This chapter explores the relationship between homelessness and two prominent conceptions of liberty: positive liberty as self-actualization and negative liberty as non-interference. It sets out how scholars have approached the relationship between homelessness, property, and both forms of liberty. It demonstrates how unhoused persons tend to lack positive and negative liberty.

Almost all psychological research relevant to revolutions focuses on the conditions in which collective action takes place to topple the ruling regime; almost no attention has been given to what happens after revolutions. Psychologists have homed in on relative deprivation, perceived injustice, identity processes, morality, and related factors as important in collection mobilization. But no serious attention has been given to the question of why after regime change almost all revolutionary governments fail to change mass behavior in line with their revolutionary ideals. The concept of political plasticity is applied in this chapter to explain this failure. Change at the macropolitical and macroeconomic levels can come overnight with the signing of a radical new constitution, but change of actual behavior in line with the ideals of the new constitution takes a much longer time, if it is possible at all. An example is the efforts of the Soviet communists to change behavior in line with their economic and political ideals of collective ownership and collective motivation.

The play King Lear is a thought experiment on sudden and drastic changes in power distribution and the consequent changes in the behavior of the individuals who have changed power positions. The change in power distribution serves as the independent variable, with the behavioral changes that follow serving as dependent variables. King Lear impulsively decides to abandon his royal duties, but not necessarily his royal privileges. He hands over his duties and his properties to his two older daughters; his third daughter is disinherited because she fails to subserviently express devotion to him. But the influence of the power shifts on the three daughters is not according to Lear’s plans: the two older daughters turn against him, while his youngest, disinherited daughter remains loyal. In line with psychological research on power and corruption, some individuals who gain absolute power become absolutely corrupt.

Dewey encourages schools to become more than places where students learn basic and advanced skills, develop a range of creative and scientific abilities, engage in inquiry and dialogue, nourish desirable dispositions and habits, and, on occasions, listen to lectures and presentations. In addition, he nudges schools away from the belief that ethical education is a discrete part of the curriculum. Instead, he explains that ethical growth occurs daily at school. In ordinary activities, all students are encouraged to develop the “power to share effectively in social life” (MW 9, 370). Moreover, instead of urging schools to focus largely on students and educators as individuals, he encourages them to help everyone recognize that they are considerably more than an individual; they are a social being who should enjoy human interactions and responsibilities including: coteaching, cooperative learning, and, in the process, becoming a more conscious and contributing member of school and external groups.

Chapter 2 conceptualizes constitutional properties in both domestic and international settings. Drawing on domestic experiences, it defines constitutions, whether written or unwritten, as a special category of institutions that provide fundamental rules (of recognition and change) as well as rules that regulate a community of members, their relations, and their rights and duties (rules of conduct). It then identifies corresponding constitutional properties in the international setting, acknowledging the limits of this analogy. While still embryonic, international rules with constitutional relevance are especially apparent in those binding treaties of public international law that are universal in intended participation, global in scope, and of substantive importance. These rules are underpinned by the principle of sovereignty, which provides for their stability and superiority. International constitutional rules define states as the prime members, organize inter–state relations in an anarchical environment by concentrating authority in circumscribed domains, and lay out rights and duties that enable collective action and set standards of appropriate behavior.