Anarchism and the right to Roam.

Think about it. When you’re travelling on a road ,you’re using it and so it’s fair to say you own it  while you’re travelling yet  it does not mutually exclude others from travelling on it and using it too.Therefore collective ownership of roads while in use is justified and essentially there can’t really be anything as persistent ownership of roads -unless maybe you counted maintenance workers or those who lived near by the roads but even then once use stops or the pattern of use stops, so does the ownership.

An  advantage of this conclusion, is it dispels any worries such as raised by Ancap that individuals or groups could choose to block roads and effectively isolate whole tracts of land – I have some small scale examples of this happening  in real life. Where I live in England, my local area is largely privately owned and exclusive,  meaning there is few communal spaces to go for walks and whole streets are closed to everyone- not an conclusive argument true but evidence enough that fears like this are not unfounded .It’s a more social conception and it seems to me people would be more likely to go for it, since everyone wants to make use of such essential things as these .

Potential worries are (1) organization of road maintenance – though I think that can be simply done with a community fund or something- and(2)  those who say free at point of use -but not necessarily untaxed such as  now- roads are a subsidy to firms (especially under capitalism/statism) and huge corporations giving them a competitive advantage.