I know I have written on this a great deal the last few months, but it seems that those who most need to learn the lessons I am trying to explain are also the most resistant to their Truth. This time, I am going to try to explain it from a different direction.
First, let me address those who have been referring to me as a Marxist because I have turned on the idea of a ‘Natural’ Right to own something that was created by man. I think Marx would find it odd that you are forcing me onto his ideological camp when I actually support the individual’s NATURAL RIGHT to own, operate and control the means of production. Marx was against this, so I know that he – as the highest authority of the ideology he created – would tell you who now call me a Marxist that you are wrong.
This then means that you are doing so for the purpose of tainting me in the eyes of my readers. If so, that would mean you are making an ad hominem attack: something that many of you who once called me an ally when I still believed the fiction you continue to support used to cry about ‘Liberals’ doing to you and your supporters. And you wonder why I have come to see you as the flip side of the same coin as the ‘Liberals’ you oppose? It is because you are no different. And the fact that you have not addressed my argument but only accused me of being a Marxist and of ‘switching sides’ only serves to solidify the likelihood that this is exactly what you are doing: trying to defeat my argument by calling me names. Well, don’t bother. The Left is far more vicious and I have shrugged off every name-calling fit they ever launched in my direction. I seriously doubt your will even compare.
Now, let’s look at what I am actually saying – and not what my enemies on both sides want you to believe I am saying. We have a Natural Right to make a living. If this means we have to make hoes, then we have a right to the materials and tools we use to make hoes. We have a right to anything into which we impart our labor and which is used to sustain our lives. But I have yet to see a corporation laying around in the jungle. Nor have I ever seen the argument that successfully demonstrates how we are born with land attached to our free will or body. This is because the right to ownership in both land and a corporation are the product of government.
Now, if we read Bastiat, or any of the founders – all of whom are quoted by the very people now calling me a Marxist – we find that government is created to protect our rights. But this leaves us with a problem. How can we be born with a Natural Right to something if that something must first be created by something else that is itself created? Confused? Well, if you are, you should be – because it is as easy to follow as the distorted reasoning which arrives at the conclusion we can claim a birth right – simply by being human – to own something that has to be created by something else that we have to create. In short: your right to own land or a corporation rests upon a double fiction, yet these people still want to call that ‘natural.’ I wonder, do these people also believe that witches and warlocks are also ‘naturally occurring’ entities? Because this is the sort of thing one must believe to assert a Natural Right to something twice created by man – after man is himself created.
Still, I do not have a problem with a CIVIL right to own land or a corporation. I have said this the whole time, but my enemies dare not admit it or it will destroy them. After all, how can one call me a Marxist if I am saying I have no issue with the CIVIL right to own land and corporations? Surely they wouldn’t be so foolish. That’s why they do not admit that I have ever asserted the right to create these CIVIL rights.
However, what I object to is the attempt to make these CIVIL rights and then – after they have been acquired – to argue they are now NATURAL RIGHTS and that the very people who created them no longer have any say over them. That is not only a perversion of the law; it is an attempt to claim the seat of God. Only God can create something from nothing, and that is what the people who argue that they have a ‘Natural Right’ to own land and corporations are doing. They are trying to use society to pass laws giving them the CIVIL right to own these things and then, after they have acquired them, to simply assert by their word and will alone that these CIVIL rights are now Natural Rights. This is both an absurdity and an usurpation and it should never be allowed.
At its heart, what this is about is power. The people claiming these ‘rights’ want to take something society has created and then claim society has no right to control it. They also want to use these CIVIL rights to excuse themselves from any responsibility for them. This is an abomination piled upon an abomination and it is the core of my objection. When someone claims the right of ownership yet rejects any personal responsibility for that which they claim to own, they have declared themselves to be an enemy of society – period. And so I say to my former allies: either re-examine the ground upon which you stand, or deal with the just attacks upon you and accept that you are guilty as charged. You are enemies of society – just as Jefferson and Franklin said you are.