The Misconception of Communism and Private Businesses in a Global Context
When discussing communism and private businesses, there is often a significant misunderstanding. Many believe that communism inherently opposes private businesses, blaming it for the oppression of individual freedoms. However, the reality is more nuanced, and it is crucial to delve into the true nature of these concepts.
Protecting Human Rights and Societal Organizations
Where are these fundamental human rights written down?
Unlike romantic notions of unalienable rights, principles of human rights must be declared and defended by the people and their societies. The notion that human rights are inherent without declaration and defense defies the reality of human existence. Human societies are organized to protect each other, and without the force of arms, individuals lack the means to defend their rights. This underscores the importance of societal structures in safeguarding human rights.
Marxism and the Means of Production
“Why is communism against private properties…” It isn’t. So if you have no clear understanding of what communism actually is, you can now get educated and delete your thoughtful but misguided question.
Communism is not opposed to private property in the traditional sense. It specifically argues against the private ownership of the means of production, which includes factories, land, and technology. These means of production are essential for large-scale production and can lead to monopolistic control and exploitation. Private property, in the form of personal belongings like old briefs, is a different matter.
Many of the beliefs about private property as a fundamental human right are deeply ingrained in Western thought, specifically European influence on the world. The notion that private property is a fundamental human right is more of a Western concept and not universally accepted.
The Exploitation of Labor and Inequality
The idea that private property is a fundamental human right is very much a Western concept that has been imposed on the rest of the world. However, this concept can also perpetuate exploitation of the working class. Without alternative means of livelihood, private businesses often hire workers at wages far below the value of products they produce, maintaining a forced relationship to ensure profits. In contrast, a system like communism seeks to balanced distribution of resources to eliminate such exploitation.
Conclusion: A Balance of Rights and Responsibilities
Understanding the roles of communism and private businesses in different philosophical and economic contexts is essential. While communism challenges the idea of private ownership of the means of production, it does not inherently oppose the individual ownership of personal property. The balance between these concepts is a matter of societal choice and ethical considerations.
It is crucial to strive for a society where the fundamental rights of human beings, including the means to a fair and dignified livelihood, are protected and upheld, fostering a more equitable and just global community.