Austrolibertarian theory gives a substance to the process of refining how law should in the objective sense be operated, and interestingly enough it overlaps almost perfectly with most of the ‘unwritten’ law that guides all types of law, which is the law and equity maxims which are axioms of their specific field, which are of course relateable to principle axioms of praxeology such as the axiom of action from the austrian and the non-aggression principle from the libertarian.

It is my opinion that if the same kind of vigorous reasoning and discussion and debate we see about the laws of economics could be applied to the economics of law we would really start to see some change in the world. The interesting thing, looking at the current state of knowledge in the field of what I guess you could call ‘libertarian legal theory’ seems to suggest that there is a very fundamental, single core basis upon which they arrogate power that we all know instinctively is our own.

The process of abuse of one party by another always starts with an idea implemented by the abuser, which follows to become an expression in the form of words, which then is the first incursion of the property (a person’s rights) which forms the precedent which then allows the following up with the use of force, the combined process would be properly termed ‘coercion’ but the key insight I am trying to get at is that coercion always lacks critical logical grounds somewhere in the pattern and once you find the inversion you can simply point at it and the game is up. Once it comes to fisticuffs it’s all over.