The myth of the transition period accomplishes at least two things. Thus, libertarians might have to advocate and participate in the violation of rights in order to humanely achieve a society where no compromise of rights is tolerated. The second accomplishment is a sleight of hand. By positing the transition period, gradualism is suddenly shifted into becoming a strategic rather than a moral question. Gradualism is simply a matter of how we get from here to there.
Abolitionists answer that gradualism is a moral issue.
It concerns a question of whether libertarians will sanction the violation of rights as a strategy. They argue that, as a libertarian, it is not within your range of discretion to deliberately violate the rights of any person in any case. It is forbidden, without qualification, by the fundamental principle of the philosophy. You may decide to aggress anyway, but you cannot aggress in the name of libertarian theory. Logic forbids you that option.