There is a well known thought by the French 19th century thinker Proudhon that "Property is theft," and so to a quick look at this to see how much sense it makes.
Property and theft are two different words meaning two very different things. If Proudhon had said "Property is property," then while this inane pronouncement would have surely had no future fame, at least it wouldn't have abandoned sense. And similarly if he had said that "Theft is theft." However Proudhon ventured into the more strange waters of claiming one word to in perfect truth imply a very different word, i.e. that 'theft' and 'property' are one.
Someone may helpfully clarify that what Proudhon is trying to say is that property is itself immoral because of being the equivalent to the act of theft; that somebody owning something is by definition stealing from someone else.
However, stealing from someone can only exist where property exists in the first place, and so the idea that 'property is theft' is entirely unintelligible. To use the word theft is to necessarily accept the legitimacy of property - theft being the illegitimate taking of someone else's property. And so to try to say that property is theft is self-contradictory gibberish.
3 comments:
he steals the semantic charge of "theft" and appropriates it to "property."
Proudhon was a disgusting crackhead thief, stealing meaning to finance his filthy lifestyle.
Anyone who steals crackheads has serous problems.
Crackheads have limited resale value.
Post a Comment