>>88026
There is no such thing as "PERSONAL" property, it's essentially an arbitrary distinction for various anti-property philosophies which essentially boils down to "I approve of you owning this!". It means nothing and reading all the stirner in the world doesn't really change that.
It's amusing that at the end of your post you insinuate that he's just going to write you off as stupid without reason but this whole post just showcases why doing so is really the best thing to do for the sake of sanity.Just look at this:
>Threats of murder and torture at the end of a blade or a barrel of a gun; sophisticated. Haha
Who made this argument? Might doesn't make right, the state being able to commit violence against most of the population successfully doesn't mean they own the property at all. If you own property and someone commits acts of aggression on it, you certainly have the right to take action against it and kick him off your property or even use violence if need be. Notice that violence is not an inherent part of owning property, anymore so than violence is an inherent in self-ownership over one's body, rather it is a rightful response of the owner towards other environmental entities that may disrupt and commit aggression towards the individuals property (in the same way that acts of aggression against one's body gives him the legitimate right of self-defense). However the ability to commit violence in of itself is not an appropriate criteria to determine whether one owns a resource or not and that's certainly not the argument that he even made.
The rest of your post, much like what you've written before, is just bunch of nonsense arguments that we've seen on this board over and over.
> Convincing people that they're free but have to get back to work for a fraction of the game tokens value or else they can just go fuck off and die, is a pretty neat trick.
This part of the argument hinges at two separate topics: the first is the question of being free but having to work (which is seen as oppressive) and the second is the implication of "surplus value".
Freedom does not mean that you have a right to everyone else's resources, that's just blatant power and it's essentially slavery in it's own right. If you don't want to work, you have the right not to but not at the expense of other people, their time, or their resources. Secondly, surplus labor, or surplus value, simply doesn't exist, it's an outdated economic concept. Value is not an objective or intrinsic thing within products, goods or services, rather it is a subjective thing, reliant on how much the individual values said thing or if he even values it at all. >inb4 prices are proof of objective value
pls don't.
Making rhetorical and practically emotional statements that don't actually have that much in the way of logical thinking to them is a pretty cool trick.
>Pretend I'm dumb and explain how you can dismiss it.
I don't think anyone has to pretend if I'm honest.