Even among those who subscribe to the non-aggression principle (NAP), there are some who do not understand the nature of obligations, responsibility, and the inalienability of the will. While a thorough discussion of these issues could fill many volumes, it is my desire to provide a simple summary for those who desire an overview of the …
Tag: NAP
I was recently involved in a discussion involving the allegation that someone forced another person into making certain choices regarding their line of work. The details or identities are not important, but I would like to touch upon the subject of what constitutes force from the libertarian perspective. It is, I think, important to remember …
The non-aggression principle (NAP) isn’t some magical or mystical moral code handed down by a deity or discovered in ancient ruins, it’s derived from logic and reason. Individuals can’t all have the right to do whatever they want without there being constant conflict—I can’t have the right to kill you without coming into conflict with …
The non-aggression principle (NAP) is consistent with the view that rights are inalienable. If we accept that the right to not be aggressed against is inalienable, retribution and punishment are necessarily prohibited. Such a prohibition is consistent with the NAP as these retributive acts are not a direct response to aggression (as is self-defense) but …
Authority is always illegitimate
The concept of “authority” can be defined as the right to control someone. While the word is sometimes used in other contexts (i.e. “the leading authority on UFO sightings”), the relevant definition is “the right to control” rather than as an inexact synonym for “expert.” It is also improper to use the word to mean …