A river is a resource, your home is your property.
Most of the time it's obvious. I do not like one rich guy to own a vital
thing like the water supply or an area's resource wealth.

I believe it's correct to rebalance power relations. That means giving
power away from the majority. Also you have to know that in that part of
the word, people are identified by labels like Sunni Arab, Sunni Kurd,
Shia Arab, Shia Kurd, Assyrian, Assyriac, Yezidi, Christian Arab,
Christian Kurd, ... and many other groups. The Kurds have been oppressed
for years, and based on their experience of being the biggest people on
the globe without a country, and being split as minorities among their
host countries. This was a tactic of the powers, split them up to
suppress their identity making them a minority in their host countries.
It's from this they've developed an anti-state, local power ideology.

On 01/08/2015 01:00 PM, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> On Thursday, January 08, 2015 2:02:06 AM Amir Taaki wrote:
>> * Private property is protected, and entrepreneurship is de jure. There
>> are no taxes on the people or businesses in Rojava.
>> * Instead price controls are democratically managed. All of Rojava's
>> resources and utility are under the collective democratic control of the
>> people.
>
> Where is the line drawn between private property and "all resources"?
> If it's democratic, then that means the majority can deny the minority access?
>
>> * Disempowered groups are actively empowered, and given disproportionate
>> equalising power such as minority ethnicities or women (40% quota for
>> administration posts).
>
> This kind of nonsense is sexist/ethnicist and creates imaginary divisions
> between the people. If you try to make it fair, by "empowering" the smallest
> minority (each individual), then you end up with an entitlement to
> administration posts for everyone. Think about it...
>
> Luke
>