On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Terry Donaghe wrote:
> >(2) 'Property' does not actually exist and is merely a way of saying
> 'Idenyyou access to this'.
> This is blatant nonsense. It's like saying love does not exist. Your
> entire argument suffers because of this.
Point (2) is, AFAIK, the central assumption on which all communistic
thought is based on. To dismiss this as blatant nonsense is to dismiss
communism as blatant nonsense. Any rational defense of socialism when
this happens is tricky. Do you have any stronger arguments on why point 2
is incorrect, or even better, a proof that property is anything but the
denial of control to others? At the initial conditions of a system, how
do you assign property to the property holders? Who is entitled to
property? How is property acquired? What property does a new player