Libertarian philosophy hinges on the non-aggression principle (NAP). It is what makes many libertarians fairly passive when it comes to aggression but it should not be stated that libertarian are pacifists. The NAP has a tipping point which is the point in which the point when someone becomes aggressive in attacking the rights of someone else. So question comes: Why does the Libertarian Party and libertarians in general not advocate the overthrow of the current government? In large part this is because there is also another principle involved – response in kind.
This is why it should be said that there is not one tipping point for libertarians in general but many tipping points. For instance if someone steals from a libertarian, he does not shoot the thief dead. This would not be ‘response in kind’ if you want to get technical. There is the tipping point theft and then there is the tipping point of life and limb. The guy who steals from me gets my response for theft but the guy who has a gun and is sneaking through my window has another tipping point and gets a deadly force response. Libertarianism in its purest form requires a lot of judgment to determine which tipping point has been crossed and when.
When looking at the political system as a whole then the government for the most part has not used violence directly in enforcing its rules, there has been no Boston Massacre in recent days in that sense. Some might argue differently but to me still only see the beginnings of a police state and not the middle motions of one. The real battle is being waged in the halls of politics and the passing of laws. This is the battleground where the government is being aggressive and it has passed the tipping point where libertarians should be getting aggressive politically. This is where the second part of the non-aggression principle should have kicked in a long time ago.
I have this and only this against the Libertarian Party: you claim to be about the defending of freedoms, are you ready to do what it takes politically to defend those freedoms or is it just a talking point when it should be a tipping point that was passed long ago? My concern is that in order to defeat the two gigantic parties that face you that you are not ready to sling the stones needed to bring them down. This requires aggression of a political nature that is far more than just winning elections.
Has the tipping point been crossed? Or are we too content to just get along when we see our freedoms and the freedoms of others taken away?