Msingi tofauti wa kimsingi wa ubepari ni kukubali wazo la uhuru wa umiliki binafsi. Kukubaliwa kwa wazo hilo chenyewe ni matokeo ya kukubaliwa kwa wazo la uhuru wa mtu binafsi. Kwa kuwa itikadi ya ubepari imejengwa juu ya wazo la uhuru, pamoja na ubinafsi wake, jambo muhimu zaidi katika uhuru wa mtu binafsi ni uhuru wa kumiliki chochote anachotaka, kwa namna yoyote anayotamani. Uhuru wa umiliki ni miongoni mwa mambo matakatifu ya Ubepari. Kwa mtazamo wao, kwa hiyo, ni lazima kufungua milango ya kumiliki na kuendeleza mali kwa watu binafsi, kwa kupunguza uingiliaji wa serikali, na kutunga sheria zinazolazimu kulinda uhuru huo. Kwa asili, sheria za Magharibi zimetungwa ili kutambua umiliki binafsi wa mtu mmoja mmoja wa njia zote za uzalishaji, na kuifanya serikali iwajibike kulinda uhuru huo. Serikali haipaswi kutunga sheria yoyote itakayobatilisha uhuru huo, huku ikiweka vikwazo kwa uhuru kwa kiwango tu kinachohitajika ili kulinda uhuru wa wengine.

The distinct foundational basis of capitalism is the adoption of the idea of freedom of private ownership. That adoption is itself the result of the adoption of the idea of individual freedom. Since the capitalist ideology is based on the idea of freedom, with its individualism, the most important aspect of freedom of the individual is the freedom to possess whatever he wants, however he desires. Freedom of ownership is amongst the sanctities of Capitalism. According to their view, it is therefore mandatory to open the doors to possessing and developing wealth for individuals, by limiting state intervention, formulating laws that are mandatory in the protection of freedom. The legislation of Western laws is in origin to recognize individual private ownership of all the means of production, making the state responsible for protecting that freedom. The state is not to legislate any laws that would nullify that freedom, whilst restricting freedom only to the extent necessary to protect the freedom of others.

Hii ndiyo falsafa ya awali ya kibepari kuhusu mali binafsi. Hata hivyo, ukweli ni kwamba mali binafsi imebadilika kwa muda kutoka kuwa mali ya mtu mmoja mmoja pekee, hadi kuwa mali ya watu binafsi na ya makundi, kama mali iliyo na mipaka, kwa maneno yao. Mabadiliko haya yalitokea kutokana na wenye mitaji kuwania faida, uzalishaji, na kuendeleza utajiri wa mitaji. Ubepari haufafanui tena uhuru wa mtu mmoja mmoja katika umiliki pekee. Badala yake, ubepari sasa unahakikisha uhuru wa mtu mmoja mmoja na wa kundi au jumuiya kumiliki. Hii ni kwa sababu maendeleo ya viwanda na teknolojia yalilazimisha mfumo mpya wa uchumi wa ushindani. Ulisababisha ongezeko la kiasi cha utajiri wa mitaji na uwekezaji. Hali hii nayo ililazimisha umiliki wa miradi mikubwa, ya uwekezaji mkubwa wa mitaji na makundi, kama kampuni, kama kampuni za hisa za pamoja, badala ya mtu mmoja. Ubepari pia ulilazimisha uingiliaji wa serikali, ukiongeza nafasi yake ya kufadhili na kuwekeza katika mataifa mengi ya kibepari, ili kutumikia malengo ya kinachoitwa dola ya ustawi wa jamii. Maendeleo haya yanaonyesha dhana ya kubuni na ubatili wa uchumi wa kibepari. Hii ni kutokana na kupingana kwake na misingi iliyojengwa juu yake, ambayo ndiyo sifa tofauti ya ubepari.

This is the original capitalist philosophy towards private property. However, the reality is that private property has developed over time from individual property alone, to the property of both individuals and groups, as limited property, in their words. This transformation occurred as a result of capitalists scrambling for profit, production and development of capital wealth. Capitalism is no longer defining the freedom of individuals in ownership alone. Instead, Capitalism now ensures freedom of both the individual and a group or collective to possess. This is because industrial and technological developments imposed a new model of competitive economy. It led to multiplication in the volume of capital wealth and investment. This in turn imposed the necessity of owning the megaprojects, of huge capital investment by groups, as companies, such as joint stock companies, rather than a single individual. Capitalism also imposed state intervention, extending its role to fund and invest in many capitalist nations, to serve the goals of the so-called welfare state. This development indicates the fictional vision and invalidity of the capitalist economy. This is due to its contradiction to the origins upon which it was built, whose characteristic was the distinct characteristic of capitalism.

Wazo la uhuru wa umiliki binafsi wa vitu vyote ni batili kwa yenyewe kwa sababu mbili:

The idea of freedom of private ownership of all things is invalid in itself for two reasons:

Kwanza, uhuru wa umiliki binafsi bila shaka utapelekea kujikusanya kwa njia za uzalishaji mikononi mwa watu wachache na makundi machache. Uhuru wa umiliki binafsi unahakikisha mkusanyiko wa utajiri mikononi mwa tabaka dogo la kibepari. Ni tabaka hili la kibepari ndilo linalotawala uchumi wa taifa, kwa kuwa mamlaka inayofanya kazi kuyatiisha mamlaka ya kisiasa kwa matakwa yake, na kulifanya dola kuwa chombo tu cha kutumikia maslahi yake.

Firstly, freedom of private ownership will inevitably lead to the concentration of the means of production, in the hands of a few individuals and groups. Freedom of private ownership ensures the concentration of wealth in the hands of a small capitalist class. It is this capitalist class which dominates the nation’s economy, by becoming the authority working to subjugate the political authority to its will, making the state a mere tool to serve its interests.

Hii ndiyo hali halisi ya kile kinachoshuhudiwa katika mataifa ya kibepari.

This is the reality of what is actually witnessed in capitalist nations.

Pili, kubainisha aina ya umiliki kunahusiana na rasilimali za kiuchumi zenyewe na mtazamo wa mfumo wa kiuchumi kuhusu ugawaji wa utajiri. Hii ni kwa sababu utajiri unajumuisha kile kinachopaswa kumilikiwa binafsi, na kile ambacho hakipaswi kumilikiwa binafsi. Kwa kuwa ubepari kimsingi unamaanisha kuongezeka na kuendelezwa kwa utajiri, haimaanishi ugawaji wa utajiri. Ubepari unasisitiza kwamba rasilimali zote za kiuchumi zinapaswa kumilikiwa binafsi. Hili si sahihi, kwa sababu usawa wa kiuchumi katika jamii yoyote unahitaji utofauti wa aina za umiliki, na hivyo kugawa utajiri na kuzuia mkusanyiko wa utajiri ndani ya makundi. Zaidi ya hayo, kulinda haki za makundi kunahitaji aina fulani ya umiliki wa huduma za umma, kama vile madini na nishati. Kwa hiyo, ukweli ni kwamba mali haipaswi kuwekewa mipaka ya umiliki binafsi pekee. Badala yake, zinapaswa kutofautishwa kweli kuwa mali binafsi, mali ya umma na mali ya serikali. Kila moja ya mgawanyo hii mitatu ni tofauti katika Uislamu, tofauti na Ubepari na Ujamaa, jambo linaloshuhudia ukuu wa mfumo wa kiuchumi wa Kiislamu. Ni mfumo pekee unaoweza kupanga mambo ya binadamu ili kuhakikisha mahitaji yao ya msingi yanatimizwa, na kufikia ustawi wao wa kweli.

Secondly, determining the type of ownership is related to the economic resources themselves and the economic system’s view towards the distribution of wealth. This is because wealth includes what is, and what is not, to be privatized. Since capitalism basically means the increase and development of wealth, it does not mean the distribution of wealth. Capitalism asserts that all economic resources are to be privatized. This is wrong, because economic equity in any of the societies necessitates differentiation in types of ownership, thereby distributing wealth and preventing the concentration of wealth within groups. Moreover, taking care of the rights of groups mandates a certain type of ownership of public utilities, such as minerals and energy. Accordingly, the fact is that properties must not to be limited to private property alone. Instead, they are to be actually differentiated into private property, public property and state property. Each of these three divisions are distinct in Islam, unlike Capitalism and Socialism, which testifies to the greatness of the Islamic economic system. It is the only system that is capable of organizing the affairs of humans to ensure their basic needs, achieving their true well-being.