Sure there is, if you're part of a community and there's land/resource that doesn't belong to a particular individual but is shared by all members of the group. Take a park or a body of water (river, lake, sea) for example: if it has no legitimate claimant, no one can simply state "this belongs to me" - it needs to be collectively owned by the group who inhabit that territory. The issue is thay in most modern western countries the "community" as a cohesive homogenous unit has degraded. Most people have very few things in common with their neighbors in today's urban/suburban landscape which makes it practically impossible for a self governing group of a few thousand people at minimum to form. This creates a vacuum in which thugs in suits take power and make rules up for the common man (or at least attempt to). This isn't communism, but rather a hybrid model in which private and public/communal property can exist side by side.

Easy there tiger. Again, I'm talking about a self organizing homogenous group of individuals who create a collective governing body to manage risks and issues that pertain to the group as a whole - a "community" or "commonwealth". So if a group of invaders trespasses on a certain individual's property it will be much easier and more efficient to protect himself by leveraging the power of the collective to resolve his issue. Reality and history show that individuals on their own cannot provide themselves security at scale...there's a reason humans have always organized into groups and created group governing structures. So forget about the state - you need to make a distinction between the modern nation state (which I also believe is a form of thuggery) and self organizing groups...