of Rousseau, who, un- like Hobbes, considered the state of nature to be the happiest moment in the life of human be- ings. According to him, it is not the right of all people over all things that is the cause of the war of all against all, but rather it is private property, for the latter generated inequality and injustice. In the 19th century, property was defined by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon as “a theft” and was connected to the exploitation of work. This, in fact, is the cause of the appropriation of the work of others. Should property be collectivized in order to obviate every type of conflict that could arise? You can find further information in the manual to Tina and Amir, episode 6 and Hanadi, episode 3. Discussion Plan: Private/Public • When can a thing be considered one’s own? • What is the difference between public and private? • Should something defined as “public” in our society be considered as being the property of all people, or property of the State? • Who decides what is public or private? • Is there anything that is neither public nor private? • If there were no laws, could I lay claim to something as mine? • If there were no laws, would private property exist? • Do animals have something similar to what we humans define as private property? Exercise: Private Property Say whether or not the cases listed below could be considered private property and then explain why. Yes No Maybe A pet