TaN: Thanks and in memorium to a brilliant and good friend – Nito Doria.
It was late when I met Nito, but from the brief period I learned a lot and he planted a seed of truth in me that will grow strong and wide forever. He taught me all I know about Social Justice and the truth behind the greatest scam of all: land, private property, and increasing poverty and misery. Just today, I had another epiphany – courtesy of that seed of truth and knowledge planted by Nito.
Land belongs to whoever can use it at once and continuously. It should never belong to anyone who “reserves” it for “future purposes” and, in the process, deprives other (needy and deserving) people with legitimate and immediate needs (for their very survival and subsistence). This is the tyranny of the current corrupt system instituted everywhere – controlled and manipulated by a handful of powerful elite who enjoy the spoils of their evil scheme. This is how the concept of private property has violated the most sacred and fundamental of man’s human and natural right – the right to life.
By permitting someone with wealth, with influence, and/or with power/authority to “buy” (more) land (than is needed and will not be put to use immediately and directly by the purchaser), it effectively prevents other people access to it. This system of (immorally, unnaturally, and “illegally”) owning land is a major culprit in the cause of widespread poverty, of hunger, of oppression, of deprivation, of social injustice, and of misery and suffering.
Think about it. Is it not immoral for a piece of land to lie unproductive while many people who are willing and able are not permitted to plant and grow their food, build their shelters, and, otherwise, be productive members of society? We see so much poverty and hunger around and, yet, we, likewise, see huge tracts of unforested wide open flat lands untilled and unused. Does this scenario not scream of injustice, of immorality, of indecency, of obscenity, of despicable evil? Is this not the height, the epitome of cruelty and of inhumanity (of man towards each other)?
How did all this start and who is responsible? It was and is a dastardly scheme, if I ever saw one.
Exclusivity can be applicable only to things infinite, where man can lay claim (but only) to portions of it. Finite things, by virtue of their being limited (and essential, assuming it refers to natural and not man-made things), should be shared by all – equitably, responsibly, and accordingly, otherwise it deprives others of their inherent right to equal access.
In a nutshell, the whole idea of individual (not personal) ownership, even if they are man-made, is repulsive, discriminatory, obscene, cruel, and immoral. [Personal ownership, here, refers to things that must necessarily be used privately – such as for purposes of hygiene and sanitation and of safety and of some other obvious reasons.] We must all learn to share our talents and our labor; it is the only way that we can all survive and flourish and attain not only individual but collective happiness – the utopia of paradise in this temporal world. When (not if) this happens, then the end shall come and the Lord (may He be praised) will finally be proud of us.
TaN: Patents and other exclusive claims of man can only be applied to things that are totally unnatural. Exclusivity – which is the purpose of patents, of IPRs (intellectual property rights), and of copyrights – is practical and enforceable only on things that are completely man-made. To lay claim of exclusive ownership to things that have natural components is to invite challenges; there will be constant threats of violations of the claims precisely because one cannot control nature – despite all our efforts. [Man-made things should be those that are entirely, uniquely, and distinctly not found in nature otherwise confusion may arise from distinguishing between naturally-occurring and man-made.]
Given this, cloning and genetic manipulation (splicing, inserting, etc) should be avoided since the delineation between man-made and natural is prone to blurring and grounds for dispute and disagreements. Moreover, all essential or fundamental needs of man (such as food, as clothing, and as shelter) should never be subject to exclusionary access and must be easily available – if not free – for all. Only things of wants may be subject to exclusionary access – since they are deemed not that vital to man’s existence. In addition, in cases where needs have become wants (such as in the First World), distinction may be made between primary needs (i.e., natural or unprocessed or raw) from secondary wants (i.e., processed or refined or otherwise been subjected to some form of alteration), and the latter may be given some leeway to be subject to exclusionary access but under certain terms and conditions.
Finally (and personally), I do not subscribe to patents, copyrights, and other forms or manners of exclusivity. I prefer that we share our talents and our labor. Our development and our advancement would go faster and better because we would not have to keep secrets from each other and more people can work on the solutions to problems and not be confined to the limited few who have permission or access to proprietary works and products. People will not have to worry nor be concerned with making a living, with protecting one’s assets and property from others, and, generally, spend time and effort over things that never exist if we only…”share our talents with everyone and take only what we need (not want)”. In this way, we would be more concerned with and achieve a higher plane of existence where everyone advances together and no one is left behind. [In a way, John Lenon’s “Imagine”.]