In 2001, the Mises Institute published Reassessing the Presidency The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom, by John V Denson, which examines the role of the US presidency in warmaking, police powers, and a variety of attacks on private property and human rights. Hint: the effect is bad.
This article is adapted from the foreword to Finance Behind the Veil of Money: An Austrian Theory of Financial Markets by Eduard Braun.
Readers of this blog may remember previous posts about George R.R. Martin’s fantasy epic A Song of Ice and Fire and its TV adaptation, Game of Thrones. Over the past few years, libertarians have enjoyed writing about the series’ political and economic themes, and Carmen Dorobăţ and I have recently collected our writing into a forthcoming book chapter, available for free here.
Here are two very interesting journal articles on Kirzner’s theory of entrepreneurship. Peter Lewin’s characteristically thoughtful and careful treatment characterizes entrepreneurial opportunities as “the potential to create value,” a formulation that rightly emphasizes the uncertainty inherent in entrepreneurial action.
I just received my first copy of The Austrian, which replaces The Free Market as the flagship publication for Mises Institute members. If the first issue is any indication they will live up to their promise of a “bolder and more robust version of what you have known for decades.”
For more than thirty years The Free Market has been the Mises Institute’s flagship monthly publication for our members. Today we introduce The Austrian, a bolder and more robust version of what you’ve known for decades.
President Barack Obama, Phoenix, August 2013
Paul Krugman, CNBC interview, July 2012
Readers of Judge Napolitano’s outstanding book will at once be struck by its unusual title. What is the “suicide pact” referred to there? The phrase occurs in a famous dissenting opinion by Justice Robert Jackson. In Terminiello v. Chicago (1949), the Supreme Court held that the city of Chicago had wrongly restricted the free speech of an incendiary speaker. The claim that doing so was needed to preserve public order did not suffice, the Court maintained.
