[1263a]
[1]
I mean, even if there be separate families as is now the case
with all nations, is it better for both the ownership and the employment of
property to be in common. . . ,1 for example, should the farms
be separate property but the farm-produce be brought into the common stock for
consumption (as is the practice with some non-Greek races); or
on the contrary should the land be common and farmed in common, but the produce
be divided for private use (and this form of communism also is said to
prevail among some of the barbarians); or should both farms and produce
be common property? Now if the
tillers of the soil be of a different class2 there might be another and easier system,
but if the citizens do the work for themselves, the regulations for the common
ownership of property would give more causes for discontent; for if both in the
enjoyment of the produce and in the work of production they prove not equal but
unequal, complaints are bound to arise between those who enjoy or take much but
work little and those who take less but work more. And in general to live together and share all our human
affairs is difficult, and especially to share such things as these. And this is
shown in the partnerships of fellow-travellers, for almost the greatest number
of them quarrel because they come into collision with one another as a result of
ordinary matters and trifles; and also we come into collision most with those of
our servants
[20]
whom we employ most often
for ordinary attendance. Community
of property therefore involves these and other similar difficulties; and the
present system, if further improved by good morals and by the regulation of
correct legislation, would be greatly superior. For it will possess the merit of
both systems, by which I mean the advantage of property being common and the
advantage of its being private. For property ought to be common in a sense but
private speaking absolutely. For the superintendence of properties being divided
among the owners will not cause these mutual complaints, and will improve the
more because each will apply himself to it as to private business of his own;
while on the other hand virtue will be exercised to make ‘friends'
goods common goods,’ as the proverb3 goes, for the purpose of
use. Such a system exists even now
in outline in some states, showing that it is not impracticable, and especially
in the ones that are well-administered parts of it are realized already and
parts might be realized; for individuals while owning their property privately
put their own possessions at the service of their friends and make use of their
friends' possessions as common property; for instance in Sparta people use one another's slaves as
virtually their own, as well as horses and hounds, and also use the produce in
the fields throughout the country if they need provisions on a journey. It is
clear therefore that it is better for possessions to be privately owned, but to
make them common property in use; and to train the citizens to this is the
special task of the legislator. And
moreover to feel that a thing is one's private property makes an inexpressibly
great difference for pleasure; for the universal feeling of love for oneself is
surely not purposeless, but a natural instinct.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.