There are many reasons why the ideologies of communitarianism – fascism; socialism; communism and the like - all fail. But one main reason stands out. It has to do with human nature, social organisation, hierarchy, power and responsibility. Private property and the ability to 'appropriate' [in the words of the Scottish enlightenment legal seer Lord Kames], is the key to organising society. Destroy the right to accumulate and appropriate and you have negated human instinct, natural law and ultimately human law. For the chattering Marxist warrior such a fact truly galls.

The ideal of private property is not an Enligtenment creation. Its origins lie with the Jews. Jewish law 3500 years ago mandated that a man's personal property including his family, home, livestock and material assets, could not be expropriated, stolen or seized by force – by anyone including the King. This revolution in ideas was sanctified in the the Hebrew Bible which gives many references to private property [in one passage Yahweh or God, condemns anyone who moves stones separating properties]. When Moses led the Jews into Canaan in about 1200 B.C. the land was parcelled out by lot, not by rank, class, or hierarchy. These lots became family plots, and were inviolable property. Thou shall not steal, is one of the Ten Commandments and it comes directly from the Jewish practice of individual asset ownership [and responsibility].

It was no accident then, that a great Jewish civilisation flourished. Private property, the Jewish belief in work and responsibility, and the private charity and sense of community which is found in any Jewish community today, gave the Jews a societal advantage over their competitors. The 12 tribes took arid desert and made it bloom – 3200 years ago. King David, of David and Goliath fame, built a warrior-trading state without equal the region. His son Solomon expanded Jewish power, turning Jerusalem into the religious and trading center of the Near East. This it should be noted was done 1500 years before the Arab invasions and claim to owning Jerusalem.

The Jews, with a society premised on wealth creation, retention and private property accumulation, were able to build a society that was far better than any competing model at the time. This is true throughout history. The Greeks [who defeated the Persians and Asiatics], the Romans [conquerors of the Jewish state and who used Jerusulem's gold to build the Coliseum circa 70 A.D.], the Byzantines, the Venetians, the Genoese, the Dutch, the British and the Americans today, all had systems premised and built upon the ideal of individual asset ownership and protection. All failed states, all those models that rose and disappeared, all those communitarian programs that usually ended up killing and murdering vast scores of people – did not.

European world domination springs from many causes [not guns, germs and steel], and the impetus to these factors is private property ownership. Such an ideal has deep roots in European culture dating from 600 B.C in Greece and 250 B.C in Rome. Seneca’s idea was wholly adopted in Europe during the reign of the Romans - Kings rule and subjects own. There were large variations to this theme of course. One reason why Rome fell was the decline in adhering to Seneca's idea, which led to over-taxation, political despotism, civil war and agricultural decline [along with losing the most profitable parts of the Empire to the Goths due to a shrinking military and male population base].

Private property concepts disappeared with the fall of Rome but were resurrected after a long interregnum throughout Europe- especially in England. A small homogenous island, anchored by a large port and trading center, developed a system of political and civil control in which rulers relied on the landed aristocracy for support, money, troops and to fed London. Without a separation of powers and protection of rights, English rulers could not build up a central state system. The Magna Carta of 1215 enshrined the rights of the landed aristocracy to their accumulations and it was only a matter of centuries and various revolutions before such guarantees were given to commoners. Though slow and halting the private property evolution in England set the stage for English world domination encased and exemplified in their Constitution, Parliament, Case law, and clear legal framework protecting individual assets. Once free to accumulate and build wealth – the English did so with gusto. It was this saved and created wealth which made a strong state [and reasonable taxation] possible.

The English advantage was manifest in its finances. England by the time of Elizabeth the First had more per capita income than France – a state with twice the population but a far more feudal system. By the 1700s the English could thwart French hegemonic aspirations by funding their Continental allies as well as fighting the French directly. Louis the Sun King and Napoleon were not only defeated by the skill of English commanders such as Marlborough and Wellington, but by English money which funded sundry allies and campaigns. England, thanks to its early modern societal form, had by 1600 designed a prosperous modern state system.

The English revolution was unique and vital. No longer could a clan King demand tribute and loot from knaves and slaves. If a state or government wanted to make war, raise taxes, or engage in any policy that might affect individuals it had to go through Parliament. Even the English monarchy had to obey Parliament. Cromwell's victory in the English civil war, assured the primacy of the institution. The Glorious Revolution of Protestant's William and Mary, ensured that despotism in the French style, would not control the English state. By 1700 the devolution of power from unelected Kings to a Parliament was forever secured. This was the foundation for the later greatness found in England's world-wide empire.

Today the richest empire in history – the American – is largely based on this British model. American prosperity and innovation really began to take off after the homestead act of the mid 1860s. This act assured private property rights for settlers in the West and stabilised land claims. Against the asset value of these 'lots' could be placed mortage loans, which helped build the US capital system and created a vast amount of available investment capital.

This capital was put to use creating the infrastructure of the modern world including the private investments which built railroads, canals, roads, bridges and various inventions from the sewing machine to the light bulb [note that most 19th century US advances were accomplished without government capital]. As Peruvian economist De Soto has so brilliantly explained, the problem with many third world countries is the lack of collaterlised debt and capital depth – private property and the institutions to defend them, simply don't exist in many places.

This is the core reason why socialism fails. Not only is socialism an immoral program of totalitarian proportions, but it destroys the one vital element that informs the basic construction of society along legal, cultural, economic and political axes – and that is private property. Redistribution, class warfare, feudal control, national socialism, national 'values' and associated over-taxation – these and other mad ravings demonstrate historical ignorance. They are also in contradiction to natural law and natural human rights. Humans want privacy, private property, accumulation and self-expression. To deny this is to deny reality.