Comment: i don't consider myself an

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Annica: Your "records" (see in situ)

i don't consider myself an

i don't consider myself an anarcho-capitalist. i find myself in between mutualism and anarcho-capitalism most the time, and very frustrated with both sides not fully understanding one another. but simply "libertarian" is more fitting.

"It's "non-sense" because "records" are only valuabe to "keep" property if there is a force-agent (or court) to affim or certify them. Otherwise who would you mention it too?"

it seems your whole argument is based on this statement, as well as many i've heard from mutualists as well. i think it is a social conditioning to tack on courts to ownership and property. it doesn't take a court to back up what is yours. and why would it matter who i mentioned it to? the validation of others isn't what makes something yours or mine. if i made something and it is in my possession, i own it. not anyone else, and no one would know i have it unless i told them myself.

"Capitalism implies an Owners-Rights Society (by definition) which needs a force-agent (court system - mandatory not voluntary) to back it."

if by force agent, you mean your gun or your knife or your baseball bat, i would agree. but a mandatory court? remember the correct definition of capitalism. capitalism is not a system. it's a practice.

philosophies are constantly being taken away from one another. surely, you can't believe in ownership along those lines if you don't believe in private property.