My friend, you either are not able to react to my questiosn or are will fully ignoring them. So lets make it very very easy, one question at a time:
On which basis do you put your claim on land that I should respect, if I do not agree with your government-induced "homesteading" legal fiction.
If I, for example, use my body to build a cabin on unowned land, absent a government, you have no nature-conferred right to enter said cabin without invitation.
The reason for this is that you have no right to enter my body, or to aggress against my body. My cabin is a product of my body's labor expended over time. To claim you may also own the cabin is to claim ownership of the labor and time required to build it.
If you disagree with this, logically speaking, I do not need to request permission to enter your house, even if you do not wish me to.
Now I have answered. And now, I would like you to answer my question before we proceed. May I, at any time I wish, even if you do not wish me to, enter your house?
No, you have not answered my question. COME AWAY FROM YOUR FUCKING HOUSE!
I just put that in as a joke and you are running around it and avoiding the basic question.
Why you think you can own land? What is the reason? You didn't build the land after all!
Not running away here. Just...if my house is on the land, and you cannot come into my house sans invitation (we agree here, I presume) then for all practical intents and purposes you cannot enter the land upon which it sits unless you dig underground, right?
All you said amounts to
"I don't own the land, I own what I build atop of it, so I can force you to not use the land beneath even if I have no right to do that because I don't own the land"
Is that right?
If you dig under it and damage my house, you will have aggressed against me. If I have a foundation or a sidewalk or a garden, I am not sure how you will get under it. If you damage my garden, or sidewalk, etc, that is aggression by the logic I have already delineated above, based on the reality of individual self-ownership.
If you cannot then get under my house, for all practical intents and purposes, yes, that land is mine.
I never said I would damage your house.
But why are you insisting that I cannot use the land just because you are forcefully blocking me (e.g. by building something on it) from using it? That is circle logic and not better then government forcing you with a fence and a mine field to not set your feet on an air base for example.
So I cannot use the land and build a house on it because nobody owns it, according to your reasoning?
Further more, if I improve the land surrounding my house, say, via landscaping, other buildings, sidewalks, roads, paths, etc, it is mine as well, because I have used my body to expend time and energy in making it so. If you claim you can destroy my improvements because "no one can own land" you are right back to contradicting yourself in asserting I cannot enter your house freely. You cannot own the land upon which it sits, so stop putting your house on land you don't own! Nobody owns it!
Have you traveled around? There is plenty for all of us.