Francois Tremblay wrote:1. I define minarchism as a totalitarian usurpation of the rights of the individuals living in some vast swath of land. Or something along these lines.
... are you saying you are a totalitarian? Keep in mind that I asked you about YOUR position.
If that is indeed what you are saying, then why exactly do you expect us to take anything you say seriously?
How many times do I have to say that I'm not a minarchist? If I were forced to choose between anarcho-capitalism and minarchism, I'd choose the former. But I think that is a false choice.
You seem to have a difficult time imagining various alternative interpretations than the most absurd one that your interlocutor might be thinking of. This is an annoying trait (I'm sure it's handy for generating strawmen though). What I mean is that it's trivial to grasp the distinction.
How is it trivial to grasp the distinction between your mind and the rest of reality?
Originally you were talking about concepts vs. particulars. I've lost interest in this little diversion of yours.
I do not see how you can cause equality of outcomes in general under any theory. What kind of outcomes are you thinking of? Income per year? Square footage of real-estate? ???
The proposition that each individual who works within a society is entitled to an equal part of the production of that society.
Setting aside other problems with this: Are you aware that there is a commensurability problem here? The units of production are not identical.
I'm not the one denying property rights, you are.
I am not "denying" anything, since property rights actually do not exist. They are a confabulation (and in the case of capitalists and history, that term is literally true). I am not, however, denying common sense. A house is not abandoned because you left to get groceries, no matter what your beliefs about property rights are.
What defines "possession"? I don't have a mystical/unlimited view of property myself. Perhaps my view of property is closer to your view of possession than to your view of property. If I were you, I would simply define property in the proper way (as you see it) rather than tossing out whole words. The dictionary is filled with words that have different senses, there's nothing wrong with having your own sense of property, just as there's nothing wrong with me having my own sense of "legitimate government."