Argumentation ethics states that: Humans are capable of argumentation and know the meaning of truth.  Nonaggression is a necessary precondition for argumentation.  One does not argue with random and meaningless propositions.  Arguing is an activity.  The arguer makes a truth claim.  These truth claims do not always end in agreement.  However, there is agreement on the fact that you own your body.

Argumentation without private property is impossible.  The truth of this can’t be undone.  Anything stated would be with sound made from your own body.  So, the arguer is agreeing to the fact that they own their body.  The arguer is recognizing private property.  It’s impossible to argue against private property without engaging in a performative contradiction.  The very denial would be made with the use of private property.

To engage in argumentation is a mutual recognition of each other’s body.  As Murray Rothbard stated, discussion is life affirming.  He is agreeing to life through the very process of discussion.  By arguing, the arguer is demonstrating he owns his body and prefers life to death.  It’s impossible to be consistent if you don’t favor private property.  The only force is the force of logical reasoning which is not force at all.

Truth cannot emerge without argumentation.  Crusoe and Friday arguing demonstrates they are working together to survive.  They have implied they own their own body.  By the fact that Friday told Crusoe to give him half his fish is a performative contradiction.  He is contradicting himself even before he takes the fish from Crusoe.  A hammer can’t be a substitute for social order.  Conflict would be permanent.

Private property is the only correct solution to social order.  All argumentation is from the exclusive use of scarce resources.  You homestead your body through direct control.  One can’t argue without agreeing that you own your body.  The truth of this can’t be undone.  Private property is the only conflict-free way to interact.  Argumentation is required for truth, and private property is required for argumentation.  Therefore, truth requires private property.

References

Hans-Hermann Hoppe; The Economics and Ethics of Private Property

Stephan Kinsella; Argumentation Ethics and Liberty