<Protection of property automatically protects freedom of expression.>
Yes.....but only for those who have property.
If protection of property is the highest right, the one that trumps all other rights, then citizens will have freedom, to the exact extent that they own things. Which is a good description of the current state of freedom, in the world today. In the early days of the U.S., this was made explicit: you had to be a land (or other property)-owner, to be allowed to vote. Today, this has been refined to: in order to be President, you have to raise $20M (from rich people) by the first primary, to have a chance.
________________________________________________
You've taken:
I think, therefore I Am
and perverted it into:
I own, therefore I Am.
______________________________________________________
You are not the sum of what you own. Neither you nor I, nor anyone else, owns anything. It's an illusion, the belief that we personally own anything, even our own bodies. We just hold some things, in trust, for the next generation. You can't take it with you. |
