There's the problem. You would claim that a given area of land, which you aren't actively using, and a party, meaning no offense to you, starts using it because they do not recognize vacant or unused property, you will try to drive them away or destroy them thereby plying your trade--land ownership, if you could call it a trade--by violence. Perhaps you will hire someone else to do it. What other recourse does a capitalist have? The two ideas aren't compatible.
It's not a "trade". It's a
right. by taking my property, regardless of whether or not I am actively using it at the time, you are taking away the resources i have invested in that property. In the terms of the "philosophy of liberty" video, you are stealing my past.
A cooperative society is in competition with the market society simply by existing. It offers an alternative to the market society. If the market society cannot keep the standard of living above that of the cooperative society, people will seek to join the cooperative society, and the market society will lose people. The same goes for the cooperative society, of course, either it will be growing, dying, or in a perilous equilibrium.
It just seems like an oxymoron to me.
Where did I lose you?