Could the Non-Aggression Principle Stop the Sixth Great
Extinction?  Column by Glen Allport.  Exclusive to STR  [A five-
part series]  Part 1: Civil Society Requires Non-Aggression (and
one thing more) Unless you're a hard-core libertarian, you
probably haven't heard much about the non-aggression principle,
or NAP. That's a shame, because the NAP is what would have saved
the world from the Fukushima nuclear disaster, from the BP Gulf
of Mexico spill (and worse, the toxic response that followed),
from the depleted-uranium-spewing wars and corrupt occupations
the United States has been bankrupting itself with in the Middle
East, and from other major disasters and systemic risks as well
– had it only been widely understood and enforced.  How could
the non-aggression principle have prevented such horrors? In
many ways, but perhaps the most underappreciated is this: By
making it impossible to raise the necessary funding. Only
aggression can pull enough money from people to fund the major
evils we see in the world,