Quote from: myrkul on January 04, 2013, 03:55:42 PM

Quote from: blablahblah on January 04, 2013, 12:47:53 PM

Quote from: hazek on January 04, 2013, 12:07:52 PM

Quote from: blablahblah on January 04, 2013, 11:45:20 AM

Quote from: myrkul on January 04, 2013, 05:51:31 AM

Property taxes are particularly offensive. Either I own the land, or I don't.

That is a perfect example of your fallacious "black-or-white" thinking. Clearly, your stubborn mental block causes you to be unable to recognise the overlap of sets drawn by self-ownership and community. Thus, you seem to conflate your concept of self-ownership with being a 'Sovereign' -- an absolute ruler to whom no law applies.

It's either that or you are someone's slave. Logic.

Ha! Slavery can only be applied to objects for which the concept of ownership exists. Since the concept of 'ownership' doesn't apply to me, I don't own myself and neither can anyone else. Thus, 'self-ownership' is a double-edged sword that enables enslavement.

You don't own yourself, do you? Then who is moving your fingers? And if I don't own myself, why are you trying to convince me of that fact? Here, let me quote the wikipedia article for you:

Quote

It has been argued by Austrian School economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe that self-ownership is axiomatic (Argumentation Ethics). His reasoning is that self-ownership is a presupposition of argumentation, thus a person contradicts oneself when one argues against self-ownership. The person making this argument is caught in a performative contradiction because, in choosing to use persuasion instead of force to have others agree that they are not sovereign over themselves, that person implicitly grants that those who one is trying to persuade have a right to use their body in order to argue.

Quote from: blablahblah on January 04, 2013, 12:47:53 PM

Furthermore, try this:

Draw a circle around everything that it means to be 'you',
E.g.: your body, personality, ideas, property owned by you, income, work, genes, physical appearance, etc...

Then draw another circle that encompasses everything that some community means,
E.g.: maintenance of property, fees, protection against intruders, a safety net in case of loss of income, support from neighbours, etc...

Then bring the circles together so that there is some overlap. Do you see what happens? Some of things that it means to be 'you' are covered by both circles. OMG! In Myrkul's simplistic world this is unacceptable -- in his case the circles can never overlap. However, he also seems to have difficulty accepting that this fundamentalist individualist attitude makes it impossible for him to ever be a member of any community.

Go ahead and draw that venn diagram for me. Or even just list some of the things that would go in the overlap.

The circle that is you is subtracted from the circle that is the community. Wherever you are, that part of the Universe (the physical extent of your body) is owned by you.