In “Government by Judiciary: The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment” Raoul Berger argues that the Fourteenth Amendment is treated by activist judges as a platform for “social and political revolution.” In theory, the role of the courts is to interpret the Constitution not to amend it. Nevertheless, by treating the Fourteenth Amendment as a “vague and elastic” tool designed to forge a brave world of racial equality, progressive judges have conferred revolutionary powers on themselves.

“Frank’s death was a real personal blow to me,” Murray Rothbard confessed in 1973. Frank Meyer and Rothbard debated at the Harvard University Institute of Politics in 1971. Less than a year later, Meyer was dead at 62. 

According to much popular mainstream economic thinking, the policy of so-called “price stability” does not always mean that the central bank must fight inflation. It is also the role of the central bank to prevent large declines in the inflation rate or an outright decline in general “price level.” Why is that so?

On September 29, 1881, Ludwig von Mises was born in Lemberg, then part of the Austro‑Hungarian Empire. He would become one of the twentieth century’s most important economists and the acknowledged leader of the Austrian School.

English translation of Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Kritik der kausalwissenschaftlichen Sozialforschung (Opladen 1983). Translated by Andreas Tank.

Anarcho-capitalism is a libertarian project of a stateless order in which private companies would be responsible for providing security, law, and dispute resolution. In previous articles, I briefly described the most important doubts about the feasibility of such an order and analyzed the most widespread concern, which is that agencies will not cooperate with each other.

Social justice warriors often suppose that since they are advancing “justice” they are entitled to do whatever they deem necessary to defend their cause. Any atrocity they commit should be viewed sympathetically because, after all, they are on the side of the angels. In the public discourse on crime and punishment, they argue that if the criminal is a victim of “systemic racism” this means he should always be understood primarily as a victim of injustice who deserves compassion.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk is a tragedy on several levels. It robs his family and friends of the time they would otherwise have had with Charlie, especially his young children and wife. It is a tragedy to Charlie—his life was cut prematurely short. And it is a tragic signal that the wrong words spoken, even in a liberal democracy, can get you killed. As an academic and public intellectual, I find that chilling.