I got into an argument about guns and my reasoning is guns, cars, and houses can be either personal and private property. For example, someone in a communist militia who owns a gun for the benefit of the militia would be owning that gun personally, while someone who is in a reactionary militia or hordes guns for their value would own those guns privately. Same thing for a house or car. If you own either of those out of necessity it's personal property while if you own either of these things not because you need them then it's private property. I think the intent of ownership is very important, I think a toothbrush could be private property if your hoarding them to sell. Does anyone get what I'm saying? Can we keep the discussion related to guns since that's where this question came up.

  • usurp [none/use name]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Tools of the master can't be used to tear down his house or something. Is a gun not one of the tools? Also let's add public shared property into the mix with personal and private property. Let's challenge the Marxist view of property with all the other views of property. Are people property? If property is something inherent and a social construct would that always apply to humans or can we and by extension objects transcend the concept of being property? What is propertyless?