What is principly involved here is the decision-making functiion.

Are decisions affecting property to be made by the state and its functionaries?  Or are decisions to be better made by private owners?

If human well-being can be better advanced by state control and state decision-making concerning property, then the socialists are correct and they ought to win the argument.

If on the other hand, human well being is better advanced by private control and private decision-making concerning property, then those who oppose socialism are correct, and they ought to win the argument.

So is that it?  Are both ideas equally valid?  Such a relativistic view supposes that it ultimately makes no difference which idea prevails, since all that is at stake is a difference of perception and opinion, and all that is needed is a preponderance of public or legislative support.

Let's examine this, step-by-step.