An abstract state is built on patriotism. And when patriotism becomes "the highest of all virtues and the source of all the remaining ones,” states can get away with almost anything.
There are many reasons why activists and intellectuals oppose inequality. Envy is one of them.
A philosopher has recently argued for the abolition of the Second Amendment, but he seemingly does this using the premises of the nonaggression principle.
Left-leaning economists and journalists apparently still harbor nostalgia for the central planning and protectionism of the "good ol' days" of the Second World War.
"It is not true that the masses are always right … ‘Belief in the common man’ is no better founded than was belief in the supernatural gifts of kings, priests, and noblemen.”
Google says it can only tolerate "accurate" information and has banned LewRockwell.com from its advertising program. This position only makes sense if one makes some faulty assumptions about how information is spread.
"Praxeology … does not deal in vague terms with human action in general, but with concrete action which a definite man has performed at a definite date and at a definite place."
In real life, the labor market includes government employers. So the fundamental question is whether or not a laborer can morally seek out the highest wage offered by all employers.
Human action does not operate under fixed causal laws, and according to philosopher Uskala Mäki, “The absence of [these laws] has been forcefully underlined by several Austrian economists.”
Isn’t a principle of nonaggression against others another way of stating the self-ownership principle? "Not necessarily," says the insightful philosopher Chandran Kukathas.
