• irmoz@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Your definition of private property must differ from “a thing that a private individual owns”, then

    …But of course it does. I’m intrigued that’s what you think it means. Every individual is a private individual - that would make all property private property, even your own toilet paper. That’s absurd. That’s personal property.

    Private property is absentee ownership; property owned for profit. A house owned to rent out, a copper mine, a business. Property that is owned by someone despite others making use of it, and the owners’ presence being unnecessary.

    • Spuddaccino@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah, I see. No wonder we were butting heads. I will admit, then, that I had been operating under a misconception, then. Mine’s the legal definition, yours is the Marxist one. Given where we are, I suppose that makes more sense to use.

      So with this new information, do I understand correctly that your stance is that police only exist to protect private, non-movable property?

      • irmoz@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Mine’s the legal definition, yours is the Marxist one. Given where we are, I suppose that makes more sense to use.

        Okay, i respect not raising the tone along with me. I got a bit flustered there but I’ve had some sleep since then so I can chat mote sanely.

        Yes, I’ve been working under the Marxist definition - I believe it makes more sense. It delineates the class divide we are living within. Those without private property are working class, and those with it are largely capitalist, with some grey area where small business owners are concerned.

        Capitalists are able to leverage their assets and wealth to exert untold influence on politics, and have done so across centuries to establish the world we are currently living in.

        So with this new information, do I understand correctly that your stance is that police only exist to protect private, non-movable property?

        That’s their distinct purpose, yes.

        • Spuddaccino@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So why do traffic stops exist? Vehicles are personal property, police shouldn’t care at all about what happens to or in them.

          • irmoz@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Social control. Y’know, i actually thought we were having a conversation for a second, there… Just like in the original image, I didn’t say protecting private property is their only function. And you haven’t really pointed out a contradiction - yes, cars are personal property, but traffic stops aren’t protecting the car…

            Social control is keeping people in line.