Violence contradicts itself. What follows from this in reality? We cancel coercion through coercion.

A first coercion is wrong. A second coercion that cancels the first is right. More than that: It is necessary.

What is a first coercion?

Not only an assault. Whoever does not fulfill a contract also uses violence. He keeps from me what is mine. The same goes for whoever does not fulfill his duties toward family or state. Against this, one may use coercion.

And when parents coerce a child?

That looks like a first coercion. After all, the child has done nothing bad. But the crude, merely natural will is itself already a kind of violence. It turns against the freedom that lies in the child as a seed. Education protects this freedom against wildness.

The right of heroes:

Where there is no state at all yet, only violence rules. Then certain individuals have a special right. We call them heroes. They founded states. They brought in marriage and farming. No one had allowed them to do this. Yet they acted with the right of the Idea against crude nature. Kindness alone does not get you far against such violence.

In the state, there are no more heroes. There, the right that all recognize holds good.

Summary: The first coercion is wrong. The second cancels it and is right. Education and the right of heroes also turn against a first violence: crude nature.