You haven;t explained how property can exist in the first place. Property is not a natural state, it is a creation of man. Furthermore, property cannot exist without contract, and contract cannot exist without the immediate threat of disproportional punishment. Its game theory really.
Shaming, even exclusion from future contracting, of a misbehaving entity only changes the present NPV calculations of that entity. The more rounds are played (and if that entity is aware of the number of rounds) the higher its NPV cost of misbehaving. This presupposes rational actors with sufficient symmetric knowledge. Because not every player is rational and not every player has symmetric information you get a systems-wide Nash Equilibrium which discounts the future disproportionally and favors the present. Or in other words, the more irrational the actor, the less does the shaming as a punishment fulfill its role. However, the punishment is there exactly for such entities, therefore shaming has no impact on reinforcement and systems-wide contract execution.
Property is in the worst case a result of violence, in the mild case a result of protective violence, and in the best case the potential for protective violence.
Government and the state are in the best case the surrender of the potential violence of the many to the one, for the purpose of all encompassing potential violence and therefore all encompassing (and hopefully coherent) contract execution and enforcement.