My first question is, how do I justify the NAP?
I got in an argument with a neo-nazi, I told him that a government has no right to use coercion upon others to advance their own agenda and plan. I explained the NAP, and he simply asked me to justify it, I was stuck there what makes it valid? Most would agree that authoritarianism and genocide is wrong, but he doesn't think so. He justified it through Utilitarianism.
My second question regards to Justice and capitalism.
I study philosophy at school, we are doing a chapter about justice and the good society. One book I'm reading in complementary to the text book is "Philosophy Key Themes by Julian Baggini and Gareth Southwest." They talk about justice. They define justice as "everyone receiving their due." He then goes into arguing that the creation of wealth in capitalism has no correlation to the amount of work one puts in, he uses the classic CEO vs worker example how the CEO apparently does no work while the worker slaves away and gets paid a slice of what the CEO earns. He introduces Marxism and how a society now becomes fair if it runs on Marxist principles.
I quote: "So we end up with Marx's principle that the only fair way to distribute wealth is to give everyone what they need and ask of everyone only what they can do. This is fair, because everyone does what they can so no-one is having an easier time of it than anyone else. Also, everyone gets what they need, no-one suffers just because their needs are greater."
I was hoping that some more experienced and wiser philosophers could help me out on these two questions.
Yep they teach us that Marxism is a just system in philosophy class (this is a private school too.)
