Whereas it has long been known and declared that the poor have no right to the property of the rich, I wish it also to be known and declared that the rich have no right to the property of the poor.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There is a noble manner of being poor, and who does not know it will never be rich.
Every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has a right to, but himself.
The rights of the individual are greatly prized in the developed world, but in many other regions they are considered a luxury reserved for the impossibly wealthy.
As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.
In a democracy the poor will have more power than the rich, because there are more of them, and the will of the majority is supreme.
Individual and national rights to wealth rest on the basis of civil and international law, or at least of custom that has the force of law.
Each man has an equal social right to multiply his power of motion by all the social factors of civilization. Private property in any of these factors is inconsistent with this fundamental right; it must, obviously, prove a source of economic despotism and industrial slavery.
Richness in the world is a result of other people's poverty. We should begin to shorten the abyss between haves and have-nots.
Just as man can't exist without his body, so no rights can exist without the right to translate one's rights into reality, to think, to work and keep the results, which means: the right of property.
Property is not the sacred right. When a rich man becomes poor it is a misfortune, it is not a moral evil. When a poor man becomes destitute, it is a moral evil, teeming with consequences and injurious to society and morality.