Obviously everything isn’t your property cause I exist and you exist and heck there’s other people in the world too. You can dispute that but you can’t control other people. You could potentially kill them all and after that then who cares?
Can you control the molecular structure of your shoes?
I’ll even grant you that, and rephrase: there is my property, and there are obstacles. To the extent I can make a thing do what I want, it is my property (it is under my control, bent to my purposes). This includes people. A ‘contract’ is no less a means of control than a stick or a gun. I do whatever suits my ends, without regard for anybody’s so-called ‘rights’. The only ‘right’ that matters is what is ‘right’ for me - what I please to do.
It really doesn’t matter if you don’t think you ought to not steal or take my money. What matters is if you try, then I’ll make a judgment of value to stop you. Conflict of scarcity. Your judgment versus my judgment. Mine and thine. Who wins? That’s the conflict of scarcity and natural law is absolutely involved unless you want to make the case that humans don’t have an intellect and there isn’t a reality outside of the intellect.
This is absolute gibberish. Nothing about the fact of cognitive patterns in a particular objects implies I ought to concern myself with it, debate with it, or consider its desires. Who wins? Whoever does. I win if I can get it under my control - and if you win, you are the stronger, but I recognize no ‘right’ you have to it.
You basically make no sense.