Brick wall with chairs in Ethics of Ownership

Ethics of Ownership

To explain the ethics of ownership we will start examining the known history. In our ancient past, private ownership was the tool to suppress the power of monarchists, while today private owners of capital rule the world.

It could be concluded that ethical balance between the capital and the capital holders type has been lost. Thousands of wars throughout our history have enabled transformation of capital ownership among people and created new multilateral borders; nowadays borders do not exist and corporations are in parallel advocating and developing their own capital protecting mechanisms inevitably leading to privatization of countries. 

In such circumstances the government representatives resemble a cheap marketing agency team, which is not deployed to protect the account of the state (borders, capital, population), although the team members are on a state payroll, but to care about the interest of the private owners. Ex Yugoslavia is one of the recent examples of stolen people/state-owned capital in favor of privately owned military corporations. In other terms, government representatives are purposely neglecting the interest of the state and people, being corrupted or blackmailed to do so.

In addition, school curriculum and programmes support such scheme by alternating the “concept” of truth in the favor of capitalism, purposely hiding the truth that countries, being the true holders of capitals, do not exist anymore, due to “deep state” conspiracy actions against sovereignty of countries.

If countries don’t posses the majority of state capital and borders were deleted, is the workforce the only value the countries posses? If so, are those government representatives owners of people’s future for the account of private capital?

One Response