fischer@cornell.UUCP (Charles Fischer) (02/24/84)
Mike Kelly makes it clear why Leftists are so mistrusted. Someone actually had the temerity to suggest that an individual owns the wealth he creates, and hence may object to forced transfers of wealth. Kelly's reply? > That got me thinking about what determines what belongs to whom. To me, > all that determines that is state policy. In other words, there is no > private property unless the state decides that there is private property. > The state does not taketh; it giveth. So 1984 has arrived! You only own what the state says you do, and if you object, it's up against the wall! He further goes on to depict an evil factory owner (a capitalist, no doubt). > But consider a factory owner. Why does HE own > the product of that factory, produced by the labor of hundreds of workers? > Simple: because the state conspires with him to prevent anyone from taking > it. It appears that laws against theft are a Capitalist plot. But wait! In that revered workers paradise, theft of state property merits the DEATH PENALITY. It must be that stealing from the state is a vile crime, but stealing from factory owners is an innate right of the proletariat. One problem though! Factories are owned by shareholders, and the majority of all stock is held by institutions and pension funds (i.e., ordinary people). Thus we come full circle. Stealing from the people's state is evil, but stealing from the people is not! Kelly concludes with masterful logic > So the "this is mine and the state is extorting it from me" attitude makes > me laugh. Try and hold on to it if the state weren't around to protect you > from rioting workers.
tpkq@charm.UUCP (Timothy Kerwin) (02/24/84)
* In its original form, "private property" meant that everyone has control over the product of his (or, in theory at least, her) labor. But the emergence of the capitalist system turned this meaning on its head. Under capitalism, the wealth produced is controlled not by those who produce it (the workers), but by the owners of the means of production (the capitalists). But capitalism's drive to develop the forces of production to the fullest has also led to the socialization of production. Under the conditions of modern capitalism, with hundreds and even thousands of workers working in the same factory, and complex interconnections between the various areas of production, it is no longer possible for an individual to say, "This is the product of *my* labor." Therefore, there is no way to "go back" to the original meaning of private property (individual producers controlling their product). But when capitalism is overthrown (by "expropriating the expropriators"), then society can take collective control over its collective product. And that's socialism.