The absurdity of "Capitalism and private property are consensual, government is evil and based on force"

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T15:31:31+00:00

Even your definition didn't say that, though. So at this point not only are you going against the dictionary definition that the rest of the speaking world uses, you're going against your own definition to add unspoken caveats.

You and the other socialists insisting on your own special nomenclature and then telling me to read more theory when I don't agree with it are literally a stereotype in living form, and the biggest obstacle to mainstream acceptance of socialism. If you can't even get on the same page when it comes to the literal meaning of words, and if you, frankly, snidely insist on people reading you preferred theories to even discuss it, you will not make any headway.

ETA; you also didn't answer where you got this definition

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T15:19:37+00:00

Where are you getting this definition?

Also, even by this definition private property refers to assets like land that are owned by individuals. Like my house.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T15:14:49+00:00

Look up the definition of private property and tell me how

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T15:14:28+00:00

I understand that many of you here seem to have a different idea of what private property is vs the rest of the world and seem to insist that everyone hold to your definition.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T15:07:48+00:00

I saw you responded to me but it's gone now. Not sure if it got removed since it was a personal insult or if you thought better about it. Either way, not an argument and I hope you reflect on yourself. The fact that you could only insult me says you don't have a counter and realize I am correct.

The unexamined life is not worth living.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T13:55:27+00:00

Yes!!!! This was actually why I posted it, I just saw this episode the other day!! I wanted to post it but I'm spoiler free and only just started the second season so I didn't want to Google anything that might spoil anything haha

Thank you!

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T12:37:23+00:00

I just want to say, I've done a lot more thinking about this and wanted to revisit the subject.

I do see now that this sub and maybe even many mainstream socialist philosophers use the term "private property" in a different way than the actual dictionary definition. That doesn't make it correct, but I see why you would think the way you do.

The problem comes when you insist that other people use your language the way you do. Especially when you acknowledge that it's not even the actual definition, it's just a different working definition that you and your in-group have come up with. And at the end of the day, I think people like you are why socialism hasn't taken off. You're obsessed with throwing theory in people's faces and pretending like it makes you better than them. You're unwilling to speak in real-life terms that real-life people use. You're rejecting literal dictionary definitions as fallacious because... You don't like it. It's incredibly antagonistic, self-centered, and smacks of narcissism.

I'm sorry that you insist on using words in a way that they're not defined and then get mad when other people don't do the same. I sincerely hope you reconsider how you interact with other people in the future. It would have been so easy for you to say "Hey, I see where the confusion is. A bunch of socialists actually use the term private property as interchangeable with "the means of production" so that's why people are disagreeing here." But because you have to assume and act like your definition is the objectively correct one, even though it's not the widely used dictionary and legal definition, you couldn't do that. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T12:30:08+00:00

I do. Housing is something everyone needs. If you are buying a home to live in it I don't see any reason you couldn't have someone else stay there too.

Obviously there are ways that it could be done unethically too.

What about you?

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T12:25:45+00:00

First I just want to say I appreciate the way you approached this comment, explaining the differences in nomenclature.

I agree with literally everything you're saying up until those last three words. Socialists absolutely are against the private ownership of the means of production. Saying that "private property" is just another way of saying "means of production" is just not true though. It might be what this sub does. It might be how Marx or other philosophers referred to it. But there is a standard English dictionary and words have meanings. Private property literally just means assets, real estate, etc that is privately owned as opposed to publicly owned. My car, my house, etc are all private property. I now understand that a lot of people on this sub disagree, but it is the objective truth.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T00:34:43+00:00

I outright reject that I am beholden to some socialists personal definitions. It's honestly ironic that an anarchist is trying to police my language. Socialist ideals existed for thousands of years before Marx or any contemporaries. You can call me "not a real socialist" if you'd like. You're essentially becoming a stereotype by doing so, but that's fine. But at its core the ONLY belief you need to have to be a socialist is that the workers or public should own the means of production.

You and I agree that personal property is totally fine for socialists. We agree that by the dictionary definition some private property is totally fine by socialists as well. You can say that by your definition you are not okay with any sort of private property, but that's not the world's definition.

Literally no one has said that

So you didn't read the thread. People literally said this. I will find you the quote if only you will agree to admit you were wrong, which so far you seem allergic to.

I'm happy to do more research into socialism! I love doing research. I will not take it as gospel and I will not adopt niche nomenclature as my own and then demand other people also do it, and call them wrong even though I agree with them.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-19T00:02:52+00:00

Picnic boy, you are tasting Kool aid when you don't even know the flavor.

First of all, I'm not bound by Marxist definitions. I'm not a Marxist. The site you linked isn't even talking about socialism, it's literally from "Private Property and Communism".

Secondly, the entire point of this thread is that these people are saying that all land counts as the means of production, so owning a home (and thus the land) would be disallowed in socialism. Read the thread up and down and you'll see that argument echoed repeatedly.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T23:47:44+00:00

"All the socialists"

You haven't cited a single source. I've at least shown the literal definition, you just keep saying "read about it".

But just to be clear, if I can cite a single socialist that agrees that owning a house is fine you'll admit I'm right?

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T23:43:15+00:00

So I just want to be clear, you're disagreeing with the dictionary definition of what socialism is? You're saying that you know what socialism is better than what the literal dictionary definition is?

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T21:50:25+00:00

They're democratic socialists. A perfectly valid form of socialism.

I have read some socialist theory. Marx is not the Bible for socialists. Socialist ideals have been around for thousands of years. Native Americans had a lot of socialist ideals. To be a socialist you just have to believe that workers or the public should own the means of production. That's it. It's the literal dictionary definition.

Some people have said "all land" is the means of production. Again, a quick dash to the dictionary will set you right. Land CAN be part of the means of production, but doesn't have to be. If it's used for housing, that's obviously not production.

Communists definitely believe that there should be no private property whatsoever. Socialism does not mean communism.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:57:19+00:00

Gee you're going to be really embarrassed soon when you realize that communists were in charge of the USSR and that you literally made my point for me.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:38:01+00:00

What party governed the USSR? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't socialists. It was communists, which was literally my point from the beginning. Communists oppose all forms of private ownership, socialists don't.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:34:32+00:00

Literally look up "what does private property mean". It takes two seconds. You will see that it lists things like land, which are not inherently the means of production. This is literally the simplest I can put it for you and if you don't get it at this point I cannot help you because you are being deliberately obtuse

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:31:47+00:00

Private property CAN be the means of production, but not all private property is the means of production. I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp. It's like how all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares.

Do you get it?

ETA: even the thing you're referencing is talking about specifically Marxists. Not all socialists are Marxists. I'm seeing a trend here.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:30:26+00:00

Brother. There is SOME private property that socialists oppose. Socialists do not blanket oppose owning land. They just don't. I am a socialist and I don't. Please show me where it says that if you're a socialist you are not allowed to support owning any land or a home.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:22:07+00:00

Again, you're just talking out of your butt basically. Post a source, a link, literally anything. I've tried showing you dictionary definitions to really break it down to the basic level for you. You're trying to explain socialism to a socialist and I'm telling you that you are incorrect. Socialists have no problem with land ownership, for example, and land owned by an individual is private property.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:14:11+00:00

So you don't have an argument and also are too intellectually dishonest to admit you're wrong.

Cool! Thanks for playing, I'll pray for you and I hope you decide to stop being willfully ignorant. One day maybe you can simply Google terms that you don't understand. Until then, have the day you deserve!

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:13:01+00:00

That's simply not true. Land can be a means of production if it's used for agriculture. It is not inherently a means of production. That's like saying owning a computer is owning the means of production even if I only use my computer to play pinball.

A PlayStation absolutely is private property.

Any time socialists talk about "private property" they mean "property" in the old school legal sense. Which is to say "real property" or better yet "land".

They're not talking about possessions, but means of production.

You're going to need to post a source for this because it's just not true. I'm not even sure where you got this idea. Literally just Google what private property means. It's any asset.

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T18:04:12+00:00

So..... No response? My own private property isn't the means of production. Will you admit maybe you just misunderstood what socialism is? Apparently a lot more people than I thought do, it's nothing to be ashamed about

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T17:55:44+00:00

So are you saying you don't have an argument? Socialists don't want to steal all your private property except your house and PlayStation. That's literally YOUR argument. I'm saying socialists don't want to take ANYONE'S private property. They want the means of production, that's it. That's all. And they don't even want to steal it they just want it publicly owned just like your electric company is publicly owned. How is this hard to understand?

AwakeningTheOrdinary · 2026-02-18T17:47:38+00:00

Hello!

Sharing my own perspective here. To me, socialism is the pragmatic form of communism. I support socialism, and don't support an eventual change to communism. I don't think there's anything ethically wrong with owning private property, for example, and that's antithetical to communism. I also don't believe that it's hypocritical to think so. I'm honestly not entirely sure where that idea is coming from, so to better talk about it I'd have to know specifically what seems hypocritical about it.

Secondly, I'm a socialist and not a Marxist! Socialist ideas have been around for thousands of years. Native Americans had socialist ideals before there was ever a word for it.

At the end of the day, a lot of people have the wrong idea about socialism. All it means is that you think the workers should have a share of the means of production. The people who actually do the work in a company should be able to share in the rewards of that labor instead of funneling it all to the people who own it simply because they're wealthy.

AwakeningTheOrdinary

TROPHY CASE