He didn't mean to, he just didn't consider all the possibilities - despite the fact that I have shown them to him before.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Boris Karpa <microbal...@...> wrote: > > Yeah, go ahead, insult all the minarchists on this list. > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Wraith <wra...@...> wrote: > > > > > > > At 07:49 AM 8/13/2009, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >To you and to me and to most libertarians, sure; but to those > > >libertarians who are Pacifists it is not an option. Note how they > > >snuck onto the LP page a prohibition against any and all USE of > > >Violence, not just its Initiation: > > >"Libertarians oppose... the use of violence to achieve political... > > goals." > > > > > >Fortunately, the very first Plank in the LP Platform is still the > > >Non-Aggression Principle: > > >================================================================= > > >================================================================= > > >1.0 Personal Liberty > > >... > > >No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any > > >other individual, group, or government. > > >================================================================= > > >================================================================= > > > > > >This Principle, known as NAP or cutely ZAP, allows for unlimited > > >retaliation and retribution, but not INITIATION of Force. Many > > >libertarians abjure unlimited retaliation,, but a NAP Libertarian > > >can follow the Non-Aggression Principle and still retaliate as much > > >as he wishes; if the other guy doesn't like it, he shouldn't have STARTED > > it. > > > > The so called "party of Principle" has forgotten what this is all > > about, in its focus on gaining Power > > within the system. If you think about it, any form of coercive > > government would by its nature violate the ZAP. > > Thus real libertarians would be anarchists. > > > > > > >
