as far as the “means of production” are concerned, if it’s true that these things can be the product of one’s labor (and without a doubt, they can be) then extending that maxim to these cases; that is the line I won’t cross.

does that maxim extend to items which they can’t immediately use, but which are also the product of their labor?

It extends to means of production primarily.

Are you saying that in the absence of government capitalism cannot happen? Why?

That’s asking me to prove a negative. All I can point out is that historically capitalism in every form required state force in order to create a class of people who had nothing else to sell but their labour. This class of people cannot be otherwise be formed than through force – when starting from an egalitarian situation that is.

I’m not saying that “in the absence of government, free markets can’t happen,” but rather the sort of capitalism referred to by left/continental libertarians can’t happen in the absence of a state.

Are you saying that in the absence of government capitalism cannot happen? Why?

I think this is far from irrelevant. What I read here is that at up until some point, accumulation is proper. Beyond that point (this is somewhat of a grey area to be sure) increasing accumulation must depend on exploitation (e.g., violence). I don’t think this is irrelevant at all. The point at which violence enters the equation is the problem, not mere accumulation (which I agree would not amount to much significance).

In regards to accumulation without exploitation I disagree. Given a possessive system, it’s downright impossible. In a hypothetical propertarian and stateless system though, it is likely that accumulation begins without exploitation but it will at some point require it in order to amount to any significance. Of course this is all quite irrelevant.

Accumulation (however defined) can certainly come about *without* exploitation, no? At some point the goalpost shifts from “accumulation” (i.e., productivity!) to “explicit violence” and all of a sudden we’re talking about a State or State-like institution of violence.