Initiation of violence and the aggression principle

Hans Hoppe; Democracy, the God that failed:

There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They–the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centred lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism–will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order.

And why exactly doesn’t this guy have a special page on Antifa websites? The Antifa supposedly protects democracy from its enemies. Yes, Communists have perfect democracy, and Salafists are oppressed victims of racism, but why let Libertarians get off the hook? It can’t be their lack of open Anti-Semitism, as the EDL, the PVV and the like are vilified and harassed. Libertarianism is based on the non-aggression principle. Everything is allowed but the initiation of violence. What about the inverse? Only the initiation of violence is allowed, only aggression. That would be just as consistent. If a Libertarian now visits me and beats the crap out of me, he would defend himself, and thát is not allowed under the aggression principle!!!

As a side note, Libertarians would be just as vulnerable to asymmetric warfare as many others. If a Libertarian gets severy wounded and crippled, he cannot have euthanasia, as that would be National-SOCIALIST, and Libertarians take great pains to lump them with bad, evil Communists. Not even compensation is possible, as his fellow Libertarians can provide him charity. Talking about charity, voluntary charity is based on the idea that humans are basically altruistic, while the laws of the free market presuppose human egoism. This is fundamentally irreconcilable. In practice, people “stupid” enough to provide large amounts of charity, will weaken their position on the free market. Therefore, the amount of charity is calibrated to be just enough to prevent revolutions. As the threat of revolution is not just necessary to push for reformism, but also influences the amount of charity, not even “voluntary” charity is really voluntary. So why bother.

Under Libertarianism, the threat of Communism can never be fully stamped out, and under Communism, the threat of Libertarianism, that is, the resurgence of the free market, can never be fully stamped out, so both ideologies should give up their utopian pretensions. Class tension will always be with humanity.