Universal Access Or Private Property?

in Deep Dives3 months ago (edited)

That's a very important question, and our answer has always been wrong. We've been lulled into believing that "private property" is the right answer, not realizing that the two possible answers are mutually exclusive: private property denies universal access, and universal access precludes private property.


Image by OpenClipart-Vectors - source: Pixabay

Access is what we need. Ask yourself what's important: is it important to own a music CD, or is access to the music you want to hear the important thing? Do you need to own the CD if you can just connect to an online music database and listen to your favorite music any time you wish to do so? The CD that I own is mine, so I'm the only one who can access that music. Next question: who owns hospital-beds? We all need access to a hospital-bed when the need arises, but because there's a private owner somewhere of every hospital-bed, we don't get to decide who gets access to those beds. Furthermore, because we don't think in term of universal access, but in terms of private ownership, there aren't enough hospital-beds to go around in times of peak-demand, like right now. The result is that only the individuals who can pay enough will have access to those much needed beds. Private property is the death of universal access. Even in the places where we are able to organize universal access, like online music, we fuck up the entire idea with the baked-in notion of private property, so individuals must still pay for access to files that are just there; you can buy songs and albums or pay a subscription-fee for an online service.

“Comradeship, dignity, amorosity, love, solidarity, fraternity, friendship, ethics: all these names stand in contrast to the commodified, monetised relations of capitalism, all describe relations developed in struggles against capitalism and which can be seen as anticipating or creating a society beyond capitalism.”
source: John Holloway, Crack Capitalism - goodreads

This systemic illness of capitalism and the widespread capitalist mindset is more apparent now than ever before in our lifetimes; in this global pandemic we NEED universal access to the goods and services necessary to save lifes. Instead we're bogged down in a nightmare scenario of clogged up supply chains and battling private owners, within borders and between nations. This is what happens when "individual", "personal", "private" and "profit" form the focal point of our way of thinking; it couldn't have been any other way. So we blame the virus for the deaths, the implosion of the economy and the shortage of essential supplies and services, perfectly illustrating how difficult it is for us to admit that we're just wrong, to admit that capitalism is the problem here. Communities solve problems and provide essentials, individuals never do; that simple truth is hard to accept apparently, or at least it's hard to translate into our way of producing and distributing goods and services. When you think about it, it's utterly unnecessary to own anything. Why own a house? As long as you can live there and people respect your need to have a place to live, you're just fine. I know that's several bridges too far for most people right now, but just ponder on it for a while. Hopefully you'll realize that sharing is so much better than hoarding, just for practical reasons alone. First watch the video though; in this interview professor Richard Wolff explains exactly how and why capitalism fails so hard right now.

Prof. Richard Wolff on Pandemic Economics

Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, keep safe, keep healthy!

wave-13 divider odrau steem

Recent articles you might be interested in:

Latest article >>>>>>>>>>>This Is NOT War!
Everyone's A SocialistBailouts Versus Pitchforks
Nineteen Eighty-Four ElectionsBailouts Biting Back?
Lying BidenEverything Is Suspect

wave-13 divider odrau steem

Thanks for stopping by and reading. If you really liked this content, if you disagree (or if you do agree), please leave a comment. Of course, upvotes, follows, resteems are all greatly appreciated, but nothing brings me and you more growth than sharing our ideas.


Utility is key. We want an outcome and have been conditioned to seek it through traditional means.

Welcome to Hive. Following.

I agree. Thanks so much for stopping by and for the warm welcome! :-)

Capitalism motivates people to do things. At least we need to integrate apathy toward our peers and not just think about ourselves.

Does capitalism motivate us to do things? I'd like to know why you believe that. What I can see is that capitalism motivates us to be selfish, it motivates inventions only if they're profitable, it will never motivate us to do the RIGHT thing. That's what I see and that's what history shows. Weren't we "doing" things before capitalism? Could it be that necessity, curiosity and a wish for a better life are enough to motivate us to do things?

Without an economic layer, a civilization cannot prosper, thrive, and survive. Human consciousness is not ready to think at a different level and live in a world without a form of exchange or money.

Human consciousness is not ready...

That I agree with, somewhat. How is it then that in times of crisis we are perfectly capable to plan the economy? I agree that a world without exchange of goods and services is too far removed from our current reality to implement all at once right now. That doesn't take away the need to keep working to move in that direction, one step at a time. That starts with the realization that what we have now simply isn't worthy of our capabilities as the ruling species on this planet. We can do better, of that I'm 100% sure :-)

When we face a crisis, we need to react quickly to find solutions. In the normal state is the status quo without too much change in the economy. ;)

Private Property, Period.

It is a compromise between how things should be and how things are. I don't disagree with the ideology of sharing is caring. But many people have, historically speaking, made bad decisions. Therefore, I would prefer that I find a way to limit my exposure to people who may in fact hurt me or even kill me. So, I like free markets. I like competitions. I like walls. I want the freedom to protect myself. Ultimately, I believe in freewill, in giving people choices. And we all make bad decisions sometimes and some more than others. One of the problems with mob-ruling democracy is that the majority of the people can vote in a bad thing. Because many people can be crazy. Some people are smarter than other people. Some people can run faster than other people. Equality of opportunities can be good. But results vary. That is diversity. I want to limit how much decisions made by some people can affect those who are trying to remain independent. I believe in my body my choice. I don't want you to dictate what I have to put into my body to the extent that I am not actively trying too aggressively and everything, knowingly, with an intent to perhaps hurt other people with whatever I may put in my body perhaps. I'm also against pursuing legal action against pre-trial pre-crime which may violate the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments especially among possibly others as well to say the least. I like private property. I like that freedom. I want to do what I want to do. I don't want you to be my boss. I want to be selfish, greedy, etc, even if that is bad. I want the freedom to be evil or whatever you want to call it. I think it is not evil, actually, but for argument sake, even if it was, I want it to the extent I am not too aggressively hurting others, etc, etc, perhaps.