Whether the right of property and ownership is observed from the perspective of absolute or categorical perspectives, it still hinges on having some form of access to an item before others. Ownership as it exists now is a result of accumulation of property or things by purchase, inheritance, or force. As such, it inherently debilitates the livelihood of those that may not have the same opportunities in ownership as those that are wealthier, from a family that owns property, or those that have received such opportunities through an exterior source such as the government. This model of acquisition is unfair, but also unnatural, as there is no basis for certain individuals to retain certain property except the current laws that dictate such a procedure.
The main issue of ownership as it exists today is that those that get punished by the current system are those that are most vulnerable to losing their property. Frequently, priority rights are violated and constitutional or any other governmental protection is not applied in the case of non-wealthy defendants. The rights of some are often violated for the ambitions of others, such as the loss of homes, seizing of assets, and unfounded charges in order to make room for development projects (Somin, 2020). As such, the property laws and rights are not only untrue to human nature, but are non-universal in their systematic application. Even if some form of property ownership is constructed, it’s basis must focus on equal opportunities and not the self-interest of the few. However, due to the inherent harm of ownership, which often results in the denial of items and services to others, it is better to formulate a system in which property cannot be absolutely privatized.
Works Cited
Somin, Ilya. “America’s Weak Property Rights Are Harming Those Most in Need.”The Atlantic, 2020, Web.