Intention doesn't come into theft. "I stole his car but only for a day" doesn't change the fact that a crime was committed; neither does it for houses or offices.
Funny you should say that since "property is theft!" is one of the earliest slogan in the anarchist literature and is often quoted by squatters advocates :-)
What you have to consider, though, is the fact that not all property is equal. There is a difference between owning a toothbrush, and owning slaves. Equalling all property would be identifying a policeman's action of emancipating a prostitute from her pimp as theft of property, which of course is nonsense.
To give an example. Imagine you go to a country where slavery is legal, disgusted by their treatment you join some activists that emancipates slaves. Now you are stealing the slaveholders property and therefor committing a crime. Are you going to hold that crime at par with stealing someones money, or someones bicycle?
Now this is an extreme example, but a few hundred years ago it wouldn't be so far out, and slave emancipators, now considered heroes, were then considered criminals? Same may hold a few hundred years from now in case of land. Land hording is criminal, it keeps other people of it. It could and should be used for the great of the community. Squatting a few hundred years from now may be looked at as land emancipation, even though now it is as criminal as stealing a bike.
>Funny you should say that since "property is theft!" is one of the earliest slogan in the anarchist literature and is often quoted by squatters advocates :-)
As said by massive hypocrites from within their safe homes. Most first world anarchists would likely be murdered and robbed within days if there was actual anarchy, and no police to get help from then.
Since when was 'free will' a criteria for property?? So you couldn't own a dog, you couldn't own farm animals? If that is not a fair comparison (since farm animals arguably don't have free will), then who is to say that slaves do?
