Phill wrote:
I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of property you do.
Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the
BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved.
controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" from the previous rulers.
They "won" it in combat. The people of china obviously prefered new government to the old one, or they would have prevented the takeover.
I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every philosopher since Locke.
Practically every philosopher since Locke has recieved their education at a Government or "Elite" sponsored school, and made their livings the same way. I'm not claiming conspiracy here, but those that feed at the trough aren't going to insult it overmuch.