Fine. But I don't. Those concepts are not that important to me. I'm not really sure they are that important to anyone. In fact, I think they're all bullshit, myself, stuff you've invented because it fills some deep psychological need for you, not any real partition of reality.

I consider myself an individualist, not a statist (I'd never even heard that term until you used it). Everybody thinks they're individualists, what else is new? Does anyone actually admit, even to himself, that he wants to submerge his psyche into the group mind? In fact, if you ask any bum off the street he's going to tell you he's an individualist. The term is meaningless, it's like asking someone if he's "good".

But you've already decided I'm not an individualist, that I'm a statist, in fact, you've created an entire catalogue of collectivist sins I'm heir to, and now you expect me to have to defend why I'm all those things? And why should I take your word for what I am? Maybe I just don't want to play your game. I certainly don't have to justify who I am to you, especially since you already seem to have arrived at a definite conclusion you have no intention of changing unless I agree with everything you say.

If you don't like anything I've posted, fine, you're free to tell me I'm full of shit, but I am under no obligation to argue with you.

Read your post carefully. This entire elaborate rhetorical ballet you've created is just not important to me. I don't have to justify anything to you, and I have no need to explain why I think what I do. You're arguing with yourself.