My article was published today as a Mises Daily. Following Paul Rubin, I argue that the antimarket bias is a cultural universal, a genetic leftover from our evolutionary past. Check it out:
Evolutionary Psychology and the Antimarket Bias
Jan 272009
Check out the new Articles page for “Systematic, timeless, and comprehensive expositions of libertarian philosophy.”
My goal is to create a one-stop resource where someone can learn the main tenets of libertarian anarchism. One of the problems with the libertarian movement is that it is lacking an “argument database” where a newbie can find the answer to every one of their questions. Sure there are websites like Libertarian Nation and Mises.org, or books like Human Action and Man, Economy, and State, but the reader still has to do a lot of work putting the pieces of the puzzle together. I want to present a systematic, step-by-step analysis of the premises and conclusions of both libertarian and statist arguments. By doing the heavy lifting, hopefully I can shorten the learning curve and multiply the progress of the libertarian movement (at least concerning education).
There are no comments in the Articles section, so I will make a blog post for each article, where you can comment.
My first three articles are up:
I plan to write future articles on: price controls, the case against monopoly, education, roads, health care, money, courts and police, and more.
Dec 282008
An educational strategy for achieving anarchy I’ve thought up is community conversions: teaching anarchism to specific intellectual or cultural communities, like atheists, gun nuts, 9/11 Truthers, anti-war groups, personal development gurus, spiritual teachers, cannabis activists, etc. The best communities would be ones with a distinct leader, who could directly influence their followers. Web-savvy communities would be preferred, as virtually all of the anarchist community and literature is online.
Essentially, this strategy is just one result of applying the 80/20 principle to conversions. Who would be the most profitable converts? Who could promote anarchism most efficiently? Who would have the strongest influence on the masses, or on the elites?
In terms of actually converting a community, I would follow a two-step approach. First, make the standard case that government is immoral, unnecessary, and doesn’t work. Second, show how anarchism is congruent with that community. Make specific, practical links between anarchist philosophy and the community, and show why they should support anarchism. For example, anti-war groups should oppose the State because it is the institutionalization of war. Keep reading...
Dec 052008
The first obvious strategy for anarchists is education: we need to teach people that government is immoral, unnecessary, and doesn’t work. But how do we achieve this? Do we convert the masses or the intellectuals? Do we emphasize morality or practicality?
Hans Hoppe has provided the answer to such questions with his strategy of “Anti-intellectual Intellectualism”. Following Boétie’s insight that governments derive their power and legitimacy from public opinion, we must recognize that it is the intellectuals who shape this public opinion. Accordingly, Hoppe calls for “anti-intellectual intellectuals” to take up the task of combating the state intellectuals, and ultimately delegitimizing, and hence destroying, the State. The two main branches of this strategy are (1) rooting one’s arguments in morality, and not mere utilitarianism, while (2) circumventing academia and reaching out to the general public. Thus, Hoppe writes, “states, as powerful and invincible as they might seem, ultimately owe their existence to ideas and, since ideas can in principle change instantaneously, states can be brought down and crumble practically overnight.” Keep reading...
There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.
- Henry David Thoreau
The libertarian immigration debate is alive and well.1 Although there is no debate over the immigration policy of a free society, there is considerable controversy over the proper immigration policy in our currently existing statist society. However, this debate has neglected to address the root causes of forced integration and forced exclusion, and its solutions fail accordingly. This article will attempt to resolve the debate by addressing the root causes of forced integration and forced exclusion, and by proposing solutions that address these root causes.
Before we can address the problem of immigration under statism, we must establish several premises. Keep reading...
