Jacob, property would include a wider definition than just real estate. Most fundamentally, one's self is property.
The idea of rights to include the right to take other people's property is where things go wrong. The right to food, housing, legal representation, medical treatment and so on is an abomination and means theft. Which is the antithesis of freedom. That's slavery and economic cannibalism.
The mere assertion of the word 'right' seems to many people to confer some validity to theft. Rights like that aren't rights, they're wrongs.
It's true that ownership is an abstract idea. But so is money. So is music. But they are real nevertheless. I tried explaining to a nephew that it isn't necessary to actually own anything to be rich.
Modern communities confer wealth on citizens. Dams, railways, roads, buildings, factories have all been built and a young person who contributed nothing to their creation can, with minor effort, earn enough money to buy the production of those already existing assets. It's not necessary to own things to gain the benefits from them.
I don't think I've swapped "I think therefore I am" to "I own therefore I am".
Voting to take or control other people's property doesn't make it right, or ethical, or good. That's just gangsterism in a genteel form. That's the primary weakness of democracy.
Mqurice |
