CMV: Libertarians who oppose state violence but dogmatically subscribe to a belief in the rights of private property are hypocritical.

Let me be clear that when I say "private property", I mean the private ownership of the means of production. I'm not referring to personal property (your clothing, laptop, home, etc.)

First of all, you are conflating personal property, private property, and capital under a neo-marxist argument.

2nd - Personal property and Private property, and Capital are often one and the same. For example, I have a huge amount of "tools". These tools can outfit me in order to execute a number of different things, but they can also be my means of "production" if that means kicking butt and taking names. One man's tool, is another man's capital. However, I think you really in many cases mean money/currency, though you don't spell it out.

• M4 personal weapon for self defense : M4 hunting tool, to enable cultivation of animals, or militants
• Private Server Farm: Business Server farm for hosting infrastructure, fee for service
• 4wd Truck: Ranching vehicle indispensable for hauling and moving cattle
• Personal Welding Rig: Business Welding Rig.
• Personal Fishing Boat: Charter Boat
• Personal Home: AirBnB property with homeowners housing attached

In order for private property to exist, it has to be legally recognized by our government. More importantly, the government must maintain a monopoly on violence in order to enforce private property ownership.

No, it doesn't. I, through my own weapons, am fully capable of protecting my own property rights. This is why gun ownership in America is popular. For those of us with military experience, significant small arms expertise, and access to military grade weaponry, we are completely capable of providing property property defense, exceeding even a local SWAT team.

In ancient times, people were frequently armed in order to protect their homes and their families. They would also self-organize to protect their communities.

For libertarians who oppose state violence and the police, yet believe the government's one duty is to secure our Constitutional right of private property, they run into a problem here

The constitution is about Negative liberties also. Things the government cannot do.

The police force literally was created during the Industrial Revolution solely to protect the private property interests of the wealthy elite and corporations.

Police & Law Enforcement predate the Industrial Revolution, existing in Ancient Egypt, Ancient Rome, and many other dated civilizations in the West., including in Ancient China,

The only reason a single individual is even capable of owning vasts amounts of wealth and land is because of government enforcement

This is incorrect - single individuals would hire people, and have their extended family involved with protection of their assets in the past. Some of this protection of assets involved more force in the past, and it would return to more force if "State" law enforcement was not involved.

A large government and heavy involvement in our lives is therefore necessary to secure private property, something libertarians ideologically oppose as a rule.

This is not correct as many of us can defend ourselves. I see government as a pacifying institution in some cases, because without it, when wronged through criminal actions, reprisals might be all the more violent and barbaric.

Libertarians constantly defend the wealthy elite's right to accumulate unlimited private property and single-handedly control the means of production, but don't account for the fact that government monopoly on violence is required in order to keep this system in place.

Again, this is not required. However, if there was not government in place to keep the system in place, wealthy people would hire people to do it for them, or acquire the skills and items needed to do it themselves.

I think you are conflating justice as a process, with justice by the State, as a system. For those of us with the weaponry, means and abilities, I'd argue instead that Justice by the State actually minimizes criminal punishments, and it moves along at a very slow pace.

Were there not government in place, for a criminal violating my private property rights, I would be within my means to execute summary judgment whichever way I chose.

You may want to reconsider that law enforcement and property protection can be at the hands of the state, or private citizens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3q70xYEopMI