One’s Own, Proper What Is Property in its Essence?

  • Vladimir V. Bibikhin
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy book series (SEEP)


Privatisation, which is said to take place or to have taken place in Russia, is called criminal, Mafia-ridden, immoral, a menace to the rest of the world. More seldom are its positive evaluations. There is no need to align oneself with either opinion. The promptitude of judgement solidifies the principal and in the long run the decisive feature of the situation: the fact that property reforms are conducted blindly. There is no difference of opinion in this respect. An important or leading activist of the privatisation, recently sacked, has expressed his wish that it be conducted in a more thoughtful manner. The belated character of the wish confirms that the amplitude of unthoughtfulness in the whole affair is itself unthought of. Understandably, one is inclined to believe that a more detailed planning could have produced more success. Yet it is most probable that the process which started moving ten years ago takes place in a depth unattainable for any plan or project. It is not a mere coincidence that the preceding socialist volte-face in Russia, too, took a haphazard stance. A theorist of the state and historian, Nikolai Alekseyev, observed in 1928: “Wonderful as it may seem, the majority of contemporary socialists, while proposing a reform of property and calling for the abolition of the latter, wander in complete darkness and do not know for sure what they are striving at”1.


Private Proprietor Social Market Economy Mere Coincidence Ultimate Target Thoughtful Manner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    N. N. Alekseyev: “Sobstvennost i Sotsializm” (Property and Socialism), in: K. Isupov, I. Savkin (Eds.): Russkaya Filosofiya Sobstvennosti, Saint Petersburg (SP”Ganza”) 1993, p. 346.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heraclitus: Fragm. 80 (Diel Kranz) = Fragm. 28 (Marcovic).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aristoteles: Eth. Nic., VI 7, 1141. a 9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    N. N. Alekseyev: ibid., p. 348.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    V. V. Bibikhin: Mir (World), Tomsk (Vodoley) 1995.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    E. Sapir: Selected Works, Moscow (Progress) 1993, pp. 609–610.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    G. W. F. Hegel: Die Philosophie des Rechts, ßß 29–30.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    S. L. Frank: “Sotsializm i Sobstvennost” (Socialism and Property), in: K. Isupov, I. Savkin (Eds.): Russkaya Filosofiya Sobstvennosti, Saint Petersburg (SP “Ganza”) 1993, pp. 311–312.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    The theme is developed in the article: V. V. Bibikhin: “Svoboda Sobstvennosti” (Freedom of Property), Put 7 (1995), p. 154.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin • Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir V. Bibikhin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations