Banksy told his followers to shoplift from the Regent Street Guess store in London after it displayed a collection that used his artwork without permission.

Excerpt:

Banksy isn’t happy with Guess’ latest collaboration.

The legendary anonymous graffiti artist had a directive for his followers on Friday, encouraging them—possibly tongue in cheek, possibly not—to visit the Regent Street Guess store in London and steal the brand’s new collection that features his artwork.

“Attention all shoplifters. Please go to Guess on Regents Street. They’ve helped themselves to my artwork without asking, how can it be wrong for you to do the same to their clothes?”

  • AccountMaker@slrpnk.netEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, but the person in the replies said “All property is theft”, they didn’t make any distinction (not sure whether that is their actual view, or whether they were just trying to explain this community, but that’s besides the point). And nobody is going to shoplift factories or natural resources, so that distinction doesn’t seem to play a major (or at least direct) role in the context of OP’s question about why this community exists here.

    But I have a genuine question about your post, how does personal property differ from the explanation given for private property?

    In a system of private property, the person to whom a given object is assigned (e.g., the person who found it or made it) has control over the object: it is for her to decide what should be done with it. In exercising this authority, she is not understood to be acting as an agent or official of the society. She may act on her own initiative without giving anyone else an explanation, or she may enter into cooperative arrangements with others, just as she likes.

    Wouldn’t that apply completely to personal property as well? I always thought that private property was just a special class of things being treated as personal property, when it shouldn’t due to their importance to society. So someone treating a factory the same way they treat a teapot they have in their house, where the former is private and the latter is personal because the former affects the lives of others in a significant way. Or have I got it wrong?

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.netEnglish
      6·
      1 year ago

      Taken from a reddit post on the subject that I think did a good job of explaining it:

      I like to link the word “private” with “privation” or “deprivation”. Private property is easily identifiable by its effects on others, specifically, it’s deprivation. There are hundreds of thousands of hammers. Having one doesn’t deprive anyone of anything. At most only one person can use the hammer.

      A house is usable by an entire family, and if I own it but don’t use it myself, my ownership deprives an entire family of its use. That scales to apartment buildings pretty easily. Then there’s farms where basically it’s impossible for one person to do all of the work on a farm or eat all of the products of a farm, but my ownership has the effect of depriving anyone the right to work there or the right to consume its products. A factory is truly impossible for one person to use, but my ownership of it allows me to deprive everyone of its products unless they meet my price demands and also allows me to deprive everyone of use of the factory to make anything at all.

      Private property entails a deprivation of society of socially necessary commodities.

      In the case of a grocery store, the argument could be made that the owners of the grocery store chain are exploiting their employees with low wages, and selling the products of other owners who are exploiting their employees as well with their private property, thus justifying ‘taking back’ what was deprived.

      On the flip side, It would be very difficult to morally justify shoplifting from a co-op grocery store that sells products from other cooperatives, as at that point no one would be being exploited.

    • stabby_cicada@slrpnk.netEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      As the person ranting in the replies about how all property is theft, I was explaining why some strains of socialist thought support shoplifting as a form of redistribution from capital to labor, so, yes, you can presume I’m using a socialist definition of property. 😆