Philosophy and Methodology

People frequently refer to government policies as paternalistic—either to justify or criticize them. But there is no analogy between a family and government.

If the pundits and politicians ever succeed in imposing the draft again on American citizens, for purposes of bolstering the military empire or doing social work, writes Jeffrey Tucker, they will have to look for support outside the libertarian tradition. Mises is not enlisted in this cause.

Noam Chomsky is an outstanding critic. But figuring out what he is for in the realm of economics is not easy. He doesn't like what we have now. He disfavors Stalinism and fascism. He despises the libertarian alternative to the present regime. That leaves him with a hazy and unworkable syndicalism.

The fate of families and children in Sweden shows the truth of Ludwig von Mises's observation that "no compromise" is possible between capitalism and socialism, writes Allan Carlson. He shows how the welfare state's growth can be viewed as the transfer of the "dependency" function from families to state employees. The process began in 19th-century Sweden.

Those who claim that government is the source of social order say that in its absence there would be violence, chaos, and a low standard of living. But medieval Iceland illustrates an actual and well-documented historical example of how a stateless legal order can work and it provides insights as to how we might create a more just and efficient society today.

Following Lott's public flogging, many people were astonished by the Senator's willingness to jettison all political principle for the sake of saving his status as Majority Leader. Why would a conservative Republican suddenly find himself embracing the full panoply of the left-wing racial agenda and criticize himself so mercilessly?

Yes, people have been defrauded, and, yes, justice needs to be served. However, by pursuing people by using the vague and unjust RICO and "insider trading" laws, the politicians appeal not to our need for justice, but to the baser emotions of envy, resentment of wealthy people, and a gut-level desire to commit mayhem.

John Rawls's political theory remains a formidable competitor with that proposed by classical liberals and libertarians, writes Carmen Pavel. Because he has shaped the main conversation, true liberals need to take on his powerful legacy if only to better understand and strengthen the positions they are defending.

Hadley Arkes gives us too much of a good thing. He  argues, with great effectiveness, that legal thinkers today ignore the natural law basis that grounds human rights.

Hilary Putnam ranks as one of the outstanding American philosophers of the twentieth century, but never before now has he shown any interest in economics.