Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
publishedVersion
Publication Date
12-1984
Abstract
In a research note on 'How Capitalism Infringes Property Rights' {PoliticalStudies, XXXI (1983), pp. 656-61), Peter Morriss attempts to demonstratethat a Nozickian version of rights theory is incompatible with that account ofcapitalism which emphasizes the importance (and value) of entrepreneurialrisk-taking and entrepreneurial failure. Because bankruptcy is an acceptedconsequence of entrepreneurial failure, capitalism, which condonesbankruptcy, in fact condones the violations of the rights of creditors. Thusthose who, like Nozick, defend property rights as sacred and inviolable, 'shouldbe in the vanguard of capitalism's opponents' (p. 657) Since the rights-basedargument for capitalism is that rights can never be legitimately violated, 'oncethe rights theorist admits that capitalism necessarily condones some violationsof property rights—however little—he must either oppose capitalism or jettisonhis insistence on the inviolability of property rights. Or, of course, both.'(p. 661) While Morriss's interesting essay illuminates a number of issuesinvolving capitalism and property rights, this reply argues that he is wrong onalmost all counts. While rights violations may occur in capitalist societies,capitalism does not infringe property rights. The paper attempts to show this byidentifying the weaknesses in Morriss's arguments to the contrary.
Discipline
Political Economy | Political Science
Research Areas
Political Science
Publication
Political Studies
Volume
32
Issue
4
First Page
615
Last Page
617
ISSN
0032-3217
Identifier
10.1111/j.1467-9248.1984.tb01551.x
Publisher
SAGE Publications (UK and US)
Citation
KUKATHAS, Chandran.(1984). Does capitalism infringe property rights: A reply to Peter Morriss. Political Studies, 32(4), 615-617.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/2949
Additional URL
https://doi.org/110.1111/j.1467-9248.1984.tb01551.x