I am often asked “ What is an individualist?”.  The very short answer is “An individual who believes in liberty”.  But that answers almost nothing, means almost nothing, to most people. 

Here is a concise definition of what it means to me to be an individualist.  

Individualists agree to abide by the HarmConsent Rule (HCR), which states that everyone should

Render no harm without consent,
except in self-defense 

The HarmConsent rule applies to ALL humans. It does not have exceptions for wealth, age, gender, position. The rule applies equally to a penniless female child, and to a wealthy and powerful man.

“Harm” is any act which uses force to materially damage the target individual. Not all harms are negative, eg surgery.

“Consent” is given when an individual authorises an action affecting themselves. Consent should be informed, explicit, freely given, preferably before witnesses, without fraud or falsehood.

“Harmed” is any act which harms you. 

"Act" is a real-world, observable, physical event, as opposed to a non-physical event such as the use of words or gestures. “Preventing an action” is synonymous with “taking an action” .For example, striking someone, taking their property, confining them, are examples of real-world events.  Being rude, shouting, threatening, are not actions with real, physical consequences.

Notes

1. To live freely and in peace, individuals who gather together by mutual consent should accept certain rules which all agree to respect.

2. This is a rule, a way of thinking,  a recommendation for a better way of life. It does not specify an enforcement mechanism.  It does not guarantee compliance. It simply states  how people who describe themselves as individualists should behave. 

3. I believe that the HarmConsent rule listed above covers the vast majority of cases of human interaction. It extends the non-aggression principle (NAP) to include cases where a person consents to acts of aggression, such as in contact sports like boxing  or satisfying unusual preferences.

4. What gives me the right to speak on behalf of libertarians, or individualists, or any one else? As an individualist, I speak only on my own behalf. However, I do believe that what I have to say may be of interest and value to others. Otherwise, what is the point of communication?

Issues

1. Assault

The initiation of all physical acts of assault are forbidden except where explicitly consented to, or when acting in self-defense.  This includes assault by individuals, groups and governments. 

2. Defense.

Individuals may defend themselves vigorously against assault by others, matching violence with violence, like for like.

3. Personal choices

This proposition has nothing to say about an individual's personal choices, such as religion,  sexuality,  or lifestyle. 

4. Conflict

Conflicts always arise.  This proposition implies that any conflict resolution mechanism must also be consented to by all  the individuals involved.  Conflicts are normally resolved through arbitration between affected parties within a community. When conflict is resolved through external agencies such as police and courts, individual control and choices tend to be ignored.

5. Harm to others

Many people believe that some individual behaviours must be restricted for the overall good of the community,  forcibly if necessary.  This belief is used to justify a vast range of coercive measures against individuals,  from taxation to immunization.  The HCR requires that proof of physical harm to other innocent persons(s) must be conclusively proven,  and may then become the subject of a conflict resolution procedure.

6. Competition
   Individuals and organisations can take competitive actions which negatively affect others. For example, an organisation may injure its competitors by lowering its price for goods, or by refusing to supply a competitor, or by poaching staff, or through aggressive advertising. None of these actions require the consent of the harmed party.
   These actions do not use force or fraud and do not conflict with the HCR. They are  a normal part of the risks of doing business.

7. Informed consent
   Denial of consent is normally straight forward and uncontested. No means no.
   However, giving consent is much more complicated. The terms of the consent may need to be spelled out, limits made clear, exceptions described. Issues such as age of consent arise. How clear are the consequences, have these been fully understood by all parties, can consent be revoked?
   When consent is given, an explicit (preferably) or implicit contract is in force. Disputes arising from a consent contract will be arbitrated by the parties to the contract within the community of their peers. Thus, local community standards will apply to an issue such as the age of consent, or abortion.

8. Penalties

In the absence of an enforcement mechanism, what penalties can be imposed on individuals committing consent violations? An individual may retaliate against the violator in his personal capacity, or with the assistance of family and friends. He may retain the services of a defence agency. He may demand restitution. He may refuse further association with the consent violator. He may lobby for them to be shunned, or evicted from the community.

9. Morality

Morality is an individual issue. One person cannot impose their morality upon another, in terms of the HCR.

Examples

1. All forms of speech, writing and expression are allowed, where no physical action occurs.
   A comedian may make outrageous statements for humorous effect, without violating the HCR. Persons offended by this speech should avoid hearing it.
   Likewise, a demagogue may exercise freedom of speech to call for violence, but only those actually committing violence are guilty of a crime.

2. All forms of personal behaviour, and behaviour between consenting adults, is allowed. 

3. An individual can do anything with his or her own body that they choose.

4. No one is entitled to the property or services of another, without their consent.

5. No one may take the life of another without their consent.

6. You do not have the right to forcibly prevent what you merely see or hear.

7. If you do not consent, you have no obligation to assist anyone else.

8. Property may be exchanged through the consent of all parties.