Again, there is nothing else to it. It is a fact. Make of it what you will.
You, in fact, did not do this. You said “okay great” to something else that I didn’t respond to. This is what I responded to:
Notice the lack of “ok great”? “Posturing” or not, you are very deceitful.
LOL! I’m still waiting for your explanation of what it could be or what it wasn’t what I said it was. I’m still not holding my breath.
Property is that which is owned. Ownership is a legal status. You cannot have a legal status precede law. Legal status is a result of law. Law is the result of nonviolent resolutions of dispute. This holds true for all systems of law. Property as a concept is inherent to people, but property itself only exists as a legal status.
No, it did not come first. And it is not obviously the case either. Furthermore, I would like to remind you that my comment was directed in general, but also more specifically at you citing Bastiat as if it made it true (it was after that quote and Hoppe’s that I said you are making the fallacy). Bastiat’s quote was one line, and instead of attempting to paraphrase or just restating it yourself, you quote him as an authority. Well, just because Bastiat says so doesn’t make it true. And you have a habit of just citing people in general as if what they say is necessarily true. I don’t feel like going through other threads, but I’ve seen other people point out errors in some of the things you cite. And then you barrel on as if there aren’t any. It’s just a lot of appeals to authority from you. No actual arguments.
No, I’ve seen you jump into threads many times just dismissing everyone and whatnot. Sure, it’s only happened a couple of times in the last few days (unless I missed another), but you’ve been here for a lot longer and you’ve done it before. Many times.
And again, I’m still waiting for you to explain why your questions were not, in fact, implying what I said. You keep avoiding it. I wonder why.