A Brief History of the NAP

The Non-Aggression Principle. Commonly referred to as the NAP it’s the central idea of Libertarianism. “I don’t mess with your stuff; you don’t mess with mine.” It’s the idea that aggression is never an option. Some people believe in the NAP, others do not. Now that I'm finally done with this school semester I have the freedom to write on the subject.

The idea of Non-Aggression has been around for a very long time, but only recently have philosophers and political thinkers narrowed and defined the meaning of the NAP. John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, Herbert Spencer, John Stuart Mill, Albert Jay Nock, Ayn Rand, and Murray Rothbard to name a few.

John Locke is one of the most influential thinkers of the 17th century. No, not the character from the TV show LOST, however; the character was named after him. Known as the “Father of Liberalism,” he wrote about the basics of the NAP, “Being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.” John Locke believed that because everybody was created equal, you had absolutely no right to harm anybody’s person or property.

Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers and a very prominent political thinker of his time. He wrote the Declaration of Independence and the 3rd U.S. President. On the subject of Non-Aggression, he had to say, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual," and, "No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him."

Herbert Spencer was a “radical” individualist who lived in the 19th century, he once wrote that "Every man is free to do that which he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man." Simple, but sweet. Sometimes (but not always) that’s the best way to put things. The NAP really boils down to this, do what you want, as long as it doesn’t affect me or my property.

If you’ve ever taken a philosophy class, you’ve probably read some of John Stuart Mill’s work. He has written about a number of subjects, but the one I’m going to be focusing on is in On Liberty. This statement sets the limits for how far the NAP can go, when is it okay to exert force on another individual? He says, "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”

Albert Jay Nock is one of the founders of the modern day libertarian movement. He’s one of the first people to identify as a libertarian. He was very critical of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and is best known for his book Our Enemy, The State. Of the NAP, he said ” the legendary king Pausole, who prescribed but two laws for his subjects, the first being, Hurt no man, and the second, Then do as you please.” I would very much encourage anyone new to the libertarian movement to read the rest of Our Enemy, The State. It’s very, very, very good.

Ayn Rand was the author of the book Atlas Shrugged. In it, she outlines her branch of philosophy called Objectivism. In her essay Man’s Rights she starts to outline the NAP by saying, “The precondition of a civilized society is the barring of physical force from social relationships—thus establishing the principle that if men wish to deal with one another, they may do so only by means of reason: by discussion, persuasion and voluntary, uncoerced agreement.” She finishes later, in the essay The Nature of Government, by saying, “force may be used only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use.” Again, many of Rand’s writings can be found in the footnotes section of this post, but I’d encourage you to check not only Man’s Rights and The Nature of Government but also some of her other essays.

Last but not least we have Murray Rothbard. Probably the most influential person to contribute to what we see as libertarianism today. If you read any of his writings you will no doubt become an Anarcho-capitalist. There’s a joke that I’ve heard before: What’s the difference between a minarchist and an anarchist? About 2 hours worth of reading. He says, "No one may threaten or commit violence ('aggress') against another man's person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another. In short, no violence may be employed against a nonaggressor. Here is the fundamental rule from which can be deduced the entire corpus of libertarian theory."

To wrap this up, many political philosophers have contributed to the formation of what we know today as the Non-Aggression Principle. As we saw, Murray Rothbard stated that it’s the whole of libertarianism.