Mises Review

Thomas Woods's forbidden questions cover a variety of topics, but a common thread in his answers unifies the book: Throughout American history, the federal government has been the principal enemy of liberty.

Hunter Lewis's excellent book differs from nearly all other books on economics. Most books defend a particular point of view: a work by Duncan Foley, e.g., will be much more favorable to Marxism than one by Ludwig von Mises.

David Gelernter starts with an undoubted fact and uses it to construct a bizarre fantasy. The origins of America have been profoundly religious; in particular, the Puritans affected American thought in pervasive fashion.

Kevin Gutzman gives his readers much more than they had a right to expect. The "Politically Incorrect Guide" series in which his book appears aims at a popular audience: 

John Quigley's book has a valuable main thesis and, I suggest, an even more valuable claim that underlies this thesis. The purpose of his book, Quigley tells us, is to explore "U.S. military actions abroad over the past half-century.

Thomas DiLorenzo calls attention to a vital fact that demolishes the popular view that one of Lincoln's primary motives for opposing secession in 1861 was his distaste for slavery.

Critics of Roosevelt's New Deal often liken it to fascism. Roosevelt's numerous defenders dismiss this charge as reactionary propaganda; but as Wolfgang Schivelbusch makes clear, it is perfectly true.

Few opponents of the free market today support the replacement of capitalism by socialism. Even anti-capitalists have learned something from the collapse of the Soviet bloc.

Critics of the Iraq war have sometimes claimed that neoconservatives who pressed for the war, and welcomed its onset, were in part inspired by the teaching of the political philosopher Leo Strauss. 

Ronald Hamowy combines extraordinary critical powers with painstaking historical research. His skills are much in evidence in this collection of his essays, but I have an additional reason to call this book to my readers' attention.

This remarkable book is a sustained attempt to solve what its authors term "liberalism's problem." In a liberal society, people are free to live as they wish, so long as they do not violate the rights of others.

Jeff McMahan's subtle article is an outstanding account of the morality of preventive war, and not incidentally a sharp condemnation of the Iraq war.

Noah Feldman is without doubt a person of great intelligence. Still in his thirties, he is already a professor at New York University Law School, and he moves with ease throughout the literature of economics,

The title of James Otteson's book is, I am sure unintentionally, misleading. Readers might expect a dry and abstract philosophical treatment of ethics. In fact, what Otteson offers is a full-scale defense of classical liberalism

Hans Hoppe is a thinker of striking originality, and this excellent collection of his essays is filled with arguments: it is, as my great teacher Walter Starkie used to say, "packed with matter."

Marc Trachtenberg's guidebook is intended as a "how-to" book for students of diplomatic history and political science. But much of it is of great value to anyone interested in a revisionist brand of history.

John Mueller asks a question that, if answered reasonably, undermines the basis of current American foreign policy. We are constantly assured that we face a threat from terrorists.

"Lochner-era jurisprudence" elicits a mindless sneer from  most contemporary legal theorists. In Lochner v. New York (1905), the Supreme Court held unconstitutional a New York state law that limited bakers to a ten-hour workday,

David Schmidtz means the title of his outstanding book literally. He does not present a tightly integrated theory of justice; rather his "contextual functionalism . . . 

Martha Nussbaum’s Frontiers of Justice is one of the oddest books I have ever reviewed. Nussbaum is a well-known philosopher, and she raises some issues that are well worth our consideration;