What is wrong with private property?

[MisguidedSheep]

Why are communists opposed to people owning their own things? Everyone should at least have a private house or bedroom, because nobody wants strangers walking into their bedroom at night while they sleep, we all need privacy to some extent, so why do communist oppose it? Please explain why you think private property is wrong, and what you would do if I came into your house and refused to leave?

[ZeroNowhere]

Short answer: We aren't.

[GPDP]

You really have no clue, do you?

Sorry if I come off as condescending, but understand that when we talk about private property, we are not, I repeat, we are not talking about personal possessions, like a house or a car or a toothbrush. We are speaking of productive property, of capital, of huge tracts of lands or massive factories owned by a single individual or a small group of individuals employed for private profit.

We communists are all for everyone having the right to a house, and to whatever other personal possessions they may wish to have, so long as it does not involve the actual means of production, which we believe should be held in common.

Anyway, hopefully you can wrap your head around this concept. I know when I first started learning about communism, I was asking myself the very same questions, until I realized the distinction. Then it became much easier to sympathize with, say, Marx, when he called for the abolition of private property. I realize it's not easy, due to the overwhelming amount of misinformation and confusion that surrounds communism as it is presented to most people, and I would say it is not an accident that such is the case.

[Plagueround]

While I never speak for everyone, I would say almost all communists want people to own a private house of their own. As noted in just about every introductory piece of communist literature, there is a difference between personal property for one's own use, and private property that is used to generate capital and keep class divisions alive and well. We are not out to deprive people of belongings, merely things that they own that should belong to everyone.

We are completely against a system that does not allow everyone to have a private house or bedroom, which is why we're not fond of capitalism.

P.S. I can't think of any reason for a "State Owned Toothbrush"...but it strikes me as a great band name.

[MisguidedSheep]

While I never speak for everyone, I would say almost all communists want people to own a private house of their own. As noted in just about every introductory piece of communist literature, there is a difference between personal property for one's own use, and private property that is used to generate capital and keep class divisions alive and well. We are not out to deprive people of belongings, merely things that they own that should belong to everyone.

We are completely against a system that does not allow everyone to have a private house or bedroom, which is why we're not fond of capitalism.

Ok, I understand and I agree with that.. It does not make sense for one person to own billions of dollars while another only has a few thousand...

[Plagueround]

Ok, I understand and I agree with that.. It does not make sense for one person to own billions of dollars while another only has a few thousand...

No problem. It's a common misconception. If you have any other questions feel free to ask or hit up our learning section for some great literature links.

[ZeroNowhere]

Ok, I understand and I agree with that.. It does not make sense for one person to own billions of dollars while another only has a few thousand...
Especially when they get it through owning shit rather than doing anything productive.

[Hiero]

While I never speak for everyone, I would say almost all communists want people to own a private house of their own.'

Well not neccasarily. While I am sure all communist agree that people should have personal space within their residence this does no contradict collective owernship of community housing or state owned housing.

Considering there are millions of people around the world without housing or adequate housing it would be a big point in Communist Parties all around the world to extend state owned housing. It may even be worth while to buy back homes to alleviate people's pressure from loans and morgatages people have to pay. Also it would assist in people moving around for work.

As I said we are talking about ownership. This would be public ownership, just the same as productive property. However space would be private. Personal liberties in private space would probally be extended more in Socialism and Communism then it has ever been in capitalism.

[Plagueround]

'

Well not neccasarily. While I am sure all communist agree that people should have personal space within their residence this does no contradict collective owernship of community housing or state owned housing.

Considering there are millions of people around the world without housing or adequate housing it would be a big point in Communist Parties all around the world to extend state owned housing. It may even be worth while to buy back homes to alleviate people's pressure from loans and morgatages people have to pay. Also it would assist in people moving around for work.

As I said we are talking about ownership. This would be public ownership, just the same as productive property. However space would be private. Personal liberties in private space would probally be extended more in Socialism and Communism then it has ever been in capitalism.

Well yes. My point was more so that we're not going to force people into rooms with tons of bunks or think that everyone could just walk into another person's space and be like "Hey. What's up? I see you're having intercourse. That's cool. I'ma go get some chips and hang out."

But then, I'm not much for state owned anything, so thanks for the alternative perspective. ;)

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Wrong question. We don't oppose people owning their own items. We oppose hierarchy, and all undemocratic states - which includes the landlord. Other than size and manpower, there isn't a spit of difference between an absolute government and an absolute landlord.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

'

Well not neccasarily. While I am sure all communist agree that people should have personal space within their residence this does no contradict collective owernship of community housing or state owned housing.

Considering there are millions of people around the world without housing or adequate housing it would be a big point in Communist Parties all around the world to extend state owned housing. It may even be worth while to buy back homes to alleviate people's pressure from loans and morgatages people have to pay. Also it would assist in people moving around for work.

As I said we are talking about ownership. This would be public ownership, just the same as productive property. However space would be private. Personal liberties in private space would probally be extended more in Socialism and Communism then it has ever been in capitalism.

It depends on what type of "communist" we're talking about. There are libertarian council communists, anarcho-communists, and Leninist varieties.

[Dr Mindbender]

Why are communists opposed to people owning their own things?

I for one am not opposed to people 'owning things'. However there is a difference between sorts of property. A computer and a factory is different in that a factory requires labour to run. What you are doing is making the error of confusing personal and private property.

What i am opposed to is people owning the means of production because it gives individuals the means to exapropriate the labour of others. What we want is people to recieve the entire value of their own labour. That is all.

[#FF0000]

Someone's Ipod isn't what we call "property". However, someone's factories and farms are. Basically, we want to make these factories and farms and workshops (a.k.a. private property or "the means of production") PUBLIC property. But why?

Simply put, it's because private property leads to exploitation of the working class by the bosses and the ruling class. How, exactly?

Well, let's look at a bakery under capitalism. At this particular bakery, there is a boss who owns the building and the stoves and everything needed to make bread. This boss hires one baker to bake bread for his business to sell. The baker produces $100 worth of bread a day. The baker is paid $10 a day for their trouble. The boss keeps $90.

Now, with that set up, let's start asking questions. Why is that baker only getting $10 a day when the bread the baker made with his or her own labor and time is worth $100 total? Why does the boss get to take and keep any portion of that wealth, when it was created entirely by the baker's labor?

When that baker goes to work, he or she is selling his or her time and labor to the boss, and is being compensated with only a fraction of what the labor is worth ($10 wage out of $100 worth of product). Not fair? Doesn't matter. There's no choice. In order to get any money at all, one must sell their labor for a fraction of its worth as a direct result of private property. This is what we call exploitation, and this is why we oppose private property.

Hope that's clear. :)

[trivas7]

Why are communists opposed to people owning their own things? Everyone should at least have a private house or bedroom, because nobody wants strangers walking into their bedroom at night while they sleep, we all need privacy to some extent, so why do communist oppose it? Please explain why you think private property is wrong, and what you would do if I came into your house and refused to leave?
B/c communists fundamentally are immoral (http://www.revleft.com/vb/john-ridpath-immorality-t91947/index.html?p=1261007&highlight=John+Ridpath#post1261007).

[Dr Mindbender]

B/c communists fundamentally are immoral (http://www.revleft.com/vb/john-ridpath-immorality-t91947/index.html?p=1261007&highlight=John+Ridpath#post1261007).

What is 'morality' anyway?

it is a subjective concept open to emotive appealing and strawmanning by the author.

Stop trolling please.

[trivas7]

What is 'morality' anyway?

it is a subjective concept open to emotive appealing and strawmanning by the author.

Stop trolling please.
Morality is a code of values to guide man's choices and actions. And no, ethics is not a subjective whim of the individual -- does that constitute trolling?

[nuisance]

Piss off Trivas-what will it be next week-7, you fucking political tourist.

[ZeroNowhere]

B/c communists fundamentally are immoral (http://www.revleft.com/vb/john-ridpath-immorality-t91947/index.html?p=1261007&highlight=John+Ridpath#post1261007).
I am in complete agreement with this. Anti-schoolers are also immoral. Also, being judgmental is sinful.


And that 'society' may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of what it deems to be its own collective good -- that's statism.
An informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's position -- that's a strawman argument.


What they all have in common is the moral principle that it is appropriate on their part to initiate force in order to expropriate your property for their use.
Oh, please. You're not even trying.


I boils down to the view that individuals left free from physical force to pursue their own lives, will do corrupt and evil things. That individuals are bad; their view of human nature is not one of love and benevolence, it's one of the corruption of human nature, and the need, therefore, for those who are familiar with what the good life and the moral life is, to take upon themselves the power of government in order to force you into their world.
On the contrary, most of us take either a positive view on 'human nature', or just don't take a view on it, because the whole argument about 'human nature' being good or evil is a load of bollocks.
I am only not going to initiate coercive force against you because free will is bullshit. :)


to set wages
Wages? What wages? Fuck wages.


That's what's under the mask.
All non-socialists are Rihanna fans. And if you're not a metal head you might as well be dead.
We're the metal inquisition! We sentence you to death! BY GUILLOTINE!


The only principled antidote to that is an establishment of a society consistently based on the principle of individual rights. Capitalism is the only alternative to these types of immoral social systems
And I thought my jokes were bad.


But in that society, I would fight for you to have the right to do all sorts of immoral things, as long as you weren't attacking the rights of others. That's what being free is.
Immoral. Heh.

[Bud Struggle]

Other than size and manpower, there isn't a spit of difference between an absolute government and an absolute landlord.


Excellent point. Actually an absolute government is worse than an absolute landlord--you can't move from the government.

Besides all the Bourgeois would become the government officials under Communism--that's what happened in the Soviet Union, and when the SU fell--they became millionaires.

[RGacky3]

B/c communists fundamentally are immoral (http://www.revleft.com/vb/john-ridpath-immorality-t91947/index.html?p=1261007&highlight=John+Ridpath#post1261007).

You don't contribute anything to this forum, go away.


Excellent point. Actually an absolute government is worse than an absolute landlord--you can't move from the government.

Yes you can :P, you .... move.


Besides all the Bourgeois would become the government officials under Communism

Please see. every explination of what communism is and what our goals are in every single thread where you bring this up, and stop bringing up points that have nothing to do with us.

Our communism is not the SU.

[mikelepore]

Why are communists opposed to people owning their own things? Everyone should at least have a private house or bedroom, because nobody wants strangers walking into their bedroom at night while they sleep, we all need privacy to some extent, so why do communist oppose it? Please explain why you think private property is wrong, and what you would do if I came into your house and refused to leave?

"Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations." --- Marx and Engels, Communist Manifesto

[ZeroNowhere]

Besides all the Bourgeois would become the government officials under Communism--that's what happened in the Soviet Union, and when the SU fell--they became millionaires.
Vi doede ikke... Vi har aldri levd.