Re: Private Property and Capitalism
Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:49:45 -0400

>> don't understand is why it isn't blatently obvious to Suresh that private
property is only maintained by force *when others try to forcefully take it
from the rightful owner*.

David, being of native American heritage, that sentnce stuck in my craw. It
is your use of the word only.... maybe you should say "rightly"... In the
USA, the land was taken by force and is still maintained by superior force.
How land is "taken" in the first place may be a good place to begin to
analyze of some of our culture's deficient memes. When members of
technologically superior yet unethical (for example if they don't regard
Indians or blacks as "human beings" but as, say, beasts in the field - which
is something the Spanish Christian Missionaries had up their sleeve ie: to be
slaughtered or converted and enslaved was their "place" in life) or
illmotivated 'tribes' take land by force, then keep it by force, it starts a
Might is Right chain.

This has less to do with capitalism, politics, it has much more to do with
ethics and morality. It may be less of a successful guise today to take
land, money and gold, but does one think it still effects on us today? Do
people still operate in this manner? The church is still here, the state is
still here. In most cases, monarchy is not. But Might is Right is a basic,
we've been doing it for years and anarchy has never been tried. Do we
passively assume such tyrannies wil dissapear overnight because we get less
govt. or do we have to do something (if one can do anything).