Private Property vs Public Lands

by Kerry Thomas

September 3, 2003

In 1848 the State of Wisconsin was formed. In that same year Karl Marx and Frederick Engels penned their Manifesto of the Communist Party. The first plank of that Manifesto calls for the abolishment of private property.

In his letter to the editor (Vilas County News Review, September 3, 2003) Wisconsin's new Secretary of Tourism, Jim Holperin, says that "The more public land we have...the better off everyone will be."

I hope I am not the only person who felt a chill when I read Mr. Holperin's comments. I won't presume to be omnipotent, as I cannot claim to speak for most readers of this newspaper. But I can hope that I am not the only person who has studied both the Constitution and the Communist Manifesto, and have seen how the practitioners of each political philosophy have fared under each document's principles.

America is not a great nation because " we have lots of land, owned in common, which ordinary hardworking men and women and their families can use for relaxation, recreation and renewal whenever they please without having to ask permission." No, America became a great nation because we had the freedom to pursue our drreams, whatever they might be, without the heavy yoke of government restraining our entrepreneurial creativity.

THomas Jefferson's original text of the Declaration of Independence spoke of the inalienable rights to Life, Liberty and Property. This was not a goal to place more and more land into the hands of government, but, rather, an acknowledgement of the yearning of Man to acquire one's own private property, upon which the owner was free to do as he pleased, according to the dictates of his own conscience, having to answer to no one other than God for his actions.

Private property ownership, whether it be 1 acre or 1,000, is a desire of many, though not all, Americans. It is echoed in the principles of Freedom underlying our Constitution, which limited the powers of our government. Public "ownership" of property is antithetical to this principle, whether you call it ownership, stewardship, community trust, or some other benign phrase.