Philosophy and Methodology

In this previously unpublished piece, Murray Rothbard argues that the the silliest of demagogues are a great servant of reason, even when mostly in the wrong.

It was the achievement of Ludwig von Mises to recreate in his time the radical program of early liberalism, i.e., the realizing of individual freedom, peace, and prosperity through limitations on state power, individual rights, and an economy based on private property. A state pursuing vengeance, he believed, threatens liberty itself.

For those who have seen A Beautiful Mind, be assured that the strategizing--in which Russell Crowe instructs his friends that the only way to success is for them all to ignore the pretty girl and focus instead on her plainer friends--does not constitute a true Nash equilibrium. Even if all the boys would be better off if they all ignored the pretty blonde, there would still be an incentive for each one to deviate from the pact and approach her.

One major reason people are not loyal to the principle of the right to private property is that they have a misconception of its main function. Many think only the wealthy benefit from it. And even if they do not have anything against being rich, they do have something against unfair legal advantages for those who are.

It may seem paradoxical that we work so hard all year so we can sleep on the beach for a week, but there is a method to our madness. As we work harder, leisure time for others increases in both quality and quantity, and we can assume that everyone else is returning the favor. Everyone else, that is, except the government.

In the real world, human action can only manifest itself through material objects; man must utilize the resources that nature gives in order to employ means. If man desires to live, he must obtain food, shelter, and other physical necessities. On the most fundamental level, to exist in this universe, man must occupy space.

Can there be a right to freedom of speech without that right being firmly based on property rights?

The Lord of the Rings is the epic journey to destroy the One Ring, which symbolizes power. More precisely, the book aligns itself against power--not "economic power" or "social power," but specifically political power. This is also the central theme of the classical liberal political tradition.

Robert Nozick writes, "The fundamental question of political philosophy, one that precedes questions about how the state should be organized, is whether there should be any state at all. Why not have anarchy?" Why not, indeed? James Ostrowski reflects on the recent death of philosopher Robert Nozick.

Why shouldn't the worker who is willing to render the best services for the least pay be the one who gets the job?  Instinctively, most of us recoil in disgust at the suggestion that wages should reflect nothing more than the cold calculus of supply and demand.  Yet few of us realize just how essential this "cold calculus" is for the long-run welfare of laborers themselves.