What I Think I Know
  • About
  • Books
    • Great Books
  • Music
  • Quotes
  • Members
  • Search Icon

What I Think I Know

“Just trying to do the hardest thing of all – to understand”

The fundamental axiom of libertarian theory is that no one may threaten or commit violence (“aggress”) against another man’s person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another.

The fundamental axiom of libertarian theory is that no one may threaten or commit violence (“aggress”) against another man’s person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another.

July 7, 2017 Nate

— Murray N. Rothbard from ‘War, Peace, and the State.‘

Let us set aside the more complex problem of the State for awhile and consider simply relations between “private” individuals. Jones finds that he or his property is being invaded, aggressed against, by Smith. It is legitimate for Jones, as we have seen, to repel this invasion by defensive violence of his own. But now we come to a more knotty question: is it within the right of Jones to commit violence against innocent third parties as a corollary to his legitimate defense against Smith? To the libertarian, the answer must be clearly, no. Remember that the rule prohibiting violence against the persons or property of innocent men is absolute: it holds regardless of the subjective motives for the aggression. It is wrong and criminal to violate the property or person of another, even if one is a Robin Hood, or starving, or is doing it to save one’s relatives, or is defending oneself against a third man’s attack. We may understand and sympathize with the motives in many of these cases and extreme situations. We may later mitigate the guilt if the criminal comes to trial for punishment, but we cannot evade the judgment that this aggression is still a criminal act, and one which the victim has every right to repel, by violence if necessary. In short, A aggresses against B because C is threatening, or aggressing against, A. We may understand C’s “higher” culpability in this whole procedure; but we must still label this aggression as a criminal act which B has the right to repel by violence.

To be more concrete, if Jones finds that his property is being stolen by Smith, he has the right to repel him and try to catch him; but he has no right to repel him by bombing a building and murdering innocent people or to catch him by spraying machine gun fire into an innocent crowd. If he does this, he is as much (or more of) a criminal aggressor as Smith is.”


Philosophy, Quotes
War

Post navigation

NEXT
If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, he’ll forever think he’s unable
PREVIOUS
Knowledge is your greatest asset. It can’t be stolen or confiscated. It sets your intellect free. And when your mind is free, the rest of it is just a bunch of beautiful fireworks.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe to our mailing list

Categories

  • Biology (12)
  • Books (5)
  • Favorites (209)
  • Freedom (10)
  • Funny (70)
  • Health (1)
  • History (9)
  • Investing (86)
  • Knowledge (101)
  • Marketing (4)
  • Music (83)
  • Philosophy (154)
  • Politics (19)
  • Psychology (155)
  • Quotes (1,267)
  • Relationships (13)
  • Religion (9)
  • Technology (19)

Tags

Altruism A Philosophy of Life Awareness Biology Brain & Mind Caring Too Much About What Others Think Charlie Munger Death Democracy Desire Economics Emotions Epictetus Fear Funny History Human Behavior Human Folly Immigration Individuality Investing Irrationality Knowledge Language Life Love Machine Learning Marcus Aurelius Marriage Money Pain & Suffering Perspective Politics Prince Seneca Social Influence Standard of Living Stoics Success Thinking Time Truth Uncertainty War Work

Archives

© 2021   Copyright. All Rights Reserved.