Anonymous asked:

I think it's sort of a mistake to try to come up with a "real" definition of private property. It's not a physical truth about the universe we can discover if we only try hard enough; it's an agreement we can make amongst ourselves. I mean, there are better and worse ways of defining it, but the goal should be "useful" (like, for social/legal purposes, such that it's fairly clear to everyone what IS considered theirs) rather than "philosophically airtight".

argumate answered:

Yes. Even if you do come up with a definitive proof of something you still have the problem of some geezer with a shotgun ignoring all of your logic.

[mitigatedchaos]

@remedialaction

I might have missed the post? That happens.

Yeah, sometimes it does.

And Utilitarianism is always ‘doing it wrong.’

You say that, yet you follow a philosophy which, when combined with artificial intelligence, will almost inevitably result in human extinction and the replacement of everything we hold dear with economium - the most economically efficient form of matter, which necessarily is unfeeling, because any resources spent on emotions could instead be spent on competition.  

You turned the social fiction of “property” into an axiom which exceeds the value of humanity - all of humanity - in your system.  

Anarcho-Capitalism and other such property-obsessed systems are always ‘doing it wrong’.