Discover more from Jon Rappoport
The Geniuses Who Believe Ownership of Private Property and Wealth are Crimes
Corollary: Everything Should Be Free
Let’s start here: As soon as a piece of land is no longer unexplored—as soon as someone sets foot on it—someone is going to own it.
It could be an individual, it could be a group, it could be a government.
It then becomes property.
Saying property is a crime is an attempt to contradict a fact of life.
Saying “the people” own the land/property, or “everybody” owns it, or “nobody” owns it is a fantasy. An unworkable fantasy.
Quite often, these claims are nothing more than power plays disguised as “greater good.” A group is trying to steal property from the owner.
And if they succeed, an interesting thing happens. They stop saying “everybody” owns what they just stole.
Communists have worked this con for a long time. The people own all property, but the people are represented by the Communist dictatorship. Except the dictatorship actually represents itself.
There are endless variations on this theme. For example, a billionaire who owns a mansion and an estate is promoting the idea that a humane government should control property and dispense it fairly—but not HIS mansion or HIS estate.
From private ownership of land comes private wealth. A farmer has acres of food crops. He employs workers. He sells his crop. This is not a magic act that comes into being with a snap of the fingers. The farmer builds for years.
Then a group of geniuses says this farmer is committing a crime through ownership and accumulation of wealth.
Translation: “We want what you have.”
Translation: “if we can somehow get what you have, we’ll own it and no one will take it away from us.”
Translation: “We’ll be just like the farmer. Except he built it and we stole it.”
The brain-addled among us confuse abuse of the private-property system with the need to abolish private property.
They believe abuse equals predestined systemic failure. And the solution, of course, is the transfer of all property to themselves, or “the government.”
Translation: “Take the property from the abusers and give it to us, and we’ll be the abusers.”
If you take a close look at large numbers of people who are actually victimized by the powers-that-be, you’ll see these people are being prevented from participating in PRIVATE OWNERSHIP and private wealth-building.
Which tells you what the solution is. The solution isn’t turning over all property to the government.
However, this simple picture is muddied by those who don’t want to work, don’t want to earn their own way. They just want to receive. They just want to steal.
The picture is also muddied by governments who refuse to prosecute the abusers of the private property system. For example, federal law enforcement has let Big Pharma off the hook for more than a century. The lethal crimes of those corporations have gone unpunished. They’ve made trillions of dollars poisoning the population with their drugs. That’s wealth-building through injuring and killing.
That’s not a systemic flaw in the system.
Obviously, if all of Pharma were taken out of the hands of its private owners and transferred to government—who has let Pharma off the hook—the situation is not going to improve.
If anything is systemic, it’s people. Meaning: no matter how society is organized, people are going lie, cheat, steal, and kill. Not all people. But some.
So which is a better organization? Private ownership of property and private wealth-building; or ownership of property and wealth at the top?
Fools choose the latter. Which is to say, they prefer centralized power to decentralized power. That’s what we’re basically talking about.
Do you want property and money owned by the government (and the elite people who own the government), or do you want property and money dispersed among individuals as widely as possible, through a system by which those individuals earn it?
Do you want centralization of economic power? Or decentralization?
“I want perfection.”
“I want a perfect system.”
“You mean I have to live and work and earn and risk? But that could be dangerous…”
True. Therefore, you might consider working at something you really want to work at. Since all work carries risk.
“I don’t like that.”
Some people don’t.
“I need the government!”
And the government needs you, as another brick laid on the millions of bricks that compose their tyranny.
-- Jon Rappoport
Episode 39 of Rappoport Podcasts—“Wuhan’s biggest secrets, underneath all the lies and cover stories”—is now posted on my substack. It’s a blockbuster. To listen, click here. To learn more about This Episode of Rappoport Podcasts, click here.