In his 1840 book What is Property? French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon wrote, “Property is theft!” Proudhon’s statement has been embraced by many on the political Left, even if they have never heard of him. And they are guilty of the same evasions as Proudhon.
In Proudhon’s time, land was the primary form of property, and his claim was aimed primarily at landed property. He did not object to labor-created property. His essential argument was that the owners of land had not created that value (unlike labor-created property), but had instead taken for themselves what is really a part of “the commons”–a resource that all should be able to freely use.
The concept of property implies an owner. Indeed, property is a material value that is owned. Theft is the act of taking property from the rightful owner without his consent. To claim that property is theft is to imply that it was owned before it was taken. Which means, the victim of the theft was himself a thief.
Proudhon would likely argue that “the commons” is a resource that is owned by the community. Therefore, the individual who takes a resource from “the commons” and declares it his private property is guilty of theft. But this too involves an evasion. “The commons” is an invalid concept.
Use of a resource does not confer property rights. It is the transformation of a resource into a human value that creates property, and thus a property right. Until that occurs, the resource is unowned and available for all to use.
As an example, a fish in the ocean is an unowned resource. But when a fisherman catches it, the fish becomes his property. Similarly with land. Unowned land is available for all to use. When someone transforms it–such as by building a house or planting a farm–he has created a value. He has created property.
Property is not theft. It is value creation.