Most rights—such as the right to free speech and the right to practice one’s religion—enjoy widespread support among politicians and the citizenry. Few explicitly call for measures to restrict free speech or freedom of religion. The right to property, however, comes under widespread attacks from both Progressives and conservatives.
As an example, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Ted Cruz have both called for antitrust persecution of Big Tech. While they use different arguments to justify breaking up companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Twitter, they agree that these companies should not be free to produce and trade as they choose.
As another example, Progressives champion the idea of a “living wage.” Most conservatives support minimum wage, but raise objections when a dramatic increase is proposed. They aren’t opposed to using government coercion to dictate what businesses can pay their employees. They just want those dictates to be implemented more gradually.
As a final example, both Progressives and conservatives are inconsistent in their support of bond elections. While they will support some projects while opposing others, they are not opposed to forcing taxpayers to pay for projects that the politician’s supporters advocate. They aren’t opposed to robbing Peter to pay Paul, unless Peter happens to vote for them.
Fundamentally, all of these examples, as well as every attack on property rights, rest on the belief that the individual has a moral duty to serve others. We must use our property, not for our own personal benefit, but for the “public interest”—the interests of others. The idea that we must serve others underlies the calls to break up Big Tech, demands for a “living wage,” and every bond election. Our property is not ours to use as we choose, but must be used in service for others.
If Big Tech isn’t using its property in the “public interest,” those companies should be punished. If employers aren’t using their property to give unearned raises to others, they should be forced to do so. If some bureaucrat decides that we need a new school or sports stadium, taxpayers should be forced to sacrifice their money for others.
Sadly, few realize that without property rights, no other rights can exist. Without property rights, the owner of a radio or television station cannot use his property to promote, support, and air the ideas of his choosing. Without property rights, the publisher cannot use his property to print the books or articles that he agrees with. Without property rights, the owner of a church cannot use his property to worship as he chooses. Without property rights, there is no free speech or freedom of religion. Without property rights, there are no other rights.
If we want to continue to enjoy free speech and freedom of religion, then we must protect property rights. The right to property must no longer be the black sheep of the family.