In the other thread your statements indicated that you define property as the abstract area itself, as distinct from the content of that area (e.g. plowed soil). You claimed that this area cannot be owned, but that the contents of the area can be owned.
Because everyone…has an equal right to go trough or use unowned
landarea.
Is it possible to use the area without using its contents?
If the area cannot be used without using the contents, then using the area without the permission of the owner of the contents necessarily entails using the contents without the permission of the owner of the contents: i.e. violating his property rights as owner of the contents.
By way of a more concrete example, suppose there is an area 1 mile square. In this area there is plowed soil. Farmer Joe plowed this soil: i.e. he produced it. Hence, he is the owner of this soil. Farmer Joe does not own the area itself. Now, if Bob and Susan come and use the area, doesn’t that mean they have to be standing on Farmer Joe’s soil? Or digging into it? Or using it in some way? If they are doing this without Farmer Joe’s permission, then aren’t they violating his property rights?
So we have a case of conflicting rights: the property rights of the owner of the contents of the area are necessarily violated if members of the community at large exercise their alleged right to use the area itself. This cannot stand. Either Bob and Susan have the right to use the area, or Farmer Joe owns the contents of the area. It cannot be both.