• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    11 year ago

    Jesus Christ, I’m not bad at logic, you’re just an idiot. A really really confident idiot.

    Violence is needed to protect private property.

    Government is useful for protecting private property. This is because governments are inherently violent.

    Does this mean that governments are the only way of protecting private property? Absolutely not. A dude with a gun can protect private property.

    Does this mean that all forms of violence are useful for protecting private property? Absolutely not. But again, a dude with a gun can do a fine job protecting private property.

    I’m not trying to debate you man, you’re an annoying debate lord, for the love of Christ fuck off.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      OK liberal.

      You have no clue what private property even is, dude. It’s not simply some kind of thing someone claims for their own. Private property is literally property which is used to exploit other people’s labor and material needs. Your toothbrush is not private property. Your car is not private property. The house you live in is not private property. That land you rent to someone else just so they can live is private property. That factory you force people to work in so they can put food in their mouths because they have no access to land or other sources of sustenance…those are private property.

      So yeah: good fucking luck protecting land and infrastructure you don’t have the capacity to even use on your own with a gun. Again, NO: the capacity to do violence, alone, is NOT sufficient to protect private property. You need a lot more than that. Your ability to beat your wife doesn’t make you able to patrol a large swath of agricultural land and make sure nobody encroaches on it. Your ability to shoot someone doesn’t make you capable of keeping workers out of a factory that is rightfully their collective property by virtue of the value of the blood, sweat, and tears they used to build and run that factory, especially when they have the capacity to do violence themselves and there’s no state to keep them from exercising it in self-defense.

      You fucking ignorant dope.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago
        1. I’m not a liberal you dumbass
        2. Everyone knows the difference between private and personal property
        3. You absolutely can protect private property without a government. If someone ownes a factory, or extra houses for rent, or access to a natural resource like water, or even infrastructure, and someone else rightfully tries to take it from them, and they patrol it with a gun to defend it, is that somehow using a government? No? Then shut the fuck up you breaindead fucking donkey.

        You are wrong. Literally just objectively wrong. Stop showing your ass. Go read some therory and maybe some history. Governments has never been the only way to protect private property. Private militias, private security forces, and other forms of non government violence have always been used.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You are just trying to posture and distract from the fact that you asserted one idiot with a gun can protect private property (thus demonstrating that fact that no: you don’t even know what private property is.), you ignorant, liberal moron.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            0
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            An idiot with a gun can protect private property. If someone owns land that they own for the sake of generating profit, ie private property, and they protect it by grabbing a gun to keep people off of it, that is literally using a gun to protect private property. Saying that that situation is impossible is fucking moronic. I’ve never seen someone so confidently incorrect.

            It’s ok man. Reading is hard. There was no distractions or posturing. Go reread the last comment and try your best to reply to bullet point number 3. Come to terms that you were wrong and move on. You just look like a dumbass

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -21 year ago

              So you’re just like, quadrupling down or so on the fact that you have no idea what private property is now. And want to project onto other people confident incorrectness.

              Clearly there’s no point continuing this with an ignorant liberal troll. GFYS.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                2
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                If someone owns land with the intent of exploiting labor for profit that land is private property.

                If they buy a gun to keep people off that property and personally patrol it to ensure that’s property’s safely they are protecting private property.

                If they do it without the use of a government or a governing agency they are protecting private property without a government.

                Therefore it is possible to protect private property without a government.

                If you can’t comprehend that, you’re a moron. You don’t need a central government to protect private property, you just need violence, albeit the correct form of violence. Next time do some reading and learn a few things before you try to correct someone.

                So like I said earlier, a dude with a gun can protect private property.