The hardcore libertarians are always easy to spot (and thus dismiss) when they drag out the old canard about the government using force to make people do certain things. Guess what? If you want a civilization (i.e. not a bunch of anarchist barbarians killing and raping and stealing at will) then the government needs to be able to use force.
On the one hand, you say it's a "canard" that government is force. On the other hand, you say that government "needs" force, and that's a good thing. Which is it?
Of course government is force. That's what makes it government. The only difference between government and any other individual or group is that the government has the legal right to use deadly force to achieve its goals. That's what government is, period. The discussions of how is is moral or not that this force will be used is called "politics".
And I hate your claim that if it weren't for government then we would all be "anarchist barbarians killing and raping and stealing at will". I resent the notion that I would go out and kill, rape, and steal if it weren't for your blessed God Government telling me not to. If suddenly government told you that it wasn't going to enforce those laws, would you immediately go out and rape a baby to death? You sound like a conservative who claims that we would all be shooting up heroin if it weren't for God Government telling us not to do it. I am completely capable of determining for myself what is right, what is wrong, and what is appropriate conduct toward other people, and anyone who insists otherwise is an asshole!
You can't dump toxic chemicals in public spaces.
Go read "The Tragedy of the Commons". You might also consider that farming lions is the best way to save the species. Disagree? Consider the populations of cows and chickens compared to the populations of lions and zebras. Common property doesn't work. Either someone owns it or nobody does.
Two plus two does not equal five, and socialism is not about denying self ownership. Your concerted effort to change the meaning of a word to control public thought is nothing short of evil.
Bull feathers and hen's teeth. Socialism, like Christianity, is entirely about denying self-ownership. In Socialism, you belong to "society" through a "social contract" (Accept it or DIE!). In Christianity, you are "made in God's image" and are "God's child". Both evil ideologies hate the notion of individualism and say that selfishness is evil, where "selfishness" means "not doing what I told you to do". As long as I am not depriving any other individual of their life, liberty, or property, then nothing I do is wrong or should be illegal. And it's rich of you to accuse other of "controlling public thought" when you know very well that socialism wants to control the way people think, act, spend, and live. For the good of "society" and the "social contract". You're no better than a fundamentalist Christian. It's the same evil nanny state with a different stupid God and the connected party members living high on the graft. You suck! I can't tell if you're a Boxer or an aspirant pig -- and go read _Animal Farm_ if you don't know what I'm talking about. Either way, I hate you.