Hi Holla Forums, so if property rights are a spook or not valid as you say, then who owns the house that you build? Is there a difference between a little shack your built yourself or a house you payed others to build for you?
You probably are also going to mention something about land, but this isn't my point. My point is this:
What stops me from going into your house, into your bedroom and using it as well? You better be open for a cuddle-session, comrade, because this is exactly what is going to happen.
Personal property is different from private property tbqhwyf
Luke Bailey
Christ almighty just learn the very simple distinction between private and personal property. It's like lecturing an army of five year olds. We have this thread every day.
Aiden Cox
I do. I own everything in the universe.
No, I own both.
A gun.
Blake Edwards
Oh and don't say a punch to the face or something like that.
Ayden Sullivan
Oh? So you are fine with someone owning land and a house in this example?
Lucas Gray
spookism says pretty much anything goes, under any system nothing is to stop you from forcing me into cuddle sessions, capitalist will say but those fly out of the window when you bribe the police, bribe the judges, bribe the media. e.g any third world country
communism is a system where people cooperate because cooperation just works. sociopaths will be dealt by the masses.
private-personal property distinctions are bourgeois as fuck. let's recognize for a functioning society we all need to cooperate and construct a society where people don't want to be ass holes and capriciously want other people's property.
Noah Watson
People can own a house. Everyone should be able to own a house. And nobody should be allowed to enter another person's house without the owner's permission.
Land is a bit more ambiguous. It depends on whether the land generates value. If you own a small plot of land where you just ride your dirt bike or shoot your guns or whatever, then it's not really a problem.
If the land you own is an orange orchard and you have people working on that land, then it becomes a different issue altogether.
Isaiah Sullivan
nice, so when do we start?
Dylan Nelson
Yeah, that's all well and good theoretically, but the fact is that in a low-stage socialism people will still have personal property, like houses and cars, etc. Maybe when FULLCOMMUNISM is achieved people will view property very differently and sharing will be much more ubiquitous. As for now, though, there is a difference between private and personal property and people are entitled to their personal property, to keep it for themselves and to expect other people to respect their boundaries.
not my fucking comrade, comrade
Aiden Baker
I don't know, user. I like this guy and his vision of just forcing anarchists like you into cuddling sessions with me.
Xavier Miller
I'm not an anarchkiddie, faggot.
Cuddle your waifu pillow instead.
Robert Ortiz
Me neither, but this is what anarchism demands (from us).
No, I want a living and breathing, able-bodied human.
Samuel Diaz
house belongs to the commune, but the commune is managed by people who want a functioning society, so that is why they aren't kicking families out, but if there is a grain surplus, the commune might store grain in the house, but only by the majority of the communes' approval.
I doubt a commune would let people who force people into cuddle sessions, run wild.
you don't get to FULLCOMMUNISM™ without implementing it.
the only cases where immediate implementations of FULLCOMMUNISM™ don't work is in dumb hypotheticals by capitalist-defenders
be realistic and have some faith in the masses, if you don't you essentially are saying that there shouldn't be democracy.
John Sanchez
Personal property is an extension of oneself. It is natural to want at least a tent or a room where you can shut the other out.
Anyway, this guy already answered that question, and demonstrated the distinction, I can defend my own space.
Ayden Garcia
I am sure a commune made up of humans would ensure privacy.
Caleb Turner
Anarchism cannot exist for extended periods of time, its extremely childish and naive to believe it can. Anarchists are the left wing equivalent of libertarians.
At least the tankies have an actual applicable political model, and have the balls to admit they jerk off to stalin.
Noah Smith
I stopped coming to Holla Forums to get away from you tbh.
David Hill
Did you build it? Or did someone else build it? Did you even pay for the building of it?
He who can keep it's ownership.
A) Me. If I have the power to. B) Society. It doesn't want to have everyone going in everyone's houses and using it. C) You. You don't want me to use your bedroom so you will not use mine.
If all three are not present, there is nothing that stops you. You can make it …. YOUR PROPERTY!
Lincoln King
I want to own your house.
Actually I want you to use my bedroom. :^)
Isaiah Reed
Well, since at least B is present, sorry you cannot.
Yes, but there is still A and B. So unless I want to use your bedroom, and we make it clear to society, no can do.
Michael Moore
makes me feel all warm inside reading that.
Noah Brown
I just got pretty triggered by some extreme authoritarians on Holla Forums. I didn't mind it before, but after getting into very lenghty autistic arguments with them. For example just defending being allowed to have sex at all vs only reproducing goverment approved eugenics program, which happens completly outside of the human body and other things.
I just feel reminded of that everytime I read extremely stupid comments about some extreme ultra nazis.
Nothing personell, kid.
Sorry user, but you are getting cuddled
Bentley Adams
Right now there are more empty houses (for speculative purposes) than there are homeless people. In just about every single Marxist-Leninist country (most people on Holla Forums don't even consider them Socialist) there was no homelessness at all, let alone on full Communism. The only reason you would have to come into my house is to be a dick and harass me, and then I, the communitary police or my neighbors would stop you.
Carson Lopez
So you don't want to cuddle with a fellow comrade?
Jayden Morales
I'm no extreme authoritarian, but saying a government is useless, or that a stable society can exist without government is silly. Eugenics programs is also silly and self contradictory, because there can be no eugenics without merit based trial and competition.
Cooper Sullivan
You and me are both stranded on an island.
We won't touch each other without consent, won't harm or steal from each other making us both basically ancaps, since no rulers means no goverment. So where does the goverment come into this and would maybe 10 more people make a difference?
Caleb Nguyen
Except american libertarians basically want no social organization.
And anarchists do.
Evan Reed
hello mister stereotype I also think that the USA are basically consisiting of 50% homeschooled evangelist and 50% normal europeans, republicans and democrats
Jaxson King
hahahahah, tough luck, I am the stronger one and I am the ruler of the island. If resources are scarce I kill you, if I am horny I enslave you. If it was some dumbass, he could do it for no reason too just cause he doesn't like you or something. Different people have different interests, and they use force to secure them, which is why laws and a state militia exist.
Jack Davis
...
Benjamin Lopez
Okay then just consider, what happens if I get to bring my friend along. We will probably ostracize you and maybe even hunt you down, since you revealed your psychopathic intentions to us.
I would be probably completly fine with just doing it his way and collectivizing all our property, since we are on a fucking island.
Have fun never being able to sleep again, we can take turns sleeping, but you are going to have to keep an eye open 24/7 you slaver rapist.
Hudson King
nazi fgts get rekt
Jack Moore
Its just realistic. Imagine the island had food for one person, what then? Cooperate my ass. Common prosperity is a very vague idea too. Imagine the island had food for two people, but just barely. I still kill you, for my prosperity. Now, lets say island is full of food heaven, but we hate each other. I still kill you.
Cooperation is indeed a source of power, but not everyone has something to offer.
Luis Moore
...
Alexander Jenkins
And that is my point. To stop me, you decided to create an organised power structure and create a militia. For the record I can take at least 3 communists at once.
Nathan Hall
if you are for real, then there is something wrong with you
fuck that guy and let's get comfy on our island
Leo Phillips
a horizontal one. Neither of them hold any power against one another, merely against you. Once organisation becomes hierarchical is when room for tyrany is created.
Ian Brooks
It's not even initation of force, since he basically outed himself as a murderous alien in human skin.
Juan Bennett
lewd
Benjamin Richardson
TOP KEK
Carter Gray
I am counting 2 ofrices? Oh right, Holla Forums can probably use his hands as well.
Jaxon Morales
Nah, I bet his ass is loose enough for two of us.
Noah Nelson
This
Josiah Brooks
lizards are gross
Samuel Nguyen
what about licking leftists?
Benjamin Roberts
The commune in which it is built
Luke Martinez
So the commune can just go to your bed and start a cuddle party whenever they feel like it?
I mean … that sounds awesome, to me at least, but I imagine not everyone is on board with that.
Zachary Reed
yeah, it totally means that. it also means the commune has the right to murder your wife and fuck your son because you're living in the commune's house.
oh, no, because in the real world it means that while the house belongs to you as your personal property since the creation and upkeep of the domicile in question requires both the efforts and surety of the community to maintain it the house isn't "yours" to do whatever you want with, up to and including selling it for profit, among whatever other stipulations you and the commune of which you are part arrange
I'm getting confused. Some of you guys say that it's personal property and I am completly free to do with it as I want. Others say it's communal property.
Now you say it's personal property, with a big BUT.
So anyway. If I expand my house beyond what the commune and I agreed to, will I have to invite a room-mate into my house and live with him waking up on top of me and cuddling me in my sleep ?
Carter Martinez
in socialism ownership of property doesn't give you absolute control over it like it does under capitalism
in general this theoretical paradigm is divided between "productive property," in general what we now call "private property," and "personal property," the things you personally either make or use
so, since you personally make use of it and theoretically are responsible for its upkeep, this house is "yours." you have the right to keep people out of it, by force if necessary, as long as you and your family are occupying it and making use of it. if you were to move away to another commune for whatever reason then the house itself would revert to the ownership of the commune to be redistributed to another member that needed a house or whatever else the commune decides to do with it.
if you did this then you'd probably face repercussions from the commune for trying to expand beyond your allotted "property" onto land that wasn't "yours," most likely having whatever addition you created torn down and some sort of censure for damaging public property.
the commune shouldn't have the right to force people into "your property" barring some sort of extremely extraordinary circumstances, a natural disaster for instance, because while access to shelter is a fundamental human right you also have the right to be secure in your own home. ideally apartments would be provided until all members of the commune would have their own private dwelling but since this isn't always possible the social allotment of living space will differ from place to place.
in the soviet union for example, in certain places multiple families were forced to occupy the same tenement due to the extreme shortage of facilities (so far as my understanding goes), but any situation like that should be understood to be as temporary as realistically possible
Oliver Gomez
What If I go on an uncharted like adventure for a few months?
Really? Torn down? Can't we negotitate something.
Imagine if I made a mistake and no one corrected me all that time and I already payed much money and time to build my house.
But why?
Sharing apartments and houses saves really an incredible amount of ressources.
Would I be allowed to share my house with some other people if it means that we can all use those ressources we saved on others things? (other things for us)
Carter Sullivan
as long as you intended to return at some point in the reasonable future the dwelling should remain in your "ownership."
maybe; it would depend on the extent of your "addition" and what sort of rules your community has regarding such things.
ideally your commune would have regulations regarding what modifications could or could not be made to your house via your own initiation. in the example of marinaleda, the town provides all the material and expertise necessary for building the dwelling up front with the owners compensating the town for materials after its completion, which in turn subsidizes the construction of subsequent houses.
i imagine it would really depend on what sort of construction we're talking about here. if we're in the stage of socialism where money is still a necessary then it would be ridiculous for the commune to destroy the sunroom you contrived to be created without communal approval so long as it fell within the bounds of your property. however, if you're building some sort of great extension from your house onto adjoining lots, especially if the size of such a building would be beyond what you could reasonably use, you would be in the wrong however you slice it, even more so if you're occupying space or resources that others could be using.
why what, there are numerous statements in the quoted section
diminishing the use of resources is a value you'd have to negotiate with your commune
sharing your house and this other group surrendering their right to a domicile of their own are matters that ultimately fall within your own personal volition. if you want to share your house with someone, that's up to you, just as much as living with you should be up to this other family or whatever.
the commune however isn't obligated to compensate you because you choose to forego the use of communal resources by the same stroke that it isn't obligated to penalize you for using proportionately more of the communal resources. whether or not you can make the case that by sharing your home with another family and freeing up resources for others to use should be compensated by the commune is one thing, but whether or not you could convince the commune of it is another.
Noah Reed
i've got to go questions-user but it was not unpleasant talking to you
hopefully some other lefty can answer your questions better than i can
Robert Martinez
Okay. Let's say the community is in the wrong here and like Tolkien's The Hobbit, they are already all up in my house and carry things away.
How am I compensated?
Yeah could. But they aren't or I wouldn't have the space to extend it.
Why am I being punished for raising my living standard?
that sounds so vague, can you be more specific?
Yeah sure, but what advantage would there in sharing one house, if we just have to give up all the saved ressources to people who all have one apartment?
Okay.
Let's say everyone gets toilet paper, a car, a computer etc given to them by the communal adminstration.
My cuddle buddies and I decide to all sell the excess ressources to another commune or people in africa, idk, and we use it to buy for us whatever we need or would rather have. Probably whatever has limited quantity in my local commune or is hard to come by or is popular in the black market.
