NightFox
Wildling
You obviously don't understand the non-aggression principle and seem to have it confused with absolute pacifism ; they're not the same thing.Er...um....call the police and have them arrest you since your actions have made it clear that you are a danger to the life, liberty and property of others, if there is no police force I'd take matters into my own hands for the same reason. You don't appear to understand the non-aggression principle, once again it DOESN'T preclude self defense or the defense of others.LOL, libertarianism isn't a form a government, it's a philosophy based on the non-aggression principle.
No, that's anarchy
Er..ummm anarchy is the absence of authority, eschewing the initiation of force against other peaceful people (aka the non-aggression principle) is just generally accepted moral behavior; they're two completely independent concepts.
Non-aggression doesn't obviate self defense or the defense of others; which is the whole point of having government, i.e. to protect you from aggressive a-holes that want to violate your life, liberty and/or property, unfortunately what we have invariably ended up with is government that routinely initiates force against the life, liberty and property of peaceful people because as Lord Acton said "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" and people somehow getting convinced that government doesn't have to abide by the same standards of morality that individual citizens do.
OK. So during the day while you're at work, I kill your family. I leave you my picture, a notarized admission of my guilt, my phone number, e-mail, address. And I say I'm not cooperating with any criminal or civilian court.
So what cha gonna do about it, Sport, without violating NAP?
LOL, I never claimed to be an anarchist but I do know what anarchism is and why it's an independent concept from the non-aggression principle, nice attempt at straw man construction though.Kevin Kennedy, who is actually an anarchist like you claim to be, said he'd shun me. Oooohhhhhhhh
Exactly, youd ignore NAP
The non-aggression principle states that it is immoral to initiate force against another peaceful person(s), force is not limited to physical violence, it can theft, deception, fraud, etc.., any action which imposes your will upon another peaceful person in violation of their life, liberty or property. ONCE AGAIN it doesn't preclude self-defense (of life, liberty or property) or the defense of others and it doesn't preclude using physical violence in such defense.
Absolute pacifism eschews violence under any circumstance.
See the difference?
… and neither of those concepts is a dependent of or dependent on anarchism.