A Scientific Defense of Property Rights
In the 19th Century, socialism arose as a form of “scientific economics.” The reason for this is because in the early part of the Modern Era, the scientific world view was the Newtonian one. The world was deterministic, meaning that if we knew the position and velocity of all objects in the universe, we could know the future. When this idea was taken up by philosophers, we got reactions ranging from Kant’s division of the world into a deterministic phenomenal world and a free noumenal world to Marx’s deterministic history, with a world going inevitably toward world communism. Adam Smith gave us abstract notions like an “invisible hand,” while socialists promised us a scientifically designed economy – one which was finally, fully just. If we could design better and more perfect machines, then we could design a better and more perfect economy. The fact that property rights were associated with Natural Law only put it in the category of non-scientific ideas.One of the great contributions of Charles Darwin was his idea that randomness could contribute to order and complexity. This idea became much more solidified in the New Synthesis, when Darwinian natural selection was combined with genetics – we realized that the mechanism of evolution was in random mutations of the DNA, creating variations that could be selected for or against in nature, whether that selection was through natural selection or sexual selection, as Darwin suggested, or through such mechanisms such as punctuated equilibrium, as Gould suggested (and which has received a great deal of support from Walter Kauffman’s work). The notion of randomness as a part of nature that contributed to its order and complexity was developed even in physics in quantum mechanics at the beginning of the 20th century, and in the second half of the 20th century in the theories of chaos, complexity, emergence, information, and catastrophe. The simplistic view of increasing entropy as merely being order turning into randomness has been greatly modified, showing that there are kinds of randomness that actually result not only in order, but sometimes in more complex forms of order. Newton gave us the mechanistic view of the world – but Darwin gave us the much more accurate biological view of the world: a world of change and complexity.All of this seems to be a strange path to property rights, but certain ideas must first be established. Property is not a physical property – it is a biological property. We find the idea of property rights deep in evolutionary history, in the first territorial fishes. Most of today’s territorial fishes are lobe-finned fishes, and there is little doubt that lobe-finned fishes have been territorial for literally hundreds of millions of years. An example is the brightly-colored gobies, which are very territorial. “For many vertebrates, a clearly defined territory for offspring rearing seems to be fundamental. This involves aggressive behavior of a great variety on the part of the male (and sometimes the female too), usually of a ritual nature, but effective in defending an area” (John T. Bonner, “The Evolution of Culture in Animals,” 86). These fish establish territories where they live, feed, mate, and protect their eggs from predators. Schooling fish, like herring, are simple in both coloration and behavior. Why spend energy on dangerous bright colors to attract mates when everyone releases their eggs and sperm at once, collectively? And why develop complex behaviors if there is no reason to, if there is no conflict, since there is no need to defend territory if you are a schooling fish in the open ocean? A great deal of energy is spent on making literally millions or even billions of eggs, let alone sperm – and there is only a limited chance that it will be either your sperm or your egg that survives. But with territorial fishes, the energy is put into protecting the fewer numbers of eggs, but those eggs are more likely to survive. And, more importantly for the individual fish, the female knows her eggs are protected until they hatch, and the male knows the eggs were fertilized by his sperm. Thus, there is a certain advantage to protecting territory, since it ensure that any particular individual fish has passed on its DNA to future generations. Herring can never know for sure.One of the consequences of the establishment of territory by lobe-finned fishes was that complex behaviors has to evolve as well. This is due to the conflict created by the creation and defense of territory. The conflict comes about between the needs to aggressively defend territory and sexually reproduce. If one just defends, one runs off potential mates. But passive gobies lose territory – and cannot attract mates. What develops from the conflict between the straightforward actions of defense and sex is the mating ritual, a nonlinear feedback behavior designed to allow members of the opposite sex to enter one’s private space. It is a dance. It is a dance wherein linear elements conflict to create nonlinear systems, which reorganize the chaos created by the conflict into a new order. Ritual is the emergent system created out of the conflicting elements. It is a safe space in which the participants play out the conflicts, to ensure mating can occur. One result is that gobies differentiate between individuals. Territoriality (notions of private property) created individuality through the need to ritualize sex. More, it resulted in the creation of ritual itself, which led to more and more complex behaviors as different species evolved, including art and religion in humans. And it was, incidentally, the lobe-finned fishes that evolved into the first amphibians – and territoriality was carried onto the land, and into every land vertebrate. All amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals are territorial. And this includes humans.Thus, evolution established property rights as a fundamental way of ensuring reproductive fitness. In social mammals, this became partly socialized, since it was the tribe or family group as a whole that owned the territory they defended. And all humans groups have always believed that they owned the land – otherwise they would not have spent so much time, energy, and lives on protecting it from others. In social animals, including pair-bonding animals, this resulted in the development of personal relationships, including love. But none of this could be possible without a complex neural system to allow for the creation of such complex behavior.Social mammals have strong social bonds even among those who are not mates. These bonds were generated through elaborating mating rituals into things like grooming rituals. Primates have strong grooming rituals, which have led to sexual pleasure, leading to recreational sex in humans and bonobos, and massage in humans. We can see this behavior in the fact that “the human neurotransmitter vasopressin, which is closely associated with aggression, is also deeply implicated in the drive to stay with and cherish one’s mate and protect one’s offspring. Without the resistance to strangers there could be no individuality and love” (Frederick Turner, The Culture of Hope, 170). The conflict is found even at the neurotransmitter level. Which should not surprise us, since we have already shown that it is the protection of territory that resulted in the kinds of rituals that created pair-bonds in the first place.Animals that have territory not only protect that territory, but work to improve it. Gobies organize rocks in their territories, and keep the caves they create to live and hide in clean. Bower birds decorate their bowers to attract females. Often the male animal himself is decorated, or he creates a larger, more beautiful territory – or, oftentimes, both. Thus undoubtedly explains why human males feel the need to accumulate more and more property, and why we try to decorate ourselves with things ranging from nice clothes to tatoos. And it also explains why, when we own property, we have more of a tendency to take care of it than if we do not own it. When we use private property, we treat
it like someone else will come along and clean up the mess we make, or that if we don’t take what is there, then someone else will. We do this because deep in our evolutionary past, in our deepest of instincts, we believe that not only do we have to keep our own territories in good shape to attract mates, but that if any competition’s territory is ruined, then potential mates will be discouraged from mating with our competition. This is the purpose of raids on the territory of other tribes, or exploiting commons – which results in the Tragedy of the Commons. So if we truly want to protect the world’s resources and keep the world clean, then all property must become privately owned, without danger of a government being able to come along and take that property. No amount of social engineering will be able to change this biological imperative to owning property.And this is certainly best overall. For it is only on our own land where we can be free to be who we are. It is only on our land where we and our families – our tribes – can be safe. There, we can live and love and prosper and speak as we wish. All of our freedoms derive from property rights – and property rights are part of our evolutionary heritage. Thus, there is nothing less scientific than the idea of abolishing private property, as the socialists have wanted to do. The desire to abolish property rights is, as we have seen, downright unnatural, from a mammalian – and even land vertebrate – point of view. And what about that “Invisible hand’? Well, scientists now call that “emergence,” and it comes about in exactly the way Smith said it did. So it looks more and more like it is free markets which are truly “scientific economics.” It’s just that the science had to catch up with what the free market economists already understood.
Link to this page
I love your post and scientifically, I think it is significant. I appretiate your voice and your argument of private property rights. However, I thought you may get a kick out of how I think about this. You see, I am a Christian and I think Darwin was just a great observer of nature. His observations are present in scripture as well, but I really liked how you stated
“One of the great contributions of Charles Darwin was his idea that randomness could contribute to order and complexity.”
For me, that is the creation narrative. However, Darwinian thought and the struggle between God and Nature is simply off course for me. I think that Darwin himself would have to say that his work was not one absent of God’s divine intervention but an observation of it. Anyway, this subject takes me away from the main point at hand and that is a defense of property rights.
Property rights are biblical and are throughout the scriptures. However, I want to give you peak into how my brain works and feel free to laugh along with me. You have to have fun when you try to attain wisdom because it is actually a futile excersise especially when you try to share it in text. But here goes:
Property Rights an example through the Garden of Eden Narrative.
My premise is that All Property is God’s yet, it is a gift to us to learn to respect our neighbor’s and God’s property as well as our own given to us. If you think of all the times property rights are present through out scripture you could do this with any such example pro or con.
My example is God creating the Garden of Eden. God owns the Garden of Eden, but he also Created Adam and then Eve. God gave Adam and Eve free run of the place and dominion or Property rights over all the beasts and plants and land I would suggest. Adam and Eve enjoyed Dominion over all, but one tree and it’s fruit. God asked for Adam and Eve to respect God’s Property Rights over this one Tree and it’s fruits.
Well enter a socialist squirrel Serpent who never lies, but yet deceives Eve into infringing on God’s property right and suggests that if she only eats of the apple, she will have dominon over all including knowledge not unlike God who created all.
Eve tresspasses and obtains the fruit and eats it, shares it with Adam. Adam, who is the first conservative, finishes it off, not wanting to waste it, thus conserving it. Uh, NO! Property rights have been infringed upon. God, who intended Adam and Eve to respect God’s property rights over that one Tree and it’s fruit, Casts Adam and Eve out of the Garden.
Now, the human narrative is in constant turmoil trying to recapture the innocence of Respect of God’s Private Property Rights.
Now that Adam and Eve and Humanity have their own property that they must protect in order to mate and procreate and also provide nourishment for themselves without the benefit of the correct relationship with God where Property rights are held as the ideal. So, now we have even sibling killing sibling over what? The struggle to understand the simple ideal of property rights. Kingdoms and peoples will now have to struggle with other kindoms and peoples who do not have the same Property rights ideals and relationship with God.
Thus, it may be said that love of God can also be in respecting the ten commandments that when followed provide the perfect ideal of Property rights that we once had in the Garden of Eden before Eve and Adam broke them and started us on this journey to learn to uphold them. Don’t think so? Well, look for yourself:
Exodus 20:
1 And God spake all these words, saying,
2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 (1)Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 (2)Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 (3)Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8 (4)Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
12 (5)Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13 (6)Thou shalt not kill.
14 (7)Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 (8)Thou shalt not steal.
16 (9)Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 (10)Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.
If you think of these 10 commandments in regards of Private Property Rights, they will truly keep you from infringing upon your neighbors or God’s Private Property.
Break one of these commandments and what have you done? Infringed upon anothers Private Property rights.
Well, this is how my mind works in a nutshell. Science to me is simply an observational tool that unlocks what wisdom is already present in scripture. Science is like the Greek language, it is dissectable. I think that is why Hebrew is the language that resonates with my mind and heart. It is suggestable, and the depths are just like deep waters that can be dived into, but you must return to the surface and try to grasp what you can remember. Science is a tool that helps you retain your observations in a very linear fashion. However, wisdom is something gained after diving into the deep waters again and again until you understand that observations of science and the human eye, are truly two dimmensional and linear. Don’t get me wrong, they are very worth while and I applaud those who rely on good tools. However, I encourage and have witnessed that the greatest scientists, philosophers and others, are those who dive deep into the deep, deep waters of wisdom. My favorite portal to wisdom is scripture and the wisdom literature especially; Job, Proverbs, even Song of Solomon and the rest. It is a rich tapestry we enjoy. After all it is to me and many others all God’s Private Property that he has given us dominon over. If only we could learn to uphold the ideal of Private Property, and that sure is not Socialism. I really do not see the Socialistic thread many faith institutions profess out of scripture when you hold the entirety of it’s depths. I see a relationship between the creator and that in which He created and loved so much that we were set free to dive again and again into the deep waters until that day when we return again to Him. Until then, we can only utilize the tools we create or are given.
You see, I understand that your assertion is profound and correct:
“It’s just that the science had to catch up with what the free market economists already understood.”
But I must add because of my faith that Darwin and Science had to catch up with not only what the free market economists understand, but also catch up to what God intended for us in the Garden of eden and in our lives today! You see, I must assert that Science and Darwin are but observations of the Creation. I applaude them for their diligence and creativity in observing.
But that is just how I see the world around me. As an apologist for my own simple mind and limited tools of observation as an artist in all the media at my disposal, I can only give you a glimpse into the workings of my mind. I hope you enjoyed this as much as I enjoyed your post and scientific approach. I can not wait for your next venture on the Grizzly Groundswell!
If you can assist me in defeating this evil of socialism, I would be so ever grateful. I do however question if we will ever defeat it. I see socialism as that one deceptive evil that may always be with us until Christ returns. It is so deceptive and plays on our frailty of mind and utilizes our original sin so well, that the deceived only perceive it after they have already have been befallen into slavery or their slow demise.
Excerpt from E. W. Everson’s Handwritten Journal with my comments in ( parentheses )
“(Today, socialism is bigger, more prevalent and better funded having infested almost every institution we hold dear including our churches. Great-Grandpa Grizzly’s closing words of this document are very true even today. If you look back on how our family farmers were destroyed and now the taxpayer is threatened almost to the brink of revolt, these words seem almost prophetic,)
“I could write a book on this one subject alone (if only you did Great-Grandpa Grizzly!) That would be very interesting to see how these imported Scalists (socialists) could come and organize the Farmers and I.W.W.’s to gather an organization that would destroy the Farmers first, and then all other taxpayers, and to this day there is lots of Farmers just as blind as ever.” –E. W. Everson Handwritten life story
(Today, you could add taxpayers to that list of people “just as bind as ever.” I was “just as blind as ever” until Great-Grandpa Grizzly called out from his grave or deep inside my DNA. Thank God my Grizzly Awoke)”
The above is taken from the introductory of E. W. Everson’s Handwritten Life Story passed down in my family. It is the only document I have directly of his. I only have the photocopy.
ZATAVU, I am glad you joined us here on the Grizzly Groundswell. Keep up the good work!
~Teddy Bear, Chad Everson
Ready to argue with the themes of education-all. All the same, you can very well write about it