[T]he central objective of the anarcho capitalist research program has been how to eliminate the monopoly bureaucracy and its institutionalize parasitism on the population, yet still produce a prosperous social order.
In libertarian circles we often refer to this simply as “the problem of social order.”
THE CENTRAL THEORY
Like marxism, libertarian philosophy is pretty rigorously thought out. By the time we get to Hoppe, it’s a well articulated theory of politics. So the logical errors in libertarianism tend to be complex, not trivial.
Most criticisms of libertarianism are naive or irrelevant because libertarian claims are technical, articulated in a formal and technical language, and they are not intuitive or normative claims at all. So without knowledge of the libertarian terminology and it’s arguments, is pretty hard to make a legitimate criticism – and that’s why so many criticisms are not legitimate.
“NAP: the non-aggression principle. That one will not aggress against the life and property of others.”
“Property: (n) Your life, your mind, your body, things you have obtained in trade, and things you have converted to first-use (homesteading).”
“Violence: (n) Physical aggression against property.”
“Aggression: (n) hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront.”
So it’s okay to use violence against aggression. ie: any time you and your property are threatened. And to obtain restitution for your lost property.
So, no, the NAP is not a prohibition on violence. It’s a prohibition on the violation of property in which you, yourself, are also your property (that which you must have monopoly of control). Or more accurately, private property functions as an extension of your body and life. (true) and as such violations against your ‘things’ are violations against your body.
WHY PROPERTY IS SO IMPORTANT
The general theory upon which anarcho capitalism rests, is that a rigid definition of property, and the common law, are sufficient for the formation of a polity. And that monopoly government and its systematic predation due to lack of competition is not necessary. Because the common law is sufficient ‘government’ for an anarchic polity. (This is the legal framework of a migratory herding people, or disasporic traders.)
This differs from a high trust agrarian society where the people must organize to prevent others from displacing them from the land. In a landed society, it is necessary for organizations to have leaders, to prevent free riding by those not willing to fight for that land.
PROSPERITY AS ‘THE COMMON GOOD”
But since trust is an index of productivity, because lack of trust acts as a friction on seizure of opportunity – and particularly on the concentration of capital by future-oriented people – (a form of transaction cost) then high trust is the the greatest social asset a polity can possess in the production of wealth.
Property will evolve from trust. Trust evolves from the prevention of free riding. The prevention of free riding evolves from the need to cooperate.
THE PROBLEM WITH NAP AND PRIVATE PROPERTY: “TRUST”
Private property and a weak state only evolve in high trust societies. But high trust societies are not dependent upon the NAP. They are dependent upon the suppression of free riding. The absolute nuclear family for example, even prohibits free riding by your children.
The NAP doesn’t prohibit unethical and immoral actions, so you can’t initiate violence against, say, a blackmailer, or scam artist, or other person who engages in conspiracy. Its a license for predation. Given the high cost of violence and the low cost of unethical and immoral behavior, it’s non-logical to essentially prohibit violence but not prohibit every kind of cheating possible.
The NAP operates on the assumption that a high trust society already exists, but actually fosters the destruction of the high trust society.
Because high trust societies do not limit ‘property’ wither private or common to the physical.
High trust societies prevent free riding, of which private property crime is merely one component.
That is why it’s non-rational.