33. On Public Ownership and Private Ownership:Only when everyone possesses private interests can they truly be selfless and impartial.

Public ownership is a necessity born of human circumstances. In primitive societies where individuals could not survive independently, humans had to rely on collective mutual aid and shared labor to endure. Since labor was collective, the property derived from it naturally belonged to the public. At this stage, humanity had to rely on public ownership to ensure the survival of the tribe and sustain social development. Moreover, given humanity's limited productive capacity, there was no surplus wealth to exploit. Consequently, those managing the public system could not exploit those under their management through administrative privilege. Under these conditions, public ownership proved an effective and sound system. However, its institutional advantages could only be realized in environments of backward production and material scarcity. This explains why, whenever a society faces severe economic crisis, those in power instinctively resort to public ownership.

As social productive forces advance, when individual productivity reaches a level where survival is possible without reliance on the collective, public ownership can no longer meet societal needs. On one hand, maintaining public ownership stifles worker motivation. Under such a system, increased labor yields no greater reward, while reduced effort may yield more benefits—leading people to instinctively choose less work. On the other hand, public ownership inevitably breeds severe social exploitation. Managers cannot escape human self-interest; they will inevitably convert public assets into private property. While property appears collectively owned, it is effectively privatized by administrators. A glance at nations that have implemented socialist systems reveals that the exploitation and harm wrought by public ownership far exceed those of private ownership.

The two dangers of public ownership are fatal to society. Its discouragement of labor causes society's total wealth to diminish; its severe exploitation concentrates this dwindling wealth into the hands of managers, worsening citizens' living standards. This is the fundamental reason why every country that has implemented public ownership has failed to improve citizens' lives.

Some persistently argue that only public ownership can eliminate exploitation and achieve social equity. Those espousing this view are either lazy individuals, fools, or deceivers. The lazy seek to benefit more while working less, hence their desire for public ownership; the foolish genuinely believe public ownership can eradicate exploitation and establish equality; the deceivers clearly understand public ownership's societal harm but support it because they aspire to become its managers and exploiters.

Private ownership most effectively encourages social labor and promotes the growth of social wealth. No one denies this advantage of private ownership. The primary motivation for opposing private ownership stems from the severe social exploitation it generates, which in turn fuels immense social injustice. Undeniably, the social exploitation arising from private ownership requires resolution, but the solution absolutely does not lie in abolishing private ownership and implementing public ownership.

Through our discussion of "On Exploitation," we have recognized that exploitation is not entirely harmful. Society must address harmful exploitation, not ban all forms of it. As long as society can effectively resolve harmful exploitation, the social ills stemming from private ownership can be overcome. The solutions have been elaborated in other essays.

In short, only by allowing everyone to possess private property can we achieve true selflessness.