Manny Pacquiao, Boxing, Libertarianism, and the Non Aggression Principle

Mayweather vs. Pacquiao

Last week I wrote an article tying in the upcoming May 2 fight between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao and the economy. It got 2,000 likes, thank God. I’m not into boxing beyond being a Rocky fan, though admittedly I’m not as much a Rocky fan as my brother is.

$300M is expected to flow through this fight from all sides. It will be by far the biggest boxing event in world history. Floyd Mayweather is undefeated, though a bit cocky. Manny Pacquiao has 5 defeats, he’s a Filipino, a deeply religious guy, and seems more humble. Arguably Pacquiao is the better boxer despite 5 defeats, but we’ll see on May 2. I don’t know who will win, but I’m rooting for Pacquiao.

Since writing that article I became more interested in these two boxers and boxing in general, looking into styles and strategy and what it takes to win a fight. Then I came across a snippet on YouTube of Pacquiao being the subject of a 60 Minutes episode in 2010.

Boxing is fascinating. On its own it’s certainly a violation of the non-aggression principle, but because it is mutually agreed upon beforehand, there is no problem with it. If two guys agree to fight each other under certain circumstances, then the whole thing is voluntary and totally legitimate.

Dr. Walter Block uses the example of “Murder Park” where murder is allowed, which is also fine provided that Murder Park is private property and clearly demarcated with visible and obvious warning to anyone who enters. Breaking into someone else’s property at night with a weapon is also grounds for being killed as well, so while Murder Park sounds sick, it really is the same principle as breaking and entering.

Anyway, watching this 60 Minutes interview I hit something amazing at the very beginning. That is, Pacquiao is so popular in the Philippines that whenever he fights, the ongoing war between the Filipino Army and the Rebels stops because both sides are busy watching Pacquiao fight. 

That’s incredible. It shows the absolute power of the market, the incredible ability of it to stop even vicious wars. When two men are paid to fight for the enjoyment of others, it can stop real, bloody, murderous wars and save lives.

Boxing saves lives. Voluntary fighting saves lives. It’s a fact. There should be more boxing in the world so there can be less wars.

So Mayweather, Pacquiao, please, put on a good show and hopefully you can save thousands of lives on May 2 while wars literally stop to watch you two punch each other. You two deserve all $300M flowing through your bout just for that.


One thought on “Manny Pacquiao, Boxing, Libertarianism, and the Non Aggression Principle

  1. Hah!
    Interesting paradox. Yes, love is a stranger…
    I hope you and your friends continue to have a lovely Passover, Rafi.
    When “universal” means “common name” that is a bad paradox, because there’s nothing in names if they cease to words, unlike the boxing thing. As long as it’s consensual.
    The heart is the body’s strongest muscle. Did the body agree the heart would be punching so hard? Imagine for a moment if it did.

Comment here.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s