Every once in a
while we review a few things from the past that we think people might want to
take another look at. One of these is
our rediscovery a few years back of a “long lost classic” by none other than
Fulton J. Sheen . . . you know, “Uncle Fulty” who was in a (friendly)
competition with “Uncle Milty”?
 |
| "Stop stealing my gags, Sheen!" |
The book was Freedom
Under God, and it’s a little more serious than that lead in might
suggest. Why, however, did the world
need the republication of a “long lost” book on the subject of “capitalism versus
communism,” even by the renowned
Catholic “televangelist,” Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen? Hasn’t communism been defeated with the dissolution of the
Soviet Union, and with China becoming more capitalist as its economy
expands? Isn’t the world becoming more free and democratic with every passing
day?
Why? Because at no
time in living memory has there been less true human freedom. Even the idea of freedom has decayed to the point where it is
effectively meaningless for most people.
In former ages
individuals and groups were enslaved. There was, however, generally a clear
legal distinction between those who were free, and those who were unfree. This
distinction has been lost. Today the proletarian (propertyless) condition is
the norm for most people — and lack of capital ownership is tantamount to slavery.
As Sheen noted in the book in support of his thesis on
the necessity of true freedom, “Power follows property, and they who own things to a
great extent own persons.” If you own capital, you are free. If you do not
own capital, even if you are legally
free, you are to all intents and purposes a slave. As Sheen explained,
Once you concentrate property in the hands of the few, you
create slaves; when you decentralize it, you restore liberty. The objection of the Church to slavery is not that the slaves are poor. Slaves need not all
be poor. . . . The Catholic approach is quite different. It
starts with the fact that no material thing, not even the whole world, shall be
allowed to interfere with the right of a person to attain his ultimate end by
the exercise of his free will.
 |
| "Thanks, Berle, I'll use that one, too!" |
Different religions
and philosophies may disagree on why people should be free. They often differ
on the means by which this can be accomplished. They even argue about what
“freedom” means, as Sheen makes clear in this book. The goal itself,
however, is unquestioned.
To understand why
private property is essential to freedom, we need to know what
“property” is. “Property” is not the
thing owned. Property is, rather, the natural right to be an owner, and the
socially determined bundle of rights that limit and define how an owner may
exercise what is owned within a social context. Property means the right to
control what is owned, and enjoyment of the fruits of
ownership.
The universal
prohibition against theft (e.g., “Thou shalt not steal”) implies
that private property is a fundamental human right, however much
understanding of it may be distorted. Even Marxist communism unconsciously acknowledges the validity of
private property by asserting that “surplus value” is stolen from workers and consumers. If the workers and consumers did not have private property in “surplus value,” how could it be wrong for
the capitalists to take it?
 |
| "Only if I don't use it first . . . you Hope. . ." |
That is why we can say
no one should be denied the right to own, and what is owned is, in human terms,
owned individually or jointly
“against” everyone else. What someone owns ordinarily cannot be taken without
the free consent of the owner(s). As John Locke commented, “what property have I in that, which another may by right
take, when he pleases, to himself?”
No one, however, may
have absolute or unlimited use
(exercise) of what is owned. Nor is it expedient that everything be privately
owned. For example, while in theory there is nothing that cannot be privately
owned, in practice most people would agree that atomic weapons (if they should
even exist at all) are not appropriate for private ownership.
Thus, in any
discussion of private property, it is critical to realize
that while the right to own is inalienable and inherent in each human person, no one can use what is owned to harm others or
society (the
common good) as a whole. Neither can anyone’s
right to be an owner, or what is owned, be used in any way that inhibits or
prevents others from becoming owners or using what they own. This is a matter
of prudence, social necessity,
and plain common sense.
#30#