Oddbean

Do you own the land, where you refuse to wear the mask? Also, what is really the difference between today's world and your utopia? The government owns the land, thus, decides that everyone shall wear masks, and it's up to you to agree or leave.

Again, you assumed that I support the government owning the land. Stop putting words in my mouth I never said — for the second time. Land should belong to the people living on it collectively, because no one has rights to really own it (nobody created the land, it's truly «owned» by the planet). You cannot own land, even if you're wealthy, just like you cannot own humans or privatize air.

I disagree with your worldview that humans can’t own land. On a philosophical level, it’s part of a fundamental human right own what you put your work into, as outlined by John Locke. On a practical level, if the government and individuals both don’t own land, then nobody does. And society can’t function because people don’t agree. For example right now me and you don’t agree. So then who gets to decide anything? You have this mythical utopian fairy tale of anarchy, where people just co-exist happily and coordinate society with no government and no individual ownership of land. But yet you can’t even co-exist in (likely) another country on Nostr without death threats every post. I certainly wouldn’t surrender my land to you without a fight to the death

On a philosophical level, you can own the land, if you create it. If you put work into it, you can use what you get, but not own it — eg. as a dog trainer, I put work in training your dog, and I can use the results, but I cannot kill it, because I don't own your dog. This was outlined by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in his works about land. On a practical level, you are free to do whatever you want, if you don't interrupt my freedom and safety — otherwise, by NAP, you are starting the aggression. Killing the land where I live (while you yourself may not be even close to it), because you bought it (from who? planet Earth? or prevoius owner, who didn't have a right for it either?), thus, poisoning my life on it, is interrupting my freedom and safety. You can kill your company, fictional character or a project — because you really created it, and you do own it. I have this mythical utopian fary tale of anarchy, which actually exists in or have existed in Ukraine, Spain, Kronstadt Commune, Xinmin Province, Oaxaca (20th century), Seattle, Christiania, Zapatista Students, Munster Anarchio-Communist Commune, Kurdistan, Zaachile, Cheran, Aura-Amba, ZAD, Fiume Free State, Strandja Commune, Markov Republic, Amish territories, countless indigenous peoples (e.g. Bushmen, Indians, Hopi, Croatans, Cherokees, Anuaks, Nubia, Piao, San, Santals, Tivs, Zomis, etc), and other territories. Where does your real non-mythical truestory existed, so we can check, if it even works in practice? I presume, it should have a lot more practical examples than some fairy tale

your philosophical statement is a contradiction. you can own the land, but you can't your practical level statement is just agreement with AnCap lol ZAD, what was that a 1 week protest? Ukraine? like we're talking when? You're listing off countries as though the words "ukraine" and "spain" were some magical thing. Ukraine is in war. Spain is tyranny crackdown on catalonia with rampant poverty throughout the EU from the failed euro. Not going 1 by 1 on your list

There's no contradiction: you can own the land, if you *create* it. You can't, really. Thus, you cannot really own it. Happy to hear, that left-wing anarchism and AnCap agree on the practical level. Then we have no problems with it. ZAD — one week? You know, that many people lived there four years together? Ukraine — obviously not today's, I'm talking about year 1917. Spain — years 36-39. If you want today day's example, search for EZLN, Christiania, Rojava, Aura Amba and others. Still waiting for the answer about hundreds of AnCap existing / existed territories by the way, you ignored that question.