Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The compatibility of effective self-ownership and joint world ownership
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
Responsible organisation
2003 (English)Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
Abstract [sv]

The three main conclusions of this doctoral thesis are: first, that effective self-ownership is compatible with joint world ownership; second, that it is incompatible with private ownership as expressed in right-libertarianism; third, that it is incompatible with private ownership as expressed in left-libertarianism. Effective self-ownership is a technical way of expressing personal freedom, and joint world ownership means that the world is owned by everyone in common and that people, therefore, have an equal say as regards its use. Right-libertarianism and left-libertarianism both support private ownership. The difference between them is mainly their respective view on how private property legitimately can be formed. Crudely put, the right-libertarian believes that ownership may be formed through mixing one's labour with the external resources in question, whereas left-libertarianism recognises ownership only if it is initially equally distributed. Furthermore, it is argued that joint world ownership, right-libertarianism, left-libertarianism and the various versions of these exhaust the field, or that these are, at least, the most obvious alternatives to be reckoned with. It may, therefore, also be concluded that if one finds effective self-ownership valuable, one should also adopt joint world ownership. To be able to assess the arguments of this thesis, one obviously needs to know more about ownership. Therefore, this doctoral thesis will also include a thorough analysis of rights and ownership.

This thesis takes part in and elaborates the traditional debate within political theory: whether personal freedom is compatible with material equality. It is by many believed that they are incompatible. The reason for this is that the measures taken to uphold material equality appear to reduce personal freedom. But if effective self-ownership is a reasonable expression of personal freedom and joint world ownership of material equality, then the thesis advocated here claims that the scepticism of their incompatibility is ill founded and that they, indeed, are compatible.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Department of Political Science, Stockholm University , 2003. , 171 p.
Series
Stockholm studies in politics, ISSN 0346-6620 ; 91
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalization Studies)
Research subject
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-7951ISBN: 91-7265-589-5 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-7951DiVA: diva2:199340
Public defence
2003-03-21, Hörsal 9, Hus D, Södra huset, Frescati, Stockholm, 10:00 (English)
Opponent
Available from: 2003-02-28 Created: 2003-02-28 Last updated: 2017-09-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

PDF (Not accessible to users outside Sweden)

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jedenheim-Edling, Magnus
By organisation
Department of Political Science
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalization Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 116 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf