Property is theft

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 58
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Every time you own something, it means that someone else doesnt.

Every time you own something, you steal it from someone else.

Property is all about who came first.

Your ancestors came first on the land. It must be their land then, no?

Wrong!

Land cannot be private property since every human  needs land to live. Giving it all to few humans would deny all others of it.

This is why we need Communism.

Private property has already destroyed all noble ideas from the past. It has degraded human to a mere animal who works only to satisfy most basic urges.

If you look at countries like North Korea, where people dont have lots of private property, we see all the old values of being loyal, being humble, living a simple life come into play. 

People are not greedy by nature. They are only greedy if you convince them that they can own property.

First, we all die, so obviously we cannot eternally own property.

Second, owning property creates class society of those who have and those who have not. Those who are cherished from the start and those who are harmed from the start.

Reality is, the less you own, the better.

The more you own, the more you wish to own that which you dont.

If you saw a starving man, would you give him some food? Yes, of course.

However, is it your duty to give him food? It is.

So food is not your property. Food belongs to the hungry.

How about a house. Do you own your house? No, you dont.

If your son was out in the street homeless, would you invite him in your house? Of course you would.

Now, how about some homeless man who is not your son?

Now you say no?

But he is someone's son. So he should have home.

So no, your house doesnt belong to you alone.

Your money, does your money belong to you? Of course it doesnt.

If your child was dying, and you had to pay 5000 dollars to save him, it would be your duty to do so.

And your child is not more valuable than some child who isnt yours.

So in reality, you own nothing except your body. Property cannot be owned. That would be theft.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,356
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Let's say I'm a caveman,
I risk my life and kill a bear with a spear,
While everyone else ran away,
I say I 'deserve that meat,
'Deserve the right to eat it, trade it, gift it, or keep it.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
The concept of theft is built on the concept of property.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Lemming
If one can assume the right to kill a bear.

Then  one can assume the right to do anything.

So the clever bloke in the cave next door who doesn't risk his neck hunting bears, assumed the right to take your bear meat when you are asleep.

And of course, when you were out bear hunting, your neighbour was taking care of your partner, and cleverly spreading his clever genes.

Didn't ever you wonder why Mrs Cavelemming always had a headache.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
Wow. This has to be one of the most ignroant threads I w ever seen here. 
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Lemming
If your son was hungry, you would share the bear with him. So still not your bear.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The concept of theft is built on the concept of property.
There are multiple concepts of property that contradict each other. Thats why property is always theft.

Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
@tws
Wow. This has to be one of the most ignroant threads I w ever seen here. 
I am glad you are enjoying it.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@zedvictor4
I am not suggesting that we go back to "power makes right", but I am suggesting that we evolve beyond property.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
The concept of theft is built on the concept of property.
There are multiple concepts of property that contradict each other. Thats why property is always theft.
That is not something you've proven, and even if you did it's likely that a slight modification to one of your definitions would resolve the contradiction.

Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Contradiction cannot be resolved due to different and opposite ideas of property.

For example, food belongs to the hungry, and taking food for yourself would steal it from the hungry.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
slight modification to one of your definitions
Well, I use definitions from dictionary, so no. Changing definition does not resolve contradiction as contradiction still exists with first definition.

ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
food belongs to the hungry
That is not a definition of property it's an assertion of ownership.


slight modification to one of your definitions
Well, I use definitions from dictionary, so no.
Sure buddy
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That is not a definition of property it's an assertion of ownership
Oh, and since property is something you own, I am afraid that it indeed is the definition ☹
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,612
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

Trump: " Ah em a rely stoopid parsen frem a rel rich family. I deserve everyting and smart poor peple dunt."
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@FLRW
Smart people should not be exploited by the rich.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,612
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

In 500 years the World civilization will look nothing like todays.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,356
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
@Best.Korea
Adulterous and thieving people get shunned,
And the bear is part of the outgroup, compared to the ingroup of cavemen and cavewomen.
Funny post though.

I might require my son to do chores, share in the work of living, before I 'choose to share.
Also depends if my son is adult or not.

'Still 'my bear, to my view.
. . .

I 'do think many people let the rich take advantage of them,
But I think there is a distinction between it and theft.
. .
Bad business, is more like.
. .
With internet and modern media,
Communication and cameras to let big business feel gaze of community to prevent brutality,
Strikes and Unions and Picketing should be more effective than ever, 'if communities use them.
Though 'maybe this assumption of mine is wrong.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Lemming
I might require my son to do chores, share in the work of living, before I 'choose to share
But you would share. And your son is not more valuable than other poor people, by any moral standard. So same standard that you use to share with your son, you must use to share with other poor people. Also, if your son was baby, he would get bear for free. So it is not your bear. You have duty to share it. Now apply same to education. You would want for your child to go to the best school. By that standard, all children must have best education and you must pay for it, since your child is not more important than other children.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,356
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
It's 'still my bear, else how could 'I share it?

Perhaps I think it is good to instill life lesson into son,
Those who don't work, don't eat.

Even a baby, it is my 'choice to share my bear,
Of course one feels obligation to helpless baby of one's own flesh,
'Still choice.

There's always suffering people needing help in the world,
Yet I keep adding 'My money, to 'My bank account, for 'My purposes.

Eh, maybe I think fancy college education is not necessary,
Maybe I can do better myself teaching child.

My child 'Would be more important to me than other children,
Though it would make sense to not let one's own child get swelled head, excessive sense of importance.
Important to understand other's also value themselves,
One might also have a sense of fairness to others,
'Still, might be I would choose to feed my own child first and only, if not enough bear to go around.

Even 'If enough bear to go around,
'My bear.
. . .

Might be other cavemen 'make items, such as flint arrows, or baskets,
They make 'Their flint arrows, 'Their baskets,
Maybe they trade 'Their property, and I trade 'My property.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Lemming
It's 'still my bear, else how could 'I share it?
Its not your bear because you have duty to share. The only thing that can be yours is that which you have no duty to share. Parents have duty to feed their children. You as baby were fed, so it would be illogical to think that you as baby were more important than some other baby who is hungry now. Since you were not more important, it is your duty to share with those equally important as you.

it is my 'choice to share my bear
Its your duty. If you cannot watch your child being hungry, how can you watch some other child being hungry? 

My child 'Would be more important to me than other children
Thats crazy. Logically talking, from advanced human perspective, your child has:
1. Same needs as other children
2. Same pain as other children.
3. Same desire for happiness as other children.

So your child is not in any way more important, from moral point of view.

If you have enough food to provide for other child, you would let that child starve just because you dont consider that child as important. 

But such logic can justify any other horrible crime too, so it is obviously inconsistent logic that should not be used by anyone.

I guess this is what is meant by saying "Society must either evolve to Communism, or sink to barbarism.

If your child is important to you, and lets say you die. You would wish for others to help your child, give him best education, best chance, no? You would wish it was their duty, no?

Or what if you were the hungry child? You would wish for others to help you, no?

So yes, even from selfish point of view, society is best modeled if everyone is treated like the family member.
Redpilled
Redpilled's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 38
0
0
4
Redpilled's avatar
Redpilled
0
0
4
Why don’t you move to a 2nd world country if you’re so fond of them?  Because first world countries are better and internally you know it. 
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Redpilled
I like how you assume where I live 😀

Also, first world countries have many socialist policies. Check 1.5 trillion for healthcare in USA.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,612
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

Remember that Redpilled is really Neo.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,356
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Eh, there's many ideas of what 'duty is.

Because I might value my child more,
Selective love,
I don't love everything equally.

As I might prioritize myself,
I might prioritize my child.

I fought the bear,
I made the risk,
The bear is mine.

My logic is fine,
People value many items and concepts,
Based on what they value they act, 'everyone does this.

I don't see why other people's suffering, necessitates my suffering.

I am not against a group organizing around mutual aid,
I 'am against the abolition of property.

Even with family,
I have my own property.

Redpilled
Redpilled's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 38
0
0
4
Redpilled's avatar
Redpilled
0
0
4
I’m not a neo. I’m a traditionalist 

Redpilled
Redpilled's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 38
0
0
4
Redpilled's avatar
Redpilled
0
0
4
Also you realize all those socialist policies are because of socialists right? They didn’t just randomly get there
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,612
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

I was talking about Neo in the Matrix. He was redpilled.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,652
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Redpilled
 They didn’t just randomly get there
My bad. I thought they just randomly got there.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
The concept of theft is built on the concept of property.
There are multiple concepts of property that contradict each other. Thats why property is always theft.
You cannot build a coherent concept off of a contradiction.