You are using the word "coercion" incorrectly. It is possible for Coercion to be used without the Initiation of Force. Consider any Threat designed to gain Compliance: "If you do not get off my lawn I will shoot you." "Rape me and I'll kill you." Both of these are Coercion by Intimidation. But neither of them is an Initiation of Force, or even a Threat of Initiation of Force. They are merely a Threat of RETALIATION, and NAP allows us Retaliation if we choose to enjoy it.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coercion 1. the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance. 2. force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force. --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Curt Howland <curt.howl...@...> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thursday 13 August 2009, Eric Pavao was heard to say: > > Real libertarians ARE anarchists. > > > > Boris Karpa Wrote: > > > Yeah, go ahead, insult all the minarchists on this list. > > > > Why on earth would someone who is not a libertarian be on this > > list? > > Ayn Rand didn't like Libertarians, specifically because she was a > minarchist and the NAP precludes any functional monopoly on coercion. > > Like a little bit pregnant, or somewhat on time, either initiating > force is wrong for everyone, or it isn't. Either coercion is a valid > form of interpersonal interaction, or it is not. > > Curt- > > - -- > The Magistrate, enrobed in taxes, condemns the thief in stolen rags. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iQEVAwUBSoRlIC9Y35yItIgBAQKu9gf/Z7d0JvPdr1OxP7usAqgybEZUTZzbuZ/t > TOoHUKxKg7/XE2pyfrVji8XIwX7nBomAIIYx72GDe1PjlMp2EFjr2c+4A84LwCKx > J6oU9NvnYclP//0mGbn8R6CJUaO5r1Ag2oy6dw6UwPZd7BPvjOT9tH3MsQJLDYWj > PkrCWFhGL6lQj1lvSiJPtGv7nhzXndddshPzQqizpHMR/MKb6OfMD/CaGCDYtV8x > GEYSn/tp2Grd3v7PGRaHsz4T9AURY5KBuw1nVYPEifLKyDstia4L9sGfEFQdXNzU > hcGN/cdqer5eaywwC/068vTM08Nq59ZCqhlsE8suTKqDF3JqKvlPyA== > =cpk5 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
