Property in Land

Home Forums Coffee Shop Property in Land

This topic contains 2 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Hogeye 1 day, 23 hours ago.

  • Author
  • #168


    I’m currently reading Studies in Mutualist Political Economy by Kevin Carson, and in the section on land monopoly he quotes our own Hogeye on the relationship between “sticky property” and “usufruct”. Looking up the web links from which Carson draws the quotes, I am unable to find the forum thread, either on the original site or on the Internet Archive.

    I wondered if Hogeye had any copies saved of that discussion to share? Or if he could help explain the different ideas, as he understands them? I find the whole ongoing discussion over property in land interesting, especially as it seems like one of the major differences between mutualism and anarcho-capitalism, but reading some of the more recent writings on the subject by Carson and others leaves me wondering what specifically both sides are advocating for.

  • #222


    I had forgotten, but Kevin’s book has very good footnotes. It turns out most of what he quotes is from the (now defunct) forum. Some of it is recapped in the chapter on property in my book “Against Authority.”

    Footnotes from Carson’s “Mutualist Political Economy.”

    10. Bill Orton, “Cohen’s Argument,” Free-Market.Net forums, January 1, 2001 Captured April 30, 2004.
    11. Orton, “Re: On the Question of Private Property,” Anti- State.Com Forum, August 30, 2003.;action=display;threadid =6726;start=20 Captured April 30, 2004.
    12. Bill Orton, “Yet Another Variation,” Anti-State.Com Forum, December 7, 2003. http://anti-;action=display;threadid=7965;start=0 Captured April 30, 2004.
    13. Bill Orton, “Property (Wolf De Voon),” Anti-State.Com Forum, July 07, 2003, http://anti-;action=display;threadid=6072;start=0 Captured April 30, 2004.

    51. Bill Orton, “Property and Panarchy,” Free-Market.Net Forum, December 28, 2000. Captured April 30, 2004.
    52. Orton, “Cohen’s Argument.”
    53. Bill Orton, “Which is MORE important–market or anarchy?” Anti- State.Com Forum, August 23, 2003. http://anti-;action=display;threadid=6721;start=20 Captured April 30, 2004.
    54. Bill Orton, “Re: Anarch-Socialism,” Anti-State.Com Forum, April 1, 2004. http://anti-;action=display;threadid=9256;start=120 Captured April 30, 2004.
    55. Bill Orton, “Re: Poll: What if An-capistan turned anti- capitalist?” Anti-State.Com Forum, January 31, 2003. http://anti-;action=display;threadid=8702;start=140 Captured April 30, 2004.
    56. Orton, “Re: Yet Another Variation…” Antistate.Com Forum, December 8, 2003.;action=display;threadid =7965;start=20 Captured April 30, 2004.
    57. Orton, “Re: On the Question of Private Property,” Anti- State.Com Forum, August 30, 2003. http://anti-;action=display;threadid=6726;start=20 Captured April 30, 2004.

  • #223


    In short, I think that mutualist “possession” property and anarcho-capitalist “sticky” property are essentially the same, except for a shorter abandonment period for the former. “Abandonment period” is defined as the time lag of non-use before an owned resource is deemed no longer owned, and hence (re)homesteadable. This is IMO a matter of degree, and not quality. Thus possession and sticky property are both sub-categories of private property. (Geoism is also quite close to anarcho-capitalism.)


You must be logged in to reply to this topic.