--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of > the literature which upholds NAP where force is ever > justified by anything save defense. > But perhaps my memory fails with age. Pointer? >
Beats me. I'm not regurgitating stuff I read anywhere. But surely someone other than I has been able to REASON and figure that out too. If the definition of libertarian were that Violence is justified ONLY IN DEFENSE, then I would not want to be a libertarian. But I do not think that is the accepted definition of ALL libertarians. Certainly anyone who uses Force ONLY IN DEFENSE is a NAP-libertarian too. I just don't think that they are the only ones. "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to **INITIATE** force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its **INITIATION**. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." - L. Neil Smith
