Talk:Non-aggression principle

message: Thomas Jefferson supported forcible imposition of taxes for various collective purposes. Property taxes by states, and import taxes by the federal government. He also supported:
taxpayer financed public education (A Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge)
restrictions against monopolies (Letter of December 20th, 1787)
imposition of government embargoes (Embargo Act, Non-Intercourse Act, Enforcement Act)
anti-miscegenation laws
taxpayer financed national expansion (Louisiana Purchase)
the use of tax policy to diminish the odious effects of inequality, specifically by taxing very wealthy property owners more "in geometrical progression" than less wealthy property owners (Letter of October 28th, 1785) 
So when the article states "a number of authors created their own formulation of the non-aggression principle," followed by out of context Jefferson quotes that superficially sound similar the NAP articulated at the top of the page, it falsely suggests that Thomas Jefferson would have agreed with that formulation, descended from Ayn Rand's. Yet I've found no evidence Mr. Jefferson ever even read an Ayn Rand novel. 
New here, so won't make any changes right now. But I suggest either that Thomas Jefferson's name be removed from the list of authors who formulated "the" non-aggression principle. Or that the article be clarified to indicate that Thomas Jefferson had a different conception of "aggression" against a person's property than lawful imposition of government taxes for legitimate collective purposes like educating the poor and reducing wealth inequality.
"Silence gives consent," so if I don't hear any opposition to my proposed changes in the next day or so, I'll go ahead and make them myself. If I do hear opposition, I might just go crazy with a baked potato.
Bug1333 (talk) 03:59, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thomas Jefferson's definition is by far the most legitimate of them all. Taxation per se is not incompatible with the NAP. Thomas Jefferson was a great man and a far better president than we've had in any recent decade. AP295 (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Thomas Jefferson on List Misleading 

message: How well regarded is the NAP among mainstream philosophers? Benjamin (talk) 03:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Maintstream is a bit of a weasel word, but if you are talking about popular personalities whose jobs are dependent on funds originating from involuntary transactions, I suspect they do not like the NAP. Also, Wikipedia talk pages are not discussion forums. I Use Dial (talk) 16:02, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No, mainstream is not a weasel word and is used to distinguish mainstream views from fringe ones as defined by Wikipedia:Fringe. Your comment that "if you are talking about popular personalities whose jobs are dependent on funds originating from involuntary transactions" shows a bias in favour of the concept. As far as I know, it is not a mainstream topic and it is really only held by American libertarians or right-libertarians. Other left-libertarians may held to something similar but it is more about the harm principle or the golden rule whereas the NAP is specifically linked to property, which not all types of libertarians, especially non-American libertarians, favour. Davide King (talk) 17:28, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  NAP 

message: This seems like a critique rather than a definition again exposing wikis inability to be just or fair. Gdod25 (talk) 18:03, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: @ I agree. This one is quite the doozy, I'll have more to say about it at some point. AP295 (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non aggressive principal