>>It's not self defense because you aren't defending yourself in this scenario, you're defending your property.
Based on the rest of your comments I then assume you reject all Enlightenment based philosophy, Locke, Adam Smith, etc etc
The core of enlightenment based philosophy, aka the foundation of our modern society, is that you do have natural rights. Governments are instituted to secure these natural rights. if you are going to now reject those bedrock principles then you have to completely reject society as we know it as well, and the founding documents of most nations including the US Constitution for the USA, Charter of Rights for Canada, etc etc
Inherent in that foundation is the concept of property, as property is an extension of your self, your labor. If you have no right to property, you have no right to your labor, thus you have no right to your self.
Based on the rest of your comments I then assume you reject all Enlightenment based philosophy, Locke, Adam Smith, etc etc
The core of enlightenment based philosophy, aka the foundation of our modern society, is that you do have natural rights. Governments are instituted to secure these natural rights. if you are going to now reject those bedrock principles then you have to completely reject society as we know it as well, and the founding documents of most nations including the US Constitution for the USA, Charter of Rights for Canada, etc etc
Inherent in that foundation is the concept of property, as property is an extension of your self, your labor. If you have no right to property, you have no right to your labor, thus you have no right to your self.