Wednesday, May 23, 2012

"Eliminate private property"?

I frequently see socialists say something to the effect, in the course of their "debates", of: "...eliminate private property and everything will be great".

You can't. That would be like me saying that everything could be perfect if we could just eliminate theft and aggression.

Private property is a feature of life. You can't eliminate it just because you want to. All you can do is eliminate "legal" recognition of private property- which all governments do to a great degree (generally in violation of their charters). But private property still exists in spite of that.

Just like the right to own and to carry, whatever kind of weapon you want, wherever you go, in any manner you see fit, openly or concealed, without asking anyone's permission, ever, is a fundamental feature of being human, regardless of "laws" that governments may write and enforce to the contrary. The right still exists; it is just being violated.

So it is with private property.



  1. Indeed, property rights are the basis of all civilization, and all rights.
    It isn't hard to make the argument that *all* rights are property rights.

  2. Kent,

    Can you name anything that is currently truly *private* property?

    Seems to me the argument should be that we *ought* to have private property-since we really don't.

    I know it seems like semantics, but apply that to the argument above-if private property is already eliminated (or, sort of, never existed concurrent with a government) then perhaps there will be a new rally cry?

  3. Lots of things are private property- but governments violate it and refuse to recognize it. Even most freelance crooks recognize private property (their own, anyway). It's really only one gang causing all the problems in this area.

    We ought to stop allowing the violation of our private property by goverthugs. Well, I ought to, since I'm not going to tell anyone else what they ought to do about it.