this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
6 points (68.8% liked)

Leftism

2129 readers
14 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Solarpunk memes [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Power of Land: Georgism 101

https://youtu.be/smi_iIoKybg

Discusses importance of common ownership of land and natural resources

@leftism

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Georgism tends not to augment leftist theory or objectives

And like I already said, not every policy is implemented to solve every problem.

Georgians want landlords and business owners to be taxed such that ...

And this is a sweeping generalization. Not all georgians agree on every aspect of georgism. There are georgians that want to keep a pure "free market" capitalism, there are those that want a mixed economy, and those that want socialism or communism in addition to georgism.

It's not a one size fits all camp.

ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally.

Do you disagree with this?

Leftists want to abolish profit

This is also just a sweeping generalization. Just as with georgism, leftism isn't something that can be defined by a simplified, sweeping generalization. Leftists are a diverse group.

You're not talking about policy, which is where the actual conversation is at.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The generalizations were not intended as asserting rules for association with a label, as much as for questioning the meaningful overlap of principles.

Leftism engages class struggle.

Georgism seeks codification to moderate the class antagonism, without addressing how it would be achieved against the power of the ruling class, or why it should he resolved as a final objective for the working class.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There is an overlap of principles though. A Georgist basis for common ownership of land and natural resources is a negative application of the labor theory of property. A positive application of the labor theory of property provides an argument for workers' self-management. See: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/column-the-case-for-employee-owned-companies

Georgism is 1 policy. Georgism itself leaves doesn't specify what the rest of the economy looks like

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The pivotal question is, supposing I lived in a society in which workers had achieved self management, cooperatives housing, and participatory systems for land allocation, then what additional valuable objective, yet unknown and unrealized, might I discover from Georgism, that I reasonably might wish for my society further to achieve?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah land value taxation. Even if land is cooperatively managed, it is still useful to charge for the usage of land to ensure efficient usage and prevent mismanagement

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Does Amazon manage warehouses, and if so, does it charge the warehouse to ensure efficient usage and to prevent mismanagement?

Despite the differences that Amazon is private and hierarchical, should a different approach, respecting the question, be preferred for a system that is public and lateral?

Is land tax a practice that was unknown before the emergence of Georgism, or that is supported exclusively by Georgists?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I meant to ensure socially efficient usage. Not usage that is efficient from the perspective of a private actor. These are not the same thing in many cases, but in particular, it is the case with land due to inelastic supply

Land value tax is associated with Georgism. I don't see what the point would be of denying that or trying to avoid association with Georgism

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

In both cases, oversight is not contingent on some formalized rule of value transfer.

It is always possible to review the current circumstances, and simply to make a suitable decision.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you're not going to answer my questions that I don't see the need to respond to your statements.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage?

I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency.

I feel the general subject is not bound to my personal feelings or preferences.

Certainly, my characterization is that any movements or values are credibly leftist only if they at least express skepticism over any particular assets or resources, including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage?

I'm referring to this one:

ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally.

Do you disagree with this?

I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency

The goal of leftism is to create a better, more progressive society. With that means that the "end goal" of the state must be determined, which means the income, whether monetary/resource based/etc must be determined as well.

You can't have a state that doesn't have a defined input/output. So if you want to meaningfully contribute to an ideal leftist society/government, one such meaningful contribution is solving the government's input/output problem.

Taxing land is one such solution to this problem.

including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private.

Under georgism, all land gets taxed regardless of who owns the land, how they own the land, whether it is private or personal, and regardless of whether or not private property still exists.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It is meaningless to assert as an objective simply creating a society that is "better".

Further, not all leftists defend land commodification.

Not all leftists defend markets.

Not all leftists defend money.

Not all leftists defend the state.

Final objectives are less valuable than criticism of structure and strategies for transformation.

As I have suggested, by my own characterization at least, the entry point for leftism is criticism of the class structure of society, embodied in the social construct of private property, that is, particular resources or assets being utilized socially but controlled privately.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you answer my question or not?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism.

I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context.

Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate?