Having everyone's property rights equally protected gives the best security to all of society from oppression, be it at the hand of the government or at the hand of large corporations.
Can it be said that those who have a higher tax rate or a certain kind of tax levied on them solely because they have more wealth than others have their property rights as equally secured as those who pay a lesser tax rate or are excused from paying a certain kind of tax due to their lesser wealth? I think logic and reason show otherwise, in that in a progressive and selective tax system such as America has now and is being promoted by the Obama Admin. and many Democrats and Republicans, those with higher incomes and more wealth have their property rights purposefully and legislatively less secured, being that more of it can be taken than from others via taxation, based solely on an outside appearance that is not a true representation of their worth and character.
And if securing property rights are one of the best ways to secure the so-called "little guys" from oppression and encroachment by the so-called "big guys," then it must necessarily follow that the little guys, in order to secure their own property rights, must secure the property rights of the big guys as well. For when one portion of society makes the rights of another portion of society insecure, they automatically weaken the security of their own rights. When one portion of society's rights are made insecure, it necessarily weakens the security of rights of all of society, just weakening one brick in an arch weakens the entire arch.
Let us put an end to the progressive and selective tax system here in America and switch to a flat tax system.
Also, here's a nice little video detailing the importance of the rule of law. Take a peek: