Deconstructing the Myth of Private Property

• Private property is presented as a natural, fundamental right, but functions as a central ideological pillar of capitalism rather than an inherent human truth.
• The absolute protection of private property often contradicts basic human rights principles, such as equality and dignity, by prioritizing ownership over social well-being.

Historical Context and Economic Fallacy

• Adam Smith’s concept of the "invisible hand," promised 250 years ago, failed to produce general welfare, instead leading to extreme wealth concentration and systemic inequality.
• Private property is not a universal human norm; for most of human history, communities practiced collective or communal resource management.
• Historical and contemporary examples, such as the Maya and Inca civilizations, as well as various indigenous peoples (e.g., Australian Aborigines, the San people), demonstrate that societies can function successfully without private land ownership.

The Distinction in Ownership

• A critical distinction exists between personal property (goods used for daily survival, such as homes and food) and capital property (assets that generate profit through the exploitation of others' labor, such as banks and corporate holdings).
• Current political and economic debates regarding housing access often weaponize the concept of private property to justify evictions and soaring rents.
• The commodification of essential services—including healthcare, education, transport, and energy—under the guise of protecting property rights exacerbates inequality, effectively shielding capital accumulation from social responsibility.