In Reply to: Re: The essence of property? posted by miranda on November 28, 2001 at 14:16:29:
: I think it has more to do with an attachment to place instead of property. I don't own Mt. Holyoke or my house back home, but I am attached to them. It is not so much ownership or possession, but the memories associated with a place.
I guess what I am saying is that it is an interesting phenomenon to see people associate their identity and memories to land or material objects. Of course it sparks memories and their hardwork could lead them to cherish the land even more. But, where did that start? Why do people take that extra step to claim something as their own. We may have a deep attachment to the sea, but we don't claim it as our property and commodify it ( at least individuals don't do that). It is this attachment that Communism is fighting against.
Post a Followup