Non-Aggression Principle

Libertarians are somewhat in disagreement as to what is the founding principle of the libertarian movement.  In this case the Non-aggression Principle (NAP) is one idea where aggression should not exist at all as an absolute for libertarianism to work.  But Austin Peterson (a person running for President of the United States on Facebook) and an article by Matt Zwolinski "Six Reasons Libertarians should Reject the Non-aggression Principle" says no to the NAP.  Let us discuss.

What is the NAP and why it does not work:  Basically, the NAP advocates doing no harm.  You cannot hit a person or do anything that resembles harm.  However this idea does not work based on what the NAP means by harm.  For instance, with pollution, there is none allowed.  So you cannot have factories or power plants that emit smoke.  No dust due to construction.  Basically, anything that is construed as pollution is not allowed, and thus things that potentially could pollute are also not allowed.  Then there is potential harm.  Under the NAP, potential harm is not allowed.  So nothing that risks another person's wellbeing.  As such, no fake threats like "I'll punch you" or "I'll kick your butt" or pointing a knife at someone on accident while talking is a big no no. Fraud is allowed under the NAP as it is not an aggressive act.  So someone can trick you out of your money and get away with it.  Then there is trespassing.  If you trespass onto someone else's property, then the owner can beat you up as trespassing is considered an aggressive act.  So here the NAP is hypocritical as it supports property rights as opposed to non-violence.   And finally we have children.  Willful neglect is allowed under the NAP.  Basically, as long as you do not hinder your own child from obtaining their own food, then allowing them to starve to death is ok.  On top of that, if someone gives your child food while coming onto your property, you can beat the person for feeding your child.  These are the flaws of the NAP and why I do not believe in the NAP as the foundation for my libertarianism.

Final Thought:  I write this because there is a fundamental disagreement about libertarianism that has caused misconceptions.  My libertarian principles is basically, do not tread on the rights of others, respect people's right to property and do not perform any of the obviously wrongful acts.  With these basics you get in my opinion a purer libertarianism without controversy.  Libertarianism is all about respecting others and their personal rights.  Sure there are some disagreements on things like welfare, how much government and abortion, but who doesn't have those kinds of issues within their political and religious ideologies.  Remember it is about personal responsibility and freedom together, not just not doing harm or even being an ideology.