PROMETHEAN ANTAGONIST

One needn’t be wealthy to wish to retain property. Property is a reflection of values and choices.  Even wolves and lions know what parcel of land is “theirs.” Watch a stretch of high tension wire with a line of crows on it. A newcomer flies in and “everybody” readjusts their location to maintain ownership of a section of space a bird can call one’s own.  

We all have property.  Your body belongs to you. From there, one’s sense of ownership extends from brief acquisitions (e.g. food) to plots of real estate.  Some people accumulate lots of property. Some, not so much. Some crave expansion of their holdings. Others, content with limitation.   The dynamics of what one acquires, maintains, or loses are complex.

There have always been people who see the amount of ownership some hold as “unfair,” yet most people with property want to keep that property and have a say in how it is utilized. After all, it’s “theirs.”  

Much of political philosophy revolves around the desire by those who control a governing structure to determine who gets what.  Beyond the free exchange of property enters the concept of theft.  Theft requires little expenditure of energy. One doesn’t earn objects of desire by simple seizure. Government seldom earns anything.  Their method of acquiring wealth, property and power is to make a philosophical argument as to why their expertise is required to determine who gets what.

Much of what one owns is the result of values and choices.  I’ve often lived in locations that didn’t require a car (i.e. New York City).  My lack of mobile property meant significant savings (i.e. payments, insurance, fuel, maintenance).  A lot of people in their early twenties spend significant funds on “partying.”   I worked long hours in my early twenties so my income was directed elsewhere.   Over the years, I purchased graphic art and historical relics.  My collection isn’t huge but it reflected my values and choices.  A typical leftist dictatorship would see my humble collection as a gross example of unfairness.  “This art belongs to “the People”.    Of course, “the people” didn’t choose art over cars and bars. Many of the people wouldn’t even like a collection of engravings and etchings, let alone know what they are.  No problem. If “the people” don’t want other people’s art collections, the government and the “party” will always be glad to step in as middle man in the perennial role of state thief.

I remember once debating an intelligent leftist (some are intelligent😉).  He was furious over a statement I made regarding “my money.” I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t have liked references to “my art collection” either.  Money is merely a symbol of energy — ultimately mental energy.  The thought and work one puts into existence can be temporarily stored as precious metals, land, or paper promissory notes (cash) etc. 

In the end, all the speculation one directs to the issue of property comes down to freedom. 

Are we free to decide how we direct the limited resources available to us?  There are people who started with nothing and amassed fortunes. Likewise, those of considerable wealth that lost everything. And, of course, every circumstance in between. No matter what system evolves or is imposed, property and wealth will always be subject to the whims of fate and free volition.  When the state steps in, the method of acquisition is always theft (unless they ask for voluntary donations — ‘not likily). 

Jealousy is a type of greed.  In the end, it isn’t property that some are jealous of but jealousy of the choices others have made that place them on the economic spectrum. 

We can chastise a wolf who urinates on a perimeter marking an area he sees as “his”  or, in the human sphere, demand that one’s property be seized for an imaginary “greater good” under the auspices of a very powerful thief. 

# posted by Promethean Antagonist @ 6:23 PM