Hernando de Soto on Iraq

Hernando de Soto talks to National Review Online about the importance of property rights for a prosperous future for Iraq. An older Reason interview in which de Soto discusses his work on the importance of property rights for development is here; and an article by de Soto from our May 2001 issue discussing the importance and evolution of property rights in American history is here.

Comments

[joe]

If Dr. DeSoto had busted out a big fattie during the interview, this thread would be full of posts.

😉

[Rick Barton]

DeSoto's arguement for property rights being required for freedom is strong. He really should have the administrations ear concerning Iraq.

[joe]

In Peru and Columbia, most of the land is not owned by anyone, so DeSoto's ideas can be easily implemented. In El Salvador, however, most of the land that the small farmers occupy is owned by the members of a wealthy oligarchy. It is a quasi-feudal system, except the land barons base their control of the country on property deeds rather than divine right or sovereign fiat. To achieve DeSoto's vision of millions of small landowners would require the expropriation of property from its deeded owners.

What do you capitlists out there think about that?

[joe]

Even if El Salvador were to develop an industrial economy, it will still have overwhelming agrarian employment for decades and decades. If those millions on the plantations are forced to live under the impoverished, feudal circumstances that have prevailed, the resultant economic and political agony will doom the industrialization project.

DeSoto is right; the establishment of title over the land the agrarian workers farm is an essential part of the development of modern capitalist systems in Latin American countries. A peasant is no less robbed of opportunity if the denial of household capital is caused by a pervasive oligarchy, rather than a diffused one.