It is no longer only Marxist or post-Marxist diagnoses that consider private ownership of the means of production or socially and economically essential goods, the inequality of property or even the existence of property at all, to be crucial factors behind the difficulties or failure of democracy. The conviction that property and its distribution play a role in undermining democracy can also be found in approaches that are less interested in social justice or more generally emancipation than in sustainability, for example. However, a closer look at the analyses reveals that the supposedly shared diagnosis is based on very different assumptions about what and how property is problematic for democracy. For some, it is the "metaphysics" of property that goes hand in hand with a problematic attitude towards the object of property and towards non-owners. For others, on the other hand, it is the anonymity made possible by property, especially in the age of financial capitalism; and for others again, it is the unequal distribution of property or its concentration in the hands of a few. These are not necessarily contradictions; the different perspectives can certainly be combined. In some cases, however, they also reveal deeper differences in the understanding of what property actually is and what can be expected from democracy. These differences at the various levels of the approaches already lead to different emphases in the diagnoses, but they often have almost contradictory effects, particularly in the case of reform proposals. While some speak in favor of overcoming ownership and focusing on a democratic distribution of usage rights and opportunities, others want to form societies of small and mid-size property holders or render the social distribution of property more egalitarian. Again, others would like to make democracy itself the owner of most what is socially and politically relevant.

This conference aims to advance the discussion by seeking greater clarity in the field of diagnoses about the relationship between property and democracy against the background of possibly different understandings of property and democracy. The aim is not only to systematize the connections in a theoretical and abstract way, but also to shed light on which empirical developments or areas are particularly significant for possible links and to consider different reform proposals in how they address them. The conference will focus in particular on the following questions:

• Is property inherently problematic or unjust, making it an issue for democracy as well? Or is property specifically problematic for democracy? What empirical evidence supports either view? Could we just do without property?
• What specific challenges does property pose for democracy? Is property itself the root cause of these challenges, or does it merely exacerbate them? Do these challenges vary depending on the historical entrenchment of property relations and/or democracy—such as in post-colonial societies, former dictatorships, or welfare-state democracies?
• Does framing the difficulties of democracy as tensions between property and democracy sufficiently capture the issue? Could this perspective be too abstract or general to effectively understand and address these challenges politically?
• How significant is the transnational nature of property in shaping democratic challenges? Are transnational power dynamics the fundamental problem, with property merely serving as a vehicle for these power structures? What is the role of property in the current rise of autocratic forms of government?
• Which forms of property and ownership, if any, are compatible with democracy? What alternative forms of ownership (collective ownership, common property, cooperation, plurality of small and mid-size property holders) are there and how do they relate to democracy?

The Fellow Group ‘Owning Democracy’ brings together a distinguished group of researchers from Mexico, the USA and Germany for continuous interdisciplinary collaboration. The group's project starts from the premise that many of the current conflicts have an economic core or at least significant economic dimensions. Some of the conflicts result directly from property relations, while others are made more difficult to resolve due to property relations. The aim of the collaborative research is, on the one hand, to understand the significance of economic developments and property for global, national and local cooperation and – currently, above all – for the prevention of a democratic shaping of this cooperation. On the other hand, we ask how property could be approached differently in order to make it an instrument of democratic self-government and not an obstacle to it.

Currently, the group focuses on the question of whether property is a facet of the economic and legal challenges and constraints facing democracies, or whether property has special significance. It also discusses whether and how different and more equal distributions of property or political decisions on possessions could lead to greater democratic inclusion.

Activities

Members