Ownership [Nationalisation?]
Political life is littered with archaic terms and behaviour that can only confuse reality. There may and must be legal definitions for varieties of ownership, most of which have a long tradition turned to stone. But the essential meaning of ownership, must centre around acquisition, and disposition, of all that is related to real and personal estate, including particularly people. Ultimately, it is government in whatever form, that has the final decision. As with all things of ethical concern, there is centralisation of control in the direct hands of government, as in the fond term Nationalisation. There is disposition over the widest possible range of individual control and benefit. There is control and disposition by society for mutual benefit, which is naturally the most problematic pragmatically. Whichever direction is chosen is a decision by the corporate government, democratic or otherwise, and which may be changed at any time if any practical options remain. It is the social purpose that directs change by clear decision or default. In the nature of the alternatives, centralisation in the hands of politicians or magnates has a potential to devalue the common individual. Dispersal amongst individuals who may become entirely autonomous, aided by modern technology, is anomie.