Marcos, your freedom of the mind is the most basic freedom. True. And increasingly, in the cyberspace world, the abstract world is the most valuable world. Music is a cyberspace entity. It has no 3D component. Money, music, images, plans and conceptual things can swish through cyberspace. So yes, freedom of expression is valuable and the primary part of freedom as our minds are what we are.
But we all have brains and those are material objects requiring all sorts of 3D inputs and property rights. Without 3D property rights for our brains, freedom of expression of our minds has limited value, though that's changing as cyberspace gathers steam.
As you say, 3D property, especially land, wasn't all obtained by fair trading with previous owners. It was only in the 20th century that property generally wasn't obtained and held by power alone - though plenty of people still tried at the cost of umpty million lives.
So, deciding legitimacy of ownership will be a difficult business all over the world. Long-settled places like Japan, UK, and others will not be much problem. But being difficult doesn't mean the task shouldn't be started. There are refugees who need resolution. There are wars over land.
Anyway, freedom of expression is just a subset of property rights. One owns one's computer. The telecommunications company owns the fibre. Property rights in 3D confer property rights in cyberspace and therefore freedom of expression. Similarly, if one owns a printing company, one could contract with somebody who wants to express something and the paper would be their property, not subject to confiscation.
Protection of property automatically protects freedom of expression. Abrogation of freedom of expression would be denial of property rights.
Property is everything!
Mqurice |
