The default state is that the majority does not have the right to take your private property for its own use, with narrow exceptions.I would rather say that what can be "private property" is defined by the majority, and even that definition allows for exceptions. For example: beaches cannot be made private in Spain by law because we recognize that collective property is better for everyone. Streets are recognized as public property everywhere, and only the lots assigned to housing can be traded. You cannot own other people, or exotic animals, or dangerous pets without a license. And so on. The same is true for all money, which is even printed and distributed by the government. And money used for any purposes not approved by the government will be readily frozen or even confiscated. Some examples: drugs, gambling, trading with disliked foreign countries, weapons dealing, or terrorism.
No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.This is a debate for a different forum, but think that "due process of law" is defined by the government, and "just compensation" is a rather weak concept.
I just wanted to point out, which is in line with the main article, that the democratic State is far-reaching, and this is not only theory; this is practical use and has been for centuries. However our government is not yet "capitalist" but "democratic", at least in theory.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds