The diametrical opposite view of property rights is set forth in a recent book on taxation, Liam Murphy and Thomas Nagel, The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice, New York: Oxford Univ. Press (2002), which I reviewed in "The Philosopher Kings," AIER, Research Reports, vol. 69, no. 9 (May 13, 2002). That book review is a useful supplement to the assigned readings, and you might find that the Murphy and Nagel book (in the AIER Library) tends to confirm your prior notions of property rights and taxation.

The seminar explains how the four modern, major, mainstream, competing theories of property rights were derived from historical antecedents and how they are applied in law, economics, and political economy models today. At least one of these theories (positive liberty or utilitarianism) tends to lend itself to mathematical modeling exercises, but this seminar is far more historical, philosophical, and logical than it is mathematical.

In a nutshell, ideas about property rights are very old, as old as recorded history itself. Inferentially, these ideas predate written history. Coherent and internally consistent systems of property rights have been practiced in at least some western societies for about 5,000 years. The origins of the particularly Anglo-American system of property rights that traditionally has been dominant in the United States and Canada can be traced back at least 1,500 years.

One view of the American constitutional protections of property rights, which I believe to be correct and which lasted at least until the New Deal (esp. 1933-1935), is that the Constitution protects the enjoyment of "ancient and customary liberties of the English people," dating from before the time of King Edward the Confessor (died in 1016). The classically liberal (negative liberty) conception of property rights is explained, and the explanation is less painful than one might imagine, thanks, in no small part, to the movies shown in connection with the seminar.

The main rival conceptions of property rights also are set forth, and the seminar demonstrates how each differs from the other. These conceptions are socialism, corporatism, and utilitarianism (positive liberty or modern welfare liberalism). Standard definitions are used for these terms, set forth in The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (1987) or in the market-related excerpts from that work, The Invisible Hand.

The last seminar session will deal with applications of what we have learned to contemporary problems of property rights and taxation, including progressive income taxation, corporate franchise vs. corporate income taxation, eminent domain and governmental takings, civil asset forfeitures, western water rights, the regulation of agriculture, and zoning laws. I also shall be glad to discuss any other property rights-related topic that you might indicate in advance for that last class meeting. You might consider writing a short paper (not more than 5 pages if double-spaced) about one of these topics for the last session.