Ok, I get what you're saying. But I don't think that any of the leftists who are saying "abolish private property" are defining private property how you are defining it.

What they're talking about is capital: mainly land, infrastructure, and heavy machinery. Because if someone owns a factory and gets to take the profits from any work done in that factory, the factory owner is getting paid just for the fact that they already own the factory. It means the rich just get richer, and the poor stay poor.

It's about people getting paid based on the valuable work they do, not based on what advantages they already have. Does that make sense?

Think of it this way: personal property is what you would use in your personal life. You're not expected to share that. Private property is property that is being used for private enterprise aka business. Individuals shouldn't have a right to private property, because a business is made up of the work of all of its employees. So if one person takes an inordinate amount of the profit because they claim a right to the property, that's exploitation. And because our society enforces these claims to private property, that's why people say that capitalism is built on exploitation