Who agrees with this statement? I kinda believe that property ownership is based on outdated feudalism. Who gave people the right to claim land as their own in the first place? However if anyone nicks anything of mine or breaks into my (rented) home I won't be very happy about it? Discuss ...
man alive! there wsa a thread called this whe i first came here yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeears ago. and my brain is too befuddled to discuss it intelligently right now
I'm usually a little annoyed whenever someone takes something of mine without asking. But then it gets me thinking. What makes it mine? Could I live without it? Do I need it to be happy. Many of our lives in the west are far too materialistic. Much of what we have we don't need, and much more we don't even appreciate or take for granted. If you've ever seen those ecological footprints, if everyone in the world had the same lifestyle and owned the same things as most of us do in the west, we'd need several planet Earths to sustain the human race. It's quite sad really. Is property theft though? No, I don't think it is, but that is only because this is the society we are socialised into. The dominant ideology is one of materialism, and it is very hard for one person, or a small group to turn their backs on it. Should property be theft? Yes, I think people should begin to look more at it this way. People really need to change the way they think about things. I'm going to try to live less materialistically, it's hard, but you just have to keep thinking about it. When I say I 'need' this or I 'need' that, do I really mean it?
Its easy to say the west is too materialistic, but have you ever tried living like a third worlder? 15 people to a one room shack, with enough food for 1 or 2 meals aday? Not the ideal existence. Yet millions around the world live just like that everyday. Yes its true you need very little to live, but what exactly is living? Is just having money for food and shelter living? Thats hardly living to me. It really sucks that the whole world cant live like the west, but the earth cant sustain how we are living now, let alone trying to bring the whole world up to our standard of living. its sad, but unfortunately i think thats life
People generally say that property is theft when they're stealing from you, not when you're stealing from them. So I generally think it's a bullshit idea. With regards to squatting, if it's a derelict building it's probably better that people live there than on the streets, but you'd have to take it up with the owner.
The whole "property is theft" idea is absurd, whoever came up with it was blatantly a skank. I'm not closed-minded, but if you open your mind far enough to include this you can also see why murder is healing and food is rape.
I don't think that's true. The whole concept of property being theft revolves around the idea of ownership being wrong. Why would we need to own property if we shared all the world's resources equally? It may be utopian and unrealistic, but it's certainly not an immoral principle. I don't really see how you can equate that to your examples. They're simply meaningless juxtapositions....
I'm not saying that we should all take to living in squalid mud huts. But if you think about it does someone really need a third mobile phone cover? Do they really need a personalised number plate for their car? Or a third television? These things aren't the essentials of life, and yet our decadant and wasteful lifestyles in the west are built on the backs of sweatshop workers, impoverished farmers and millions in the third world who live as you say. Now Earth can't sustain a western lifestyle for the whole world. But does that mean we should carry on the way we are, whilst others suffer? Even if we were do do that, we'd eventually expend all of our natural resources. The only choice is for us to find less materialistic ways of living. Think more ethically about our relationship to the natural world, and to the third world peoples. For example, it doesn't hurt to spend five pence more on a cup of fair trade coffee, but to a third world farmer, if everyone were to do that, it would make a world of difference! Or to buy clothes from companies that pay their workers a fair wage. Or for our government to drop third world debt. Or to use public transport/ bio-diesel instead of driving a petrol car everywhere. Or to get wood and paper from sustained forests. All of these things can help to make a difference, and help for a world that can sustain development for all people. With a massive population boom under way, we're running out of time....
Well there is no way to say this without coming off selfish and greedy, so oh well. I am absolutely against redistribution of goods. I enjoy my life, and no i dont need a third cell phone cover, and thats why i only have 1, but i never even had a cell phone until last year. The lifestyle of the west will go WAY down to bring other parts of the world to an equal level. Remember, if everyone buys fair trade coffee, the other guy goes out of business. Unfortunately, i think there will always be a have and a have not in this world. This is why we need to allow things like GM foods to be introduced so everyone atleast has enough food to live off of. While everyone might not have 3 cars or 5 computers, they will be able to eat a well balanced meal. but there is no way we can raise the poor in this world up to our standard without taking a huge cut in our standard of living? I'm not really willing to dothat..are you?
Just a thought coz I really can't be arsed getting into this debate right now, but I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that "property is theft" is actually an oxymoron. The notion of theft presupposes the existence of property. Without property, how can there be theft?
Without a motivation to better yourself the world would soon crumble. Its in our very nature to want to improve our lot. Take away that incentive and you're in trouble.
That was kind of the point. Basically, if we lived in a benign, egalitarian utopia of perfect beings, yes, this could be a viable doctrine. But we don't, and people still spew it out (I thought it had gone away in the late 80's but apparently not). I don't think ownership really causes any problems. Some people don't like the idea of money, status, material things, etc., but they have grown out of a societal desire to impose meritocracy on a godless universe that does not punish the guilty and reward the dilligent. Because of this, I feel it's an important part of human heritage, if nothing else. If you got rid of money, status et al, you'd still have the same problems, because you'd still have people, and you can't stop people being people. So rather than transferring the combined wealth of the world into a kind of communal pocket, you're essentially giving it to whoever has the biggest guns. I am so not a hippy, am I?
I think this is kind of the point they're trying to make. That if no-one owned anything, no-one could steal anything. It's gibberish, of course, I've never heard anyone say it who wasn't living on the scrounge in some rat-infested squathole, but there is a perverse logic behind it.
Being a land OWNER..I must say.. my husband and I worked hard all our lives..we bought our place in the woods to be away from the main stream and to have a place that we can live how we want without threat of eviction..it took us 15 yrs to build what we have here on our little farm.. I look out over the land and our animals and I swell with overwhelming happiness..I'm not an Indain or nomadic.. I have roots.. I want roots..I want to be in a place where I can be who I am and I can call my own and that I can pass on to my kids so they will work the land and raise the livestock and be closer to the earth and the natural way of things..It's not that I'm materialistic..we never buy anything brand new..I like my creature comforts..you don't have to be without anything.. everything on the earth was meant for us to use right down to the icemaker.. I did without till I was in my 30's I did the nomadic thing most of my youth..I want to be settled now in my middle age..I don't want to Sleep where I Fall..I want to lay my head down on my pillow and crawl between my clean sheets that are on my bed.. I want to drink my mornin' tea and sit in my chair and talk with my hubby..I want (and have) a place where my friends and family can come and be comfortable and hang out and be themselves.. we are happy land owners.. I would fight to the death to protect what's mine.. I never thought about tomorrow when I was on the streets.. I just lived for them moment. I was forced to comformity to some extent by the doctors I had to deal with on an almost daily score.. I was tied to the hospitals and seen awfull things.. I still kept myself true to my beliefs and I'm living the dream..I help whoever needs it and give the shirt off my back.. my hubbys the same way... we give freely.. but don't try to come and take it..you'll meet with disaster.. raising our kids to adulthood and paying off our home is our greatest acomplishments and still be young enough to enjoy it..We want a place where I grandchildren will have a place to call home.. and their children and so forth..you have to OWN the land to be free from landlords.. I don't know.. maybe you have to be a land owner to feel the freedom...
Property space possesions and stuff people need their ........... 'space' This space needs to be respected. Imagine the madness should they make it illegal to sell property overnight. Yes. Bring it on.
It's as bad as someone stealing yr car. If you live in that car, and I know I would if I could. I haven't heard a convincing argument in favour of the idiom so far, so I still believe what I believe.
My argument is more of a historical one. At some point in time all the land belonged to nobody. Someone comes along, fences it off, grows some stuff and declares it their own, although they may work hard they restrict it from being used by other people or animals. At a later stage they decide to sell it on. Do they have a right to do any of that? Or are they just selling what was never theirs to sell? Or would land ownership be justified through war? ... after William I arrived in Britain in 1066 he brought in a lot of the Norman Aristocracy to slice up the land and govern the country in the form of our feudal system. Does conquering a land through force equate to ownership? ... after all, that is our royal history. However if anyone touches any of the things I've collected over the years I wouldn't be too happy about it. This was demonstrated last week when I had my van broken into. So although property may be theft in the historical sense of the word ... at what stage should something be accepted as yours? I guess this is yet another grey area in the grand scheme of things.
Property ownership is simply a reward for those who work hard and earn it. Work hard, you get land. If you are lazy, you don't.
There's a car dealer not far from where my sister lives, there isn't a single car in there for less than £60,000, the most expensive is £170,000 ... That could buy a lot of food for a lot of people.
