I do slightly disagree with his point about evolution of property rights.
This issue comes up often in the context of the Great Divergence - a topic of economic history that describes and seeks to explain why there was such a rapid difference in development between the West (modern powers) and the East (classic powers).
It can be easily shown that private property rights in the West at the very beginning of this divergence were not only critical but also preceeded even the widespread use of the technology of parchment let alone the introduction of paper by some 200 years!
Another one is, of course, slavery.
That said, technology is undoubtedly the commonly fastest means to change the definitions of property. At least, it is faster and often more equitable than having a monopoly on violence (which is what the state and it's laws at any given time essentially represent).
I do slightly disagree with his point about evolution of property rights.
This issue comes up often in the context of the Great Divergence - a topic of economic history that describes and seeks to explain why there was such a rapid difference in development between the West (modern powers) and the East (classic powers).
It can be easily shown that private property rights in the West at the very beginning of this divergence were not only critical but also preceeded even the widespread use of the technology of parchment let alone the introduction of paper by some 200 years!
Another one is, of course, slavery.
That said, technology is undoubtedly the commonly fastest means to change the definitions of property. At least, it is faster and often more equitable than having a monopoly on violence (which is what the state and it's laws at any given time essentially represent).