This rhetorical approach often fails to consider three things: 1) "private" can refer to non-profit or not-for-profit orgs, and at its loosest can mean any non-state or non-public org; 2) there is such a thing as "radical privatization", which is essentially getting government out of the issue completely and leaving the rest up to non-state orgs, including mutual aid orgs;
and 3) there is such a thing as "privatization to the third sector", whereby government sells properties - or hands off control of public agencies - to non-profits, not-for-profits, voluntary associations, charities, cooperatives or ELMFs, consumer cooperatives, mutuals, or consumer-oriented orgs.
A further distinction must be made between the "third sector" associated with the non-state actors I just described, versus the "third sector" associated with government-supported private-public partnerships (PPPs).
Understanding this is crucial to delineating the difference between capitalism (in which government protects private property) and real free enterprise (in which, if you want to declare something your private property, you have to protect it yourself).
Image created in April 2014