[Alan]

I'm sorry I went away till school was done. At the same time I'm also sorry that this thread is already a non-issue, but I don't think you would have wanted me to drop it and that's that.

So, on the last of your post. First parts you're apologizing for confusing me with something I didn't say. That's not important anymore. Then you complain about my putting attention into your simile because that doesn't attack your position. It's true, that's the point. I got rid of a big part of your post by getting rid of that simile, because as you just said, it was just a simile. It had to be addressed as you raised it into the conversation.

Now, for the most substantial parts. I fail to see how I am dogmatic when you're the one positing a concrete position. That I completely critique it makes me fucking stubborn at best, but that still makes you more dogmatic than I am.
And then the paragraphs that have substance where you're making an argument:

For the record, there are plenty of non-profit organizations that work to feed and clothe people, and plenty of for-profit, capitalist institutions that donate large portions of the funds by which these organizations are able operate on.

Yeah, and the drug cartels give a lot back to the community, but I can't imagine you forgiving them.
Of course you're gonna shout back "IT DEPENDS!!" and it's true, but then you can't make this an argument FOR capitalism. If it depends, then this is just a happy event that happens within it (once more as I have said over and over again, because people are people more than they are capitalists) and not something you can point out to defend it anymore than I can defend drug cartels because of it.

I'm not going to take the bait on whether or not fairness is the norm, as you have constantly pulled this discussion away from practice and into theory

I'm sorry but I believe I have mentioned too many fucking examples of exploitation by the free market, with you only coming back and saying that I can't blame capitalism for its misuse.
Doesn't that consist by definition on trying to pull the discussion away from practice into theory? You can't salvage capitalism in its present state so of course your only choice is to recur to the minority instances and pure theory. I don't know why you even try to deny it when you yourself agree that capitalism right now must be presently misused to say the least.

you need to make a strong case for why private property is indefensible. You have thus far failed utterly. Now stop trying to derail the discussion and make your case. I'm still waiting.

You just dissed me for 'pulling the conversation away from practice and into theory' and now you demand me to make a case of political theory 'for why private property is indefensible'?
MAke up your mind. I'm trying to talk on those two levels because they're both important. You demand me to work in neither.
If you have that in mind then think a little and make your demands clearer. What part do you want to begin with? Just, no more double standards.