The entitlement of Libertarians

1. Libertarianism is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, 

Entitlement theory is based on John Locke's ideas.^[1] Under entitlement theory, people are represented as ends in themselves and equals, as Kant claimed, though different people may own (i.e. be entitled to) different amounts of property. Nozick's ideas create a strong system of private property and a free-market economy. The only just transaction is a voluntary one. Taxation of the rich to support full robust social programs for the poor are unjust because the state is acquiring money by force instead of through a voluntary transaction. However, Nozick's ideas can endorse the creation of a minimal social program for the poor. Every person in the state of nature can achieve a certain level of welfare according to their own abilities. This level of welfare, while not equal, must be maintained via the Lockean Proviso. Given the justice of acquisition condition and the Lockean Proviso, "It is conceivable that in the normal operation of the economy, a private property regime might at some times, for some people, fail to provide access to this level of welfare when left to itself. If so, then justice — as the libertarian understands it — demands that the state act to correct the distribution of welfare generated by the spontaneous play of market forces." ^[2]

Although libertarianism could be advocated as a full theory of moral permissibility, it is almost always advocated as a theory of justice in at least one of two senses.

In one sense, justice is concerned with the moral duties that we owe others. It does not address impersonal duties (duties owed to no one) or duties owed to self.

A central attraction of libertarian political philosophy is that it takes very seriously the historical component of justice. To ask whether justice obtains in the world, libertarians argue, is mainly to ask whether people have been justly treated, principally whether their rights to their persons and possessions have been respected. Libertarian theories of justice thus focus on the processes by which social results come about, and reject theories that look merely at the outcomes or end-state distributions.

The most famous version of this, no doubt, is Robert Nozick's (1974) “entitlement theory”, which holds that distributive justice primarily consists of only three principles: (1) the principle of justice in acquisition, (2) the principle of justice in transfer, and (3) the principle of rectification for violations of (1) and (2).
Perhaps as a result of Nozick's fame, libertarianism is often thought of as “right-wing” doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons.

First, on social—rather than economic—issues, libertarianism tends to be “left-wing”.

It opposes laws that restrict consensual and private sexual relationships between adults (e.g., gay sex, extra-marital sex, and deviant sex), laws that restrict drug use, laws that impose religious views or practices on individuals, and compulsory military service. Second, in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—there is also a version known as “left-libertarianism”. Both endorse full self-ownership, but they differ with respect to the powers agents have to appropriate unowned natural resources (land, air, water, minerals, etc.). Right-libertarianism holds that typically such resources may be appropriated, for example, by the first person who discovers them, mixes her labor with them, or merely claims them—without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them. Left-libertarianism, by contrast, holds that unappropriated natural resources belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner. It can, for example, require those who claim rights over natural resources to make a payment to others for the value of those rights. This can provide the basis for a kind of egalitarian redistribution

Furthermore, the notion of taxation being inherently unjust, and market transactions being inherently just, depends on the notion that they actually are as voluntary or involuntary as they appear: in a nation that permits free emigration of its citizens, taxation is not entirely involuntary, while market transactions for necessary goods and services can hardly be said to be entirely voluntary, and if the wealthy, or organized labor, or those in control of de facto industry standards are able to exert undue influence on such a market, they frequently skew those transactions to favor their own interests.