anonymous question

Deception is merely a violation of expectations. A person is expected to act in one way, but the deceiver acts in another.
Can deception cause harm? Of course, yes. A subject plans their actions based on premises that, as a result of deception, are not justified, and this increases their costs.

Is deception violence? Of course not. One can betray trust (for example, violate the Budapest Memorandum) and apply violence when peaceful behavior is expected from you, but still, deception is one thing, and violence is another.

Is deception aggression? Again, no. Deception can be a justification for aggression (Right Sector sent a train of Nazis to Crimea), but again, deception is separate, aggression is separate.

Where do the assumptions come from that deception in itself can be a violation of the NAP, that is, aggressive violence? Of course, from the concept of positive rights. There is a right to education, to social security, to respect, to the truth… Thus, the right to the truth is violated, and now my violence toward the deceiver will be self-defense. It should be noted that such an approach is most common not even among SJWs, but rather among classic gopniks. (Got anything? What if I find some?) The state is a special case of a gopnik, and also seeks to punish for deception (for example, for forging tax documents).

Will there be more deception under libertarianism than there is now? It cannot be said for certain, but I assume that there will be less, because a libertarian society does not hinder the action of feedback loops. But that is a separate large topic.