Cute idea that state control over property is tyranny, whereas personal control over property is a fundamental right. The difference in truth is arbitrary. There is no objective ownership since all property is either based on first discovery (finders keepers, losers weepers rule from kindergarten) or more commonly violent seizure. We tend to absolve ourselves from the crimes of generations past, but the fruits of those crimes have been passed down to us (or not passed down if your ancestors were the victims).
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
So in reality the right to property is being assigned completely arbitrarily, but we each build an imaginary code of ethics depending on which view of property benefits us the most. If you control the property, of COURSE you'll argue that private ownership is the correct type of imaginary assignment of ownership. Why wouldn't you? Those who find themselves in possession of very little, on the other hand, might not see it that way.
I hope you like this philosophical musing. Seems like you enjoy philosophy, but I can't figure out where your assumption that "ownership" is real comes from. Curious.
meep