The War on Property; P. L. Poirot

THE RESULTS, after more than 30 years of Federal "war on poverty" in America,suggest that the cam paign has failed. "Instead of tem porary aid, relief has become a permanent way of life for millions. Second and third generations of families now live on relief."! Nor is it that the millions in this new class of poverty-striken are simply destitute of the material manifes tations of private property. Far worse; many have lost their self respect and the respect of their fellow men; they have lost their human dignity. What can these persons claim as their own? Respect for the dignity of an individual presumes him to be re1 U. S. News & World Report. July 17. 1967, p. 44. sponsible for the development and use of his faculties, his qualities, his properties. The personal free dom of choice that is liberty de pends upon self-control and posses sion or ownership in the form of private property. And consistent with this concept of human dig nity and private property is the right of the individual to make his own mistakes, if he so chooses, and to abide by the consequences - to know the penalties of improp er choice and action as well as the fruits of success.

"Property is desirable, is a pos itive good in the world," said Abraham Lincoln. "That some should be rich shows that othe·rs mayl become rich and hence is just enc~uragement to industry and en! 579 580 THE FREEMAN October terprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work dili gently to build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence." Lincoln understood that pove'rty is not to be overcome by warlike or compulsory measures, but by peaceful example. Not by pulling down the house of another, not by destroying another's life or char acter or estate, but by each man working diligently to build one for himself. A property owner, of course, might be able to live upon his own resources. But few of us now adays would be content with such a subsistence level of living. We have grown accustomed to the ad vantages of specialized production and. peaceful exchange of goods and services. Such voluntary ex change also depends on private property. Every trader is a prop~ erty owner and his own man.

Something to offer is his ticket of admission to the market - his purchasing power. For Property Owners Only This requirement for trade gives rise to a common complaint about the so-called tyranny of the market economy: that it tends to be exclusive - for property owners only. The fact that a buyer's pur chasing power depends upon what he has to offer is said to be un democratic and unfair; it doesn't afford everyone everything he wants. Some even argue that "property is theft," in the belief that any accumulations of private property must have impoverished other people. Such beliefs might have been justified under various conditions of the past - might be justified in some parts of the world today. A slave owner, for example, acquires and holds his slaves by force, and thus impoverishes them. Tribal wars for territory or other prop erty leave the losers poorer to the extent of the victors' spoils. But ina trading society as we know it, property required for produc tion and marketing can only be ac cumulated and retained by an owner insofar as he use·s it as consumers want him to. Otherwise, he's out of business.