It is an unattainable utopia. So is the pro-freedom creed, whether one calls it the Non-Aggression Principle or Zero Aggression Principle, (snip) Why? Because there are elements of nature—which includes human life—that have a stubborn way of not playing along with the conceptual game.

I must disagree. I attain the zero aggression principle each and every day. I just have to practice it. The fact that others do not doesn't stop me from living that way. All I can do is prepare to defend myself the best I can from that aggression. NO guarantees of any kind exist.

I don't need the consent of every other (or any other) being on the planet to own my life and use it in the way that suits me, the best I can. Self ownership is foundational, whether you call that a "right" or anything else. And calling that a "right" certainly can't be used to make the violation of anyone else's self ownership somehow legitimate.

I don't think that's what you mean by what you're saying here, but that's the first impression I got.

Guess I don't understand the question... :(