I apologize for not reading your whole long post. I just don't have the time. But I wanted to mention that anarchists like Larkin Rose seem to have a problem with pitching self-ownership. When he says "You own yourself," that turns off people for whom the assertion "God owns you" comes to mind (and either they believe that or they think they believe that). On the other hand, the positive assertion "You own yourself" really resonates with people who have rejected the idea that God owns them.
More generally, I think some of Larkin's vocabulary is a bit unnaturally limited. Maybe it's possible to have non-authoritative government, for example. That issue aside, perhaps the main point he wants to get across is that neither government nor society has any legitimate rights of ownership over you. Though that's a negative assertion, it's one that many more people can accept at face value.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: