Converting an anarcho-communist

[BobRobertson]

Ownership requires 2 things 1 the owner and 2 the owned they can't be the same thing. You don't own your self you are yourself.

Please note above, I said,

The dedicated Socialist sees property only in terms of land and physical resources. They cannot conceive of "property" as being a concept which includes the possession of one's thoughts, one's labor, one's initiative and actions.

So you prove my point.

Abolishing private property makes the individual the property of the state. Slavery.

[assasin7]

I reject the state

You are your self their for you can't be owned because you can give up property you dont own

[BobRobertson]

I reject the state

Non-sequitor. You cannot both reject the state -and- have prohibition.

The prohibition of private property and money, or other Socialist fantasies, requires coercive enforcement against people who have harmed no one.

That is the state.

[assasin7]

I reject the state[.quote]

Non-sequitor. You cannot both reject the state -and- have prohibition.

The prohibition of private property and money, or other Socialist fantasies, requires coercive enforcement against people who have harmed no one.

That is the state.

Private property is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it

[macsnafu]

I reject the state

Non-sequitor. You cannot both reject the state -and- have prohibition.

The prohibition of private property and money, or other Socialist fantasies, requires coercive enforcement against people who have harmed no one.

That is the state.

Private property is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it

So voluntary contracts are slavery, and statism is liberty. Also, black is white and the moon is made of green cheese.

[Syock]

Private property is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it

I could easily say the same about any system.  

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" 'is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it.'

More fun useless arguments online. yay...

[assasin7]

I reject the state

Non-sequitor. You cannot both reject the state -and- have prohibition.

The prohibition of private property and money, or other Socialist fantasies, requires coercive enforcement against people who have harmed no one.

That is the state.

Private property is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it

So voluntary contracts are slavery, and statism is liberty. Also, black is white and the moon is made of green cheese.

Every system is a social contract and their for oppressive. I think communism is less.oppressive than capitalism

[Syock]

I think communism is less.oppressive than capitalism

We obviously disagree.  How about we all just stop banging our heads against the brick wall and stop bothering with this useless discussion.  

[macsnafu]

I reject the state

Non-sequitor. You cannot both reject the state -and- have prohibition.

The prohibition of private property and money, or other Socialist fantasies, requires coercive enforcement against people who have harmed no one.

That is the state.

Private property is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it

So voluntary contracts are slavery, and statism is liberty. Also, black is white and the moon is made of green cheese.

Every system is a social contract and their for oppressive. I think communism is less.oppressive than capitalism

Well, "their for" oppression, maybe, but I'm not for oppression, which is why I advocate the capitalist system of voluntary exchange.  Do you really think voluntary exchange is oppressive?  If you don't agree to capitalism, then don't engage in voluntary exchanges--simple, no?  Who is forcing you to engage in voluntary exchange? Huh?  Just tell us who, and we'll send Bruno to straighten 'em out.

 

[assasin7]

I reject the state

Non-sequitor. You cannot both reject the state -and- have prohibition.

The prohibition of private property and money, or other Socialist fantasies, requires coercive enforcement against people who have harmed no one.

That is the state.

Private property is a social contract, by having it your forcing people to follow it

So voluntary contracts are slavery, and statism is liberty. Also, black is white and the moon is made of green cheese.

Every system is a social contract and their for oppressive. I think communism is less.oppressive than capitalism

Well, "their for" oppression, maybe, but I'm not for oppression, which is why I advocate the capitalist system of voluntary exchange.  Do you really think voluntary exchange is oppressive?  If you don't agree to capitalism, then don't engage in voluntary exchanges--simple, no?  Who is forcing you to engage in voluntary exchange? Huh?  Just tell us who, and we'll send Bruno to straighten 'em out.

 

I'm talking about property, its a social construct, I didn't sign a contract recognizing private property, so why am I bound by it.

[BobRobertson]

I'm talking about property, its a social construct, I didn't sign a contract recognizing private property, so why am I bound by it.

You're not. You may do with yourself and your productivity whatever you wish to do.

[Syock]

You're not. You may do with yourself and your productivity whatever you wish to do.

That is where they come in and say they can use your stuff and land.  Since they don't recognize your claim of ownership. 

[assasin7]

You're not. You may do with yourself and your productivity whatever you wish to do.

That is where they come in and say they can use your stuff and land.  Since they don't recognize your claim of ownership. 

Yes communism is oppressive to people who believe in private property, but private property is oppressive to people who don't believe in it. All societies are oppressive to someone, a society that bans killing is oppressive to killers.

[SinCityVoluntaryist]

And that's why we create societies that are voluntary and allow people to organize in the way that we see fit, so long as they don't aggress against other individuals and force them to accept their way of thinking.

Personally, I don't understand something. If you hate property so much, why do you bother to surround yourself with it? For example, you live in a home that your parents own. That, by nature, is the property that they obtained through a contract agreement with the bank that set up their mortage. If you think having that property is some great, immoral act against God and mankind, why do you live in it? Move out if it makes you feel better. What about all the stuff that you own? You know, the stuff that was made on the free market? If you feel guilty about having property,get rid of it. Go share in some collective co op if that's what you want.

Personally, I like having property. I enjoy making money and using that money to buy the things that I want. I enjoy the prospect of having my own house and organizing my life in the way that I see fit. If I'm being immoral for feeling that way, then I'll gladly take my place in Hell.

[AgoristTeen1994]

And that's why we create societies that are voluntary and allow people to organize in the way that we see fit, so long as they don't aggress against other individuals and force them to accept their way of thinking.

Personally, I don't understand something. If you hate property so much, why do you bother to surround yourself with it? For example, you live in a home that your parents own. That, by nature, is the property that they obtained through a contract agreement with the bank that set up their mortage. If you think having that property is some great, immoral act against God and mankind, why do you live in it? Move out if it makes you feel better. What about all the stuff that you own? You know, the stuff that was made on the free market? If you feel guilty about having property,get rid of it. Go share in some collective co op if that's what you want.

Personally, I like having property. I enjoy making money and using that money to buy the things that I want. I enjoy the prospect of having my own house and organizing my life in the way that I see fit. If I'm being immoral for feeling that way, then I'll gladly take my place in Hell.

In regards to what you said towards assasin7 I agree with a lot of it. I do however disagree with the part about "What about all the stuff you own? You know, the stuff that was made on the free market" I disagree with that on two counts. 1. We are about as far from a free market as is possible in a state capitalist/corporatist system as we have in the U.S. 2. From my understanding communism takes how a family works, i.e. sharing the land your live on but having your own living spaces, and possessions, and apply it to the community. To put it another way, in a anarcho-communist community, the land and any factories and such would be communally owned. things such as tools for artisans, and small-time crafters, and possessions such as the numerous books, guns and ammunition, electronics et cetera I own would be MINE. If somewhere were to take them without my permission or damage them, then depending on the community, there would be hell to pay. So basically ancoms when they say property, refer to stuff like land and the resources of the land, as well as factories. Stuff like your bedroom in a home or apartment, and your stuff, like books, guns, electronics, etc. would be yours, and yours alone. At least unless you gave them to someone else.