yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

'Property is theft' stolen concept fallacy


3m read
·Nov 8, 2024

Property is theft. This is a phrase that unpacks as all property is theft, and it's something that I've seen mentioned a few times on YouTube lately. A comment from one of my subscribers, I think in my previous video, prompted me to address this specifically.

To claim all property is theft is one that we can easily show to be incoherent. A stolen object is not considered the property of the thief; even though it's in his possession, it remains the property of the rightful owner. Theft is when property is taken by someone who has no legitimate title to that property, and this person doesn't have the permission of the rightful owner to take it.

So, the existence of legitimately owned property is conceptually ancestral to the concept of theft. In other words, in order to be intelligible, the concept of theft depends on the concept of legitimately owned property. Similarly, the actual existence of theft presupposes the actual existence of legitimately owned property. Thus, we can be certain it's not the case that all property is theft. In fact, we know we can see that this makes no sense.

Or, as Nathaniel Brandon put it, "theft is a concept that logically and genetically depends on the antecedent concepts of rightfully owned property and refers to the act of taking that property without the owner's consent." If no property is rightfully owned, that is, if nothing is property, there can be no such concepts as theft. Thus, the statement "all property is theft" has an internal contradiction.

So, to use the concept of theft while denying the validity of the concept of property is to use theft as a concept to which one has no logical right; that is, as a stolen concept.

The same problem applies to the phrase "property is aggression" or "initiated force," which I've also seen posted on YouTube lately. I'll briefly explain why you have your work cut out for you if you want to make this claim to a libertarian who is in favor of property rights.

Aggression, in common language, often refers to behavioral manifestations of anger. However, aggression in the context of libertarian or property rights tradition means something more specific and something a little bit different. It refers to the unauthorized use of another person's property or the threat to do the same. It doesn't assume that the aggressor is angry; they might even be very calm while they're doing the aggressing.

So, like with theft, the existence of aggression, understood this way, depends on the existence of legitimate property ownership. Why is this? It's because aggression is the breach of or the violation of property rights, or the threat to violate them.

In fact, we can only detect that aggression has occurred because we have an idea of what a person's property rights are, and that means we notice when they've been violated. So, if you want to say that property is aggression, you should be prepared to explain how you're defining these terms. Because, according to their meanings within the libertarian tradition, it makes no sense.

More Articles

View All
Playing Sci-Fact or Sci-Fiction | StarTalk
Now we’re going to play a game called SFA or SCI fiction, and you’re going to identify whether you think it is SFA or a sci fiction or maybe you don’t know if I don’t know either. I won’t claim to know. That sounds good. The days were shorter millions of…
How to Invest In the Stock Market for Beginners in 2020
Good date subscribers! Thank you so much for joining us today. My name is Graham, and welcome to the Financial Education Channel. I’m so happy! Finally, we’ve been talking to each other for probably like a year and a half. I finally got Jeremy on my chann…
Should I Die?
Someday, I will die. But should I? If I was offered a longer life, I would take that in a second. But how long is too long? Is death something I should deny forever, or is death and the role it plays in the universe something I am better off accepting? I …
How To Financally Plan Before Marriage | Jason Tartick & Kaitlyn Bristowe
It’s a crazy thought process to leave 10 years of NBA grinding all over the country in corporate America to go on reality TV, but it was that thought process that actually changed my life. Somebody in your family, either side, comes to you and says, “Loo…
Calculating a P-value given a z statistic | AP Statistics | Khan Academy
Fay read an article that said 26% of Americans can speak more than one language. She was curious if this figure was higher in her city, so she tested her null hypothesis: that the proportion in her city is the same as all Americans’ - 26%. Her alternative…
12 SIGNS THAT YOU SHOULD CUT ALL CONTACT WITH SOMEONE | MARCUS AURELIUS | STOICISM INSIGHTS
We often think of our relationships as mere extensions of our daily routines, rarely stopping to consider their profound impact on our well-being. Yet, what if I told you that the quality of your relationships could be the single most crucial factor in yo…