Fact: A U.N. study of 83 countries showed that less than 5% of
rural landowners control three-quarters of the land.
Fact: The most pressing cause of the abject poverty which
millions of people in the world endure is that a mere 2.5% of
landowners with more than 100 hectares control nearly three-quarters of all the land in the world, with the top 0.23%
controlling over half. (Susan George, How the Other Half Dies,
Penguin Books,1976, p.24)
Fact: At best, a generous interpretation would suggest that
about 3% of the population owns 95% of the privately held land
in the U.S. (Peter Meyer, Land Rush-A Survey of America's
Land - Who Owns It, Who Controls It, How Much Is Left; Harpers
Magazine, Jan.l979)
Fact: According to a 1985 government report, 2% of landowners hold 60% of the arable land in Brazil while close to
70% of rural households have little or none. Just 342 farm properties in Brazil cover 183,397 square miles--an area
larger than California. (Worldwatch Oct. l988)
Before a global authority, be it a reformed United
Nations or a federal world government, can be trusted to
wield power benignly, the problem of the current undemocratic control of
the earth must be addressed. Innumerable
battles and wars have been fought, and many are currently
in progress, over territorial control. The fair and peaceful
resolution of such conflicts requires a deep consideration of
ethical principles regarding land tenure.
Dr. I.G. Patel, Independent Commission on Global Governance
member, governor of the Reserve Bank of India,
and former director of the London School of Economics
stated that "We cannot talk (sensibly) about what kind of
global government we want until (1) agreement is reached
on how to deal with the causes of international problems and
(2) if we are going to have governance or government we
will have to do something about poverty." --World Peace
News, Nov. l993
Dr. Patel is correct in his perception that the world
order movement has not dealt sufficiently with these issues.
While there is a fair amount of unanimity regarding the
basic outline of a democratic global political structure, i.e.,
the need for a democratically elected legislature, a world
judiciary to interpret and apply world laws, and an executive
to administer and enforce the laws, there has not yet been
sufficient thought applied to the consideration of root
causes of poverty and international conflict.
The problem is that democracy has not "grounded"
itself. We have not yet extended democratic principles down
to the ownership and control of the earth. Democratic government as presently constituted, and democratic world
government as currently proposed, ungrounded and
unembedded in equal rights to the earth, cannot create the
world of peace and justice that we seek.
THE CRACK IN THE LIBERTY BELL
To fully grasp the nature of the severe limitations in the
current ideology of the world government movement, it is
necessary to follow the thread of the democratic ideal back to
its fundamental tenets. Pondering the problem of persistent
poverty within a democratic system of government, Richard
Noyes, New Hampshire State Representative and editor of the
book entitled, Now the Synthesis: Capitalism, Socialism, and the
New Social Contract, identifies the current land tenure system
as "the one great imperfection, the snag on which freedom
catches."
Noyes shows us that the "Age of Reason gave us a thesis
with flaws." John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government, the political bible of the founding fathers, held that "The
great and chief end of men's uniting into commonwealths, and
putting themselves under government is the preservation of
their property." The central understanding was that only
through the guarantee of property rights, one's own body
included, could the individual really be free.
In further defining property rights, Locke stated that
"every man has a `property' in his own `person"', so that
anything a man has "removed from the common state," anything
with which he has "mixed his own labor," is rightfully
his own. The securing of this right was to be the main duty of
a democratic government.
Locke also affirmed that "God hath given the world to
men in common." But the trouble lies with Locke's Second
Proviso regarding property. Locke maintained that it was
correct for the individual in a state of nature to mix his labor
with land and so call it (produced wealth) his own "since there
was still enough (land) and as good left, and more than the yet
unprovided could use."
In the Second Proviso the reasoning of the primary
mentor of the founding fathers was faulty and limited. Locke
failed to perceive the consequences for democracy of a time
when so few humans would come to control so much of the
earth, to the exclusion of the vast majority. Nor could he have
known how the forces of an industrial economy could drive
land values to such highs, to the benefit of landowners rather
than wage earners.
The property-in-land problem, insufficiently scrutinized
by John Locke and the founding fathers, is the crack in
the Liberty Bell. It is the root dilemma of democracy. Life and
liberty without land rights breeds unhappiness, unemployment,
and wage slavery.
Adam Smith was of no more help than John Locke when
it came to solving the land problem. Although initially he made
clear distinctions among land, labor, and capital, he soon began
using the terms capital and land as synonymous factors. Consequently,
mainstream economists have treated land as essentially no more
than a subset of capital in their own two-factor
(capital and labor) macroeconomics. This is why they have
failed to understand the grave problem of the maldistribution
of wealth which has grown out of the fact that a minuscule
percentage of the world's people have come to control and
consume the vast majority of the earth's land and natural
resources.
THE COMMON HERITAGE PRINCIPLE AND PUBLIC FINANCE
The resolution of the dilemma of democracy can be
found in a three-factor (land, labor, capital) macroeconomic
approach. The products resulting from the interaction of land
and labor are rightfully held as individual private property,
while land (which term includes all natural resources) is
recognized as the common heritage.
Once the human right to the earth is firmly established
in the minds and policies of a democratic majority, land will no
longer be taken by the few from the many either by the force
of military might or by the mechanisms of the market. The
market's ability to place value, combined with the efficiency of
money as an exchange medium, results in a range of prices for
land sites and natural resources. Those who simply "own" earth
resources, contribute nothing as such to the productive process.
Yet under the current private property ethic, they are
in an advantageous position of power and can extract the
ransom of what economists call "ground rent" from both
labor and productive capital.
But if we now apply the common heritage principle to
land, then it follows that ground rent, which is a measure of
natural resource value, must be treated as "common property."
The next step which three-factor economists take is to
link this insight with the public finance system. Voila! The
policy imperative becomes clear. A way to affirm the equal
right of all to the common heritage is to collect the ground
rent for the benefit of the community as a whole, a policy
frequently referred to as "land value taxation."
Confiscatory taxes on labor and productive capital
should gradually be removed, as the value of earth resources
becomes the proper source of funding for the community as
a whole. The "common wealth" finances the commonwealth.
Three-factor economists thus advocate a practical
policy that will solve the problem of Locke's Second Proviso,
which falsely assumed no limitation to natural resources.
Democracy can now be established on the firm foundation of
equal rights to the earth, our common heritage.
While this perspective is newly emerging, it is not
new. No less a figure than Tom Paine stated that "Men did not
make the earth. . . It is the value of the improvement only, and
not the earth itself, that is individual property. . . . Every
proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land
which he holds." Where does that leave us in our consideration
of the world order movement, the concept of "sovereignty,"
and the need for financing the activities of the U.N.
or any other global body?
THE NEW DEMOCRATIC COVENANT
Clearly, the mandate of a benevolent yet powerful
sovereign global governmental body must be to protect
the property rights of the bodies of individuals as well as
the products of their labor (private property), as well as to
protect and to fairly share our common body Mother Earth.
This is the new territorial imperative, the new democratic
covenant, the higher synthesis resolving what has
been the difficult and too-often-destructive dialectic of left
versus right.
A properly constituted global authority will seek to
further these principles both within and among the current
nations. Once the importance of the new territorial imperative
of equal rights to earth is grasped by the world order
movement, then it follows that ground rent (land value)
should be advocated as the appropriate source of public
finance from local to global levels.
EXAMPLES OF GROUND RENT POLICIES
This taxation approach is not merely theoretical but is
being implemented, at least in part, in a number of places. In
the United States, enabling legislation in Pennsylvania gives
cities the option of shifting their property taxes off of buildings
(productive capital) and onto land values only (common
heritage). The fifteen cities taxing land values at the higher
rate have been experiencing statistically significant economic benefits.
Alaska retained its oil lands as public land, subject to
fair leasehold arrangements for use plus a tax on each barrel
pumped for market. Assets in the Alaska Permanent Fund are
about $13 billion. 'There are no state income or sales taxes, and
every citizen of Alaska receives an annual dividend of about
$1000 each with an additional $250 per month to every citizen
65 years or older.
Movements in this direction are underway through-
out the world. In the spring of 1993, representatives of eighty
Russian cities signed a resolution to reform their public
revenue system in this manner.
On the global level, the Law of the Seas, the Moon
Treaty, and the treaty now governing Antarctica are all based
on the common heritage principle, a principle that now must
be extended worldwide to include surface lands, as well as oil
and mineral resources.
HATCHING MANY BIRDS OUT OF ONE EGG
As the taxation of land values, essentially a "user fee"
system, becomes an integral component of the agenda of planet
management, several birds will begin to hatch out of one egg.
Simultaneously,
(1) land tenure will be based on fairness,
not force, thus ameliorating territorial conflict, a root
cause of war;
(2) land resources can be equitably allocated;
(3) the economic playing field is leveled;
(4) a genuinely free market is encouraged;
(5) the gap between the rich and poor narrows; and
(6) the necessary collective activities of humanity are properly funded, which include peacekeeping and the restoration and protection of the environment.
COMMON HERITAGE FUNDING: LOCAL TO GLOBAL
It has been suggested that such a system of finance would
be based on principles of subsidiarity in terms of implementation. The ground rent of certain specific types of land re-
sources can be collected by clearly delineated governing bodies
from the local to the global level.
Thus, cities and counties would draw their funding from the
ground rent of surface lands; regional authorities would collect
the ground rent of oil and minerals, and global governing
agencies would be funded by a percentage from these two
levels as well as that of deep sea resources, the electromagnetic
spectrum, satellite orbital zones, and other transnational
resources.
Democratic rights to the planet can be vested in the people
as a whole in a way that can be understood easily and
administered practically. The advent of the information revolution
combined with the personal computer enables such a system to
be monitored by the masses. Who owns what, where, and how
much ground rent they pay into the common fund could
become the most enlightening computer game on earth.
A WARNING AND AN APPEAL
If we fail to tax land values for the common fund, the
concentrated control of earth in the hands of the few will
continue unmitigated, thus advancing the conditions of social
turmoil which too often burst into flames of hatred, murder,
and war.
Marx is in the morgue, and in the West there is a
dawning realization that the huge bureaucracies of the welfare
state, which confiscate the wages of the middle classes
through the income tax in the attempt to provide a safety net
(rather than a safe nest!) for the poor, are not only unwieldy
but unworkable as well.
I am appealing to my brothers and sisters in the world
order/planetary peace and justice movements to deeply consider
the fundamental assumptions of the planet/people relationship
as it concerns the entire question of land tenure. I
trust that this consideration will discard both the power politics
of "dominion," as well as the market construct of buying
and selling our Mother Earth for private profit.
Currently, certain monetary and debt repayment policies
and practices of the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund are strangling the economies and harming
the people of many developing nations. This reality relates
to the theme of this exposition in a major way.
A significant proportion of the "profit" that has poured
into the global banking system in the past several decades was
not a product of honest labor, but was in fact a pool of funds
generated from the ground rent of oil resources. These funds
were loaned to numerous developing countries where they
were frequently of benefit to the ruling elite rather than the
people as a whole. However, the debt repayments have now
fallen upon the middle class and poor citizens who neither
voted for nor gained from the borrowed money.
Morally and ethically, a vast amount of the funds of
the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank represent
a theft from the global commons. Under the common
heritage principle, these funds would have been used to
benefit the people of the world either by direct dividends or
as interest free loans through a revolving loan fund type of
system.
These "oil theft loans" made by the world financial
institutions should therefore be declared illegal and invalid.
In the future, any other money loaned to governments by
global financial institutions should be repaid from the ground
rent of the indebted nations. Such repayments would therefore
fall primarily upon those who are unjustly reaping the
benefits of valuable land holdings rather than further burdening
the struggling wage earners, small business owners,
and the oppressed poor.
Unless a reformed or empowered United Nations or
other world government is built firmly upon the principle of
equal rights for all to our planet, then both the government
and the planet will be controlled by a handful of vested
interests. It is up to the intellectual leadership of the world
order movement to grapple with this issue NOW - to stop
hedging and waiting for the messiah of world government to
descend.
Before we purport to know the global governmental
recipe for success, let us consider how to make one city
succeed. What would it take for the wealth gap between rich
and poor to begin to narrow each year instead of widening,
for the murder rate to plummet rather than skyrocket, for
the schools to become safer rather than scarier?
If the present political structure of democracy were
sufficient for the task, then Washington, D.C. would be the
New Jerusalem, Philadelphia would truly be a city of brotherly
love, and every slice of the Big Apple would taste sweet.
To have peace on earth, we must work to create the
conditions for peace in our own towns and cities. If we would
revitalize our urban habitats by improving schools and
libraries, creating livelihoods and affordable housing, and
maintaining safe and beautiful parks and playgrounds, then
we must urge our city council members to collect the ground
rent of land to finance public services and greatly reduce or
eliminate most other forms of taxation.
If the politics of the planet are to be based on fairness
rather than on force, then equal rights to earth must become
the guiding principle, the sovereign, supreme rule. The
fundamental human right which now needs to be affirmed
is this -- THE EARTH IS THE BIRTHRIGHT OF ALL PEOPLE.
Alanna Hartzok co-chaired the Alternative Economic
Commission at the recent Conference on Global Governance sponsored
by the Association of World Citizens and
the Campaign for A More Democratic United Nations
(CAMDUN). She is the United Nations Non-Governmental
Organization Representative for the International
Union for Land Value Taxation and Free Trade and Executive Director
of Earth Rights Institute.
COMMENTS
- "World citizens must be concerned with the growing gap
between rich and poor in the world and within democracies. Conventional
economics has failed miserably. Alanna Hartzok's application of the common heritage principle to land and 'land value
taxation' offers a refreshing new approach."
Ross Smyth, President
World Government Organization Coalition
- "Alanna Hartzok has recognized that the earth is the birthright
of all peoples and that prevailing notions of state sovereignty must
yield to the new thinking that the only real sovereigns are the people
If we are all to live together in peace and dignity, it must become a
reality that the land, the sea, and the air we breathe are a common
heritage to serve the basic rights of human kind."
Dr. Benjamin B. Ferencz
Prosecutor, Nuremburg War Crimes Trial
Adjunct Professor of International Law
Pace University
- "Alanna Hartzok has given us a fascinating account of the
economic necessity of building democracy in human terms from the
ground upwards. World governmentalists should start their re-think
from here."
Dr. Jeffrey J. Segal, Co-Founder
Campaign for a More Democratic United Nations
- "I enjoyed reading Financing Planet Management and found it
to be a valuable contribution to the quest for world government on
a democratic basis. We do need to have a politics based on fairness
and with the earth as our birthright."
Leland P. Stewart, Founder
Unity-In-Diversity Council
- "I'm very much in favor of the ideas proposed in your paper.
I agree very much with you that world federalists and world
governmentalists need to think through the fundamentals of
economic justice"
Jack Yost, United Nations NGO Representative
World Federalist Movement
- "Your paper is a cogent and convincing reply to the appeal for
an economic engine to propel the 'democratic world order', 'global
peace and justice', and 'environmentally sustainable development'
movements. It is an evocative introduction to a crucial
worldwide discussion by citizens locally and opinion-makers
internationally and confirms your qualifications to serve as a
coordinator for the Campaign for a More Democratic United Nations
(CAMDUN)."
Dr. Harry H. Lerner, Co-Founder
CAMDUN
- "One thing that has troubled me about the world government
concept is the fact that our continuing failure to be able to use
power wisely at any local level, with which I am familiar, casts
doubt on the possibility that we homosapiens would be able to do
any better at the highest level.
- Your essay correctly isolates land title as the modern day
weapon-- the one which has so recently replaced the Auchelian
'almond-shaped hand axes' Louis S. B. Leakey found at Olduvia,
and the even earlier thigh bones which seem to have bashed in
so many skulls.
- Your essay is calculated to focus the attention of the world
peace movement at a critical place."
Representative Richard Noyes
New Hampshire State House of Representatives
- "Many organizations that advocate peace, human rights,
or alleviation of poverty suggest temporary charitable measures
or a future ideal solution to world problems, at once
inadequate on one hand and frustrating on the other.
- Alanna Hartzok in Financing Planet Management makes
a vital connection for creating world peace and order. In this
concise but insightful narrative, the author has us realize the
importance of providing a sound base from which democracy,
justice, and equitable opportunity can proceed."
Hal Sager, Media Producer
Trustee, Common Ground-USA
- "We are fond of citing history yet refuse to act in accordance
with the lessons that are apparent. Past civilizations have collapsed
and perished by their own making and by stubborn adherence to
their profit and power paradigms. The unchecked depletion and
destruction of natural resources and eco-systems, is an old story
repeating again and again. In every case where there was the
holding of land by the few out of the hands of most, the result was
the horror of war or economic collapse.
- The nation-state country-clubs have not been able to rise from
the muck of myopic views and economic illusions. Hartzok drops the
veils through which we see economics and profits courageously
calls for a gentle revolution in our relationship to the planet-one
that is not only necessary, but vital to our very survival."
Mary Rose Kaczorowski
Action Coalition For Global Change
Ten Mile River Watershed Association
- "Ms. Hartzok has a firm, intuitive grasp of basic economic
and political principles."
Dr. Mason Gaffney, Professor of Economics
University of California, Riverside
Many Great Lawgivers and Economists Have Said "Landed Property IS DIFFERENT!"
Adam Smith - "Ground rents are a species of revenue which the
owner, in many cases, enjoys without care or attention of his own.
Ground rents are, therefore, perhaps a species of revenue which can
best bear to have a peculiar tax imposed upon them."
Thomas Jefferson - "The earth is given as a common stock for men
to labor and live on."
Tom Paine - "Men did not make the earth...It is the value of the
improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual
property...Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for
the land which he holds."
John Stuart Mill - "Landlords grow richer in their sleep without
working, risking, or economizing. The increase in the value of land,
arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should
belong to the community and not to the individual who might hold
title."
Abraham Lincoln - "The land, the earth God gave to man for his
home, sustenance, and support, should never be the possession of any
man, corporation, society, or unfriendly government, any more than
the air or water, if as much. An individual, company, or enterprise
should hold no more than is required for their home and sustenance.
All that is not used should be held for the free use of very family to
make homesteads, and to hold them as long as they are so occupied."
Leo Tolstoy - "Solving the land question means the solving of all
social questions. Possession of land by people who do not use it is
immoral-just like the possession of slaves."
Henry George - "Our primary social adjustment is a denial of
justice. In allowing one man to own the land on which and from which
other men must live, we have made his bondsmen in a degree which
increases as material progress goes son. It is this that turns the
blessings of material progress into a curse."
Dr. Sun Yat-Sen - "The [land tax] as the only means of supporting
the government is an infinitely just, reasonable, and equitably
distributed tax, and on it we will found a new system. The centuries
of heavy and irregular taxation for the benefit of the Manchus have
shown China the injustice of any other system of taxation."
Dear Reader,
- I invite your comments on this essay which,
with your permission, may be printed in whole or in
part in future editions. I invite your questions as well,
which I will try to answer in correspondence back to
you.
- Please write comments and/or questions on
a separate page and send or fax back with this form.
Most sincerely yours,
Alanna Hartzok
alanna@earthrights.net
Alanna, You have my permission to print my
comments, in whole or in part, in the next
edition of this publication.
Signature __________________________________ Date _________________
Name (clearly print or type) ______________________________________
Line of work, Association, etc. ___________________________________
YES! I have checked Yes to include my
signature on the growing list of those endorsing
the International Declaration on
Individual and Common Rights to Earth.
YES! Put me in touch with others in my area
who are working to implement these ideas.
Street Address, Apt., P.O. Box ____________________________________
City, Town _______________________ State, Zip _____________________
Home Phone _______________________ Work Phone _____________________
Fax # ____________________________
PLEASE MAIL OR FAX THIS PAGE TO:
Alanna Hartzok, P.O. Box328, Scotland, PA 17254 USA
Message Phone/FAX: 717-263-2820 Res.: 717-264-0957
AN INTERNATIONAL DECLARATION ON INDIVIDUAL AND COMMON RIGHTS TO EARTH
We here declare that the earth is the common heritage of all and that all people have natural and equal rights to the land of the planet. By the term "land" is meant all natural resources.
Subject always to these natural and equal rights in land and to this common ownership, individuals can and should enjoy certain subsidiary rights in land.
These rights properly enjoyed by individuals are:
- The right to secure exclusive occupation of land.
- The right to exclusive use of land occupied.
- The right to the free transfer of land according to the laws of the country.
- The right to transmit land by inheritance.
These individual rights do not include:
- The right use land in a manner contrary to the common good of all, i.e., in such a manner as to destroy or impair the common heritage.
- The right to use appropriate what economist call the "ground
rent" of land.
The ground rent is the annual value attaching to the land alone from any
improvements thereon created by labor. This value is created the existence of and the functioning of the whole community wherein the individual lives, and is in justice the property of the community. To allow this value to be appropriated by individuals enables land to be used not only for the production of wealth, but as an instrument of oppression of human by human leading to severe social consequences
which are everywhere evident.
All humans have natural and equal rights in land. Those rights may be exercised in two ways:
- By holding land as individuals and/or
- Sharing in the common use of the ground rent of land.
The ground rent of land can be collected for the use of the community by methods similar to those by which real estate taxes are now collected. That is what is meant by the policy of land value taxation. Were this community-created land value collected, the many tales which impede the production of wealth and limit purchasing power could be abolished.
The exercise of both common and individual rights in land is essential to a society based on justice. But the rights of individuals in natural resources are limited by the just rights of the community. Denying the existence of common rights in land creates a condition of society wherein the exercise of individual rights becomes impossible for the great mass of the people.
WE THEREFORE DECLARE THAT THE EARTH IS THE BIRTHRIGHTS OF ALL PEOPLE.
http://www.earthrights.net/docs/fpm.html