Which I mean, my wife believes that the government using the threat of violence to collect taxes is immoral, unethical, and that all transactions between all individuals should be voluntary and nonviolent. Which in terms of popular discourse, is very "extreme". She was thinking about running for local public office an a platform of "the government will not take away your propery for failure to pay taxes" which a surprising number of local people on Facebook supported. She's been going to Meetups and having people say "oh yeah I saw your meme, the government sucks, keep it up!" She bugs local politicans on Facebook, their ads keep popping up in her feed, so she'll ask them things like "do you think it's moral to seize someone's property when they can't pay their taxes?" which of course gets bullshit nonanswers from politicians. Nobody wants to say "I think it's moral to seize someone's house because they're behind on taxes".
An authoritarian government wouldn't like someone like my wife, and they certainly wouldn't want her getting likes on Facebook. After all, what if she DOES run for office? What if she wins? What if other people like her win?
My understanding is that HN has no shortage of libertarians. Maybe one of them could tell us if there’s an alternate way to enforce contracts.
Or does she rely on the coercive power of the State? The State that maintains a monopoly on violence.
I think threatening the tenant with a gun to get the money then kick him out of the flat is the way it should go for most libertarians. You'd appreciate the irony of this not being an aggression.
(there's a reason why libertarianism is almost only found in the US: it lays on the Far West myth a lot)