The only way to “remove the initiation of force” would be if there were no more bad people left in the world.
Until then, the idea is moot, unless you think the weak and helpless, the Constitution, and the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and private property should not be defended.
As long as evil exists, good men will have to stand up and act like real men. And sometimes, that means the use of violence in defense of all you hold dear.
And peace through strength is still the best deterrence to evil there is.
So, when will there actually be either a revolution or a civil war throughout the U.S. that seriously and successfully results in a political comeback by “non-leftists”, if ever?
“The only way to “remove the initiation of force” would be if there were no more bad people left in the world.
...
As long as evil exists, good men will have to stand up and act like real men. And sometimes, that means the use of violence in defense of all you hold dear.”
Apparently you do not understand the difference between the “initiation” of force and “the use of force for defense.” There is no moral justification for the initiation of force, and there is no moral justification for any limitation of the use of force in defense against anyone who does initiate it, including a government. There is no moral justification for a government initiating the use of force—to collect taxes, or to force people not to produce or consume products, or prevent people from living as they choose so long as they do not initiate force, for example.
Hank