Its not tho.

how is it different?

Capitalism is a relationship

I.e. between wealth, in the form of capital, and wage labour.

or the difference between owning land and working to pay rent

so buy some land

Which is what I said

But also

No

He wouldnt buy the land

he would jsut take it?

In revolution, probably. He and those others who'd joim the commune of bee keepers, yes.

Otherwise,

He'd have to succumb to wage labour

Be exploited, and then use what he gets to buy land.

so everytime anyone wants land they have to take it by violent force from eachother?

And then he'd "own" that land, despite owership being counterintuitive to syndicalism

and it would have to be quite a lot of land for a commune

I mean

Thats how capitalism did it

And does it

So idk why the hang up is violence

no, we just sell stuff to eachother

No,

yeah

I bought my property with money

The capitalist system is predicated on the violent acquisition of land and wealth

Hence why it was able to start

And hence why we now have foreign wars

whatever

I jstu bought my land with money

They had to acquire the common land somehow

taking land, mostly through the state.
forcing farming commoners off land and into cities to become factory workers

didn't have to kill anyone

The peasants didnt just give it to them

what are you guys talking about?

The stole and killed them for it

no, I just bout land from some other guy that didn't want it anymore

noone was killed

you can do likewise

the industrial revolition.
the state stole the commons, and forced its occupants into cities to become working-class