From our responsible friends at Vox, we learn that private property is merely an expression of racism.
The Cathedral gets to win this one because the people who would otherwise want to defend private property are entirely hamstringed by the ideology and legal structure of civil rights. Centrist and left-leaning libertarians in particular, who might be inclined to defend the rights of suburbanites to maintain an exclusive place to themselves, are instead pushed by their prior ideological commitments to defend the raucuous mob.
Why exactly should anyone give a rotten dime to the Cato Institute if they’re unwilling to defend the most clear cut issues related to trespassing? You would have to be both rich enough to not care about wasting the money and dumb enough to not comprehend the issues involved here.
The entire point of private property is having the right to select who can and can’t make use of something. If you say that you can’t use even reasonable amounts of force in defense of property, then it’s not private property anymore.
Hamfisted Red propaganda makes its return as the state conscripts indoctrinated children to wave signs condemning the ‘intolerance’ of the inoffensive suburban bourgeoisie.
If anything, not enough force was used to clear the pool. To claim to uphold private property without being willing to use as much force as is necessary to demonstrate that claim is to give up the claim. Proclaiming that you support private property in the abstract, while condemning the defense of those rights in the concrete, is to be worse than useless as an ‘advocate’ of those rights. It is to say “I will defend this” while unchallenged, and then to back away when that principle is actually challenged. This is more obnoxious even than an open Bolshevik who openly opposes the existence of private property.
For conservatives, the unreliability of the state in defense of private property is a further difficulty. It’s embarrassing that private property owners have to make themselves so pathetic in relying on a uniformed agent of the state to defend their own pool. Given that the priestly authority in the US, bound up in the press, wants to obliviate the principle of private property selectively — particularly in cases like this — it’s going to be more challenging to prevent the US from receding to the third world mean.
For the press, events like these are teaching moments intended to shame the remnant middle class to part with their holdings, creating maudlin morality plays intended to break resistance to expropriation of all kinds.
The entire national press will censure one woman for saying “Go back to Section 8,” but it’s become crimethink to even conceive of something like “end Section 8” and “those who do not work should not eat.”
It may be true that the left is overplaying its hand in cheering on the mob of youths. The rising third world generation may have numbers on their side, but they aren’t really useful for much else other than mobbing things and whining on the internet. To that extent, the left is good at mobilizing discontent, but not terribly good at making those people productive.