THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VI, Issue # 55, March 17, 2004
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE INTERIM IRAQI CONSTITUTION & PRIVATE PROPERTY:
CAN IRAQ SUCCEED WITHOUT PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTIONS?
By
Cheryl K. Chumley
John Adams said, “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God and there is not a
force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
How then, does Iraq, based in part on months of influence from America’s best and brightest, choose to advance this fundamental
human right of property ownership in its interim Constitution? It currently is the Law of the Administration for the State of Iraq for
the Transitional Period. It does so by asserting in Article 16, Sections A, B and C: “Public property is sacrosanct and its protection
is the duty of every citizen.” That’s public, not private property.
Is this what we’re patting ourselves on the back for helping develop? That first and foremost, a citizens’ duty is to protect public
land? This is what Secretary of State Colin Powell called “a day reflecting a bright future for the Iraqi people.” Have we forgotten
that without private property protections, no other civil rights can exist?
Without the protection of private property, freedom to practice one’s religion, speak without fear, live where desired, maintain
personal privacy, and operate a business in a profitable manner are all jeopardized. That’s because all these activities take place
on land and once government owns land, it has control of what can and cannot occur on the property.
This is not an insignificant issue. Consider the western portion of the United States of America and the very large proportion
property that is already under government ownership and control. Consider the estimated 75% of Utah property that is owned
and/or controlled by state and federal government entities. Look at the 95% of Alaska land that is deemed off-limits to private
ownership and development. Look at the recent successes of radical environmentalist organizations like the Sierra Club and
Audubon Society, which work to advance the United Nations goals of “sustainable development.” "Sustainable development"
means controlled “Smart Growth” and Wildlands Project agendas that unequivocally state that humans are destructive to nature
and need to be corralled into small, government-managed areas so that the salamander and bear can roam freely.
This is how we as a nation are relinquishing our private property rights and continuing the betrayal of Founding Fathers, who
knew the importance of land rights and stated so inarguably in the Fifth Amendment: that “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.”
As Adams warned, failure to protect private property rights results in tyranny. As a nation, we are forgetting this warning, and
are allowing our God-given rights to be transferred to government hands, controlled and doled as a favor or reward for "political
correctness." We are forgetting to such a degree that we not only seek to undo the hard-earned protections of our nation’s
founders, but now are also spreading this watered-down interpretation of basic human right to other countries. And congratulating
ourselves in the process.
It is true that Sections B and C of Iraq’s interim Constitution do guarantee that “the right to private property shall be protected,”
that “no one may be prevented from disposing of his property except within the limits of the law,” and that owners will retain
control of their lands, except in cases of “eminent domain, in circumstances and in the manner set forth in law, and on condition that
he is paid just and timely compensation.”
However, as Patrick Basham, senior fellow for the Center for Representative Government at the Cato Institute, suggests: “The
headline rhetoric looks good, but the devil’s in the details.”
How, for example, can this private property safeguard be taken seriously with so many references and promises of laws-to-come
that will ultimately clarify the manner in which property can be disposed and grabbed? It’s these references, along with the curious
inclusion of unnecessary gender-specific pronouns that should strike ominously at the hearts of private property protectionists.
It’s the Iraqi document’s lack of mention of free market principles, the cousin of private land rights protections, that should also
come as a warning of our nation’s changing belief system -- from constitutional republicanism characterized by majority rule with
protection of minority rights, including private property rights, to majoritarian tyranny, statism, and socialism -- as we not only
dismiss the decimation of our own capitalistic roots, but also applaud the spread of a fated “equality for all” economic system
elsewhere -- an economic system that destroys incentives and has ultimately failed wherever it has been tried.
This new Iraqi constitution, in Article 25, gives the Iraqi government “exclusive competence” to “formulate a general policy on
wages.” Article 14 advances this tenet of socialism further by recognizing the right of the individual to government-provided
economic security, government-controlled education, socialized medical and health care, and the benefits provided by a
comprehensive and all-encompassing social welfare state. The Constitution goes on to say the government “shall strive to
provide prosperity and employment opportunities to the people.”
What all this means is government imposition of wage controls, an expansive social welfare system, government-controlled
education, and a government that professes its duty to deliver this quality of life and equality of prosperity to all its citizens.
This is not hopeful for private property advocates living in Iraq -- those who dreamed of the wealth that could be generated
with property and business ownership, but who will soon find their newly elected government officials struggling to realize
the promises of this very expensive socialist or statist economic and social system. They will, of course, turn to
thoroughgoing governmental regulation and confiscatory taxation as the answer.
To honor the commitments promised in this interim Constitution, desperate politicians will have little recourse but to enact
eminent domain provisions in the futile belief that controlling land and therefore business will somehow provide the money
for the guaranteed benefits. Reversion to dictatorship – tyranny, as Adams put it – seems imminent.
Official US support of such a system of governance reflects how far we have strayed from our Founding Father’s principle --
the absolute protection of private property.
Perhaps we should not be surprised then if history remembers March 8, 2004 not as Powell depicted, the beginning of Iraq’s
“bright future,” but rather as a day of infamy, marking the start of a failed Bush administration nation-building policy that
was sadly based on our own deviated, hypocritical interpretations of freedom -- a policy that resulted in a slow return to
oppression of the Iraqi people.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iraq
Page Two
Page One
The Problem of Rogue States:
Iraq as a Case History
The Middle East & the Arabs
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Cheryl K. Chumley is the Associate Editor of the American Policy Center’s News Wire. The American Policy Center is
a grassroots, activist think tank headquartered in Warrenton, VA. It maintains an Internet site at
www.americanpolicy.org.
Copyright 2004 American Policy Center
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VI, 2004
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights, Page Two
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights, Page One
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy