And people who seem to believe that "public ownership" necessarily means "ownership by THE WHOLE public" are especially deluded. The railways shouldn't be owned by "the public", the railways should be owned by the people who work on the railways. The post office shouldn't be owned by "the public", it should be owned by the people who work in the post office. Services should be owned by their providers, not the state.
Nationalisation is not public ownership, because the owner of whatever is being nationalised would not be "the public", the owner would be the state. It's akin to people who accuse self-employed tradesmen who own their own tools of being "kulaks" (unbelievable as it sounds) when surely they should be the platonic ideal of working people who own their own labour that the so-called "socialists" purport to champion?
Crimes would be reduced if the laws were abolished, because there can be no crimes if there are no laws to break. For as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon said, liberty is the mother and not the daughter of order.
