Property of Freedom in Property

Property of Freedom

In Property and Freedom, Richard Pipes draws a connection between two seemingly unrelated topics: the ownership of property and the experience of personal freedom. Using specific historical examples, Pipes shows that while authoritarian states can enable some form of private property ownership, that it is impossible to have a free state without enabling or guaranteeing citizens the right to own property. Pipes states his starting hypothesis in the introduction to Property and Freedom: "There is an intimate connection between public guarantees of ownership and individual liberty: that while property in some form is possible without liberty, the contrary is possible," (p. xiii). To substantiate and bolster his claim, the author focuses on two primary examples: that of England and that of Russia.

However, Pipes also delves deeper into the historical context of property ownership and its connection with democratic rights, freedoms, and liberties. The first two chapters provide definitions of terms. Chapter One, "The Idea of Property" is helpful in drawing a cohesive concept of property, which Pipes admits is both "concept and…institution," (p. 3). Property ownership is universal, common to all societies, claims the author.

Pipes continues to trace the evolution of property, including its philosophical, psychological, sociological, political, and economic facets. Collectivism and privatization are not necessarily established as opposite ends of a spectrum, as Pipes does not oversimplify the complex issues at stake. For example, the author explains the ancient Greeks' struggle with the conflict of private property ownership and the utopic ideals inherent in a collectivist, communal society. Later the reader learns more about Pipes' unabashed suspicion of collectivism. The author builds upon his self-proclaimed expertise in Russian history to illustrate the deep connection between private property and personal liberty.

Before Pipes takes readers to England and then to Russia, the author examines potential philosophical conundrums such as how human beings can own private property without falling pray to greed. Pipes also explains the paradox of a democratic state that protects the rights and liberties of citizens via property laws. The state has a certain jurisdiction over private property while still allowing for freedom of ownership. While it would be refreshing to read more about issues such as eminent domain, Pipes warns his readers early in the book that he comes from a historian's perspective; further reading into the political philosophy and philosophical economy of private property would be warranted for a fuller understanding of the issues at stake.

In Chapters 3 and 4, Pipes begins his in-depth historical analysis of private property and its connection with political and governmental systems. Chapter 3 is devoted to England. Pipes points out the important role that private property played during the Enlightenment and the burgeoning of universal rights and freedoms. Interestingly, the connection between private property ownership and political freedom developed in a roundabout way. As property owners grew richer from their commercial endeavors, the state sought to reap benefits via property taxation and this in turn helped to empower the people and Parliament. Pipes draws further connections between the evolution of the commonwealth, the British Empire, and burgeoning rights and freedoms for property owners.

Chapter 4 addresses the history and evolution of property ownership in Russia. Russia's history is far different from that of England, especially with regards to property and its connection with individual rights and freedoms (or lack thereof, in the case of Russia). Pipes explains thoroughly the origin and impact of the patrimonial system in Russia, which established monarchs firmly as the property owners and precluded genuine private property ownership. Patrimony, Russian style, is clearly and simply defined as "the fusion of sovereignty and ownership," (p. 160). Ultimately, Pipes works from the hypothesis that "the critical factor in the failure of Russia to develop rights and liberties was the liquidation of landed property in the Grand Duchy of Moscow," (p. 160). This section provides a great deal of insight into Russian history from a refreshingly focused perspective and is the strongest chapter of Property and Freedom. Pipes also makes sure to contrast Russia's example with that of England on key points, so that the reader can understand how private property and political rights are indeed linked.