Perhaps the most fundamental question in political philosophy is whether any state is justified. The most impressive modern attempt to justify the state is in part 1 of Robert Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Nozick argues that a minimal state, and only a minimal state, is compatible with our having natural rights. Here, I clarify the logic of Nozick’s strategy and show that his attempt to justify the state fails at every step. A central issue is that Nozick implicitly adopts a restricted, rather than absolute or even bounded absolute, conception of natural rights.

The problem with the “special relationship” between America and Israel is bigger than one man.

Fears mount that AI will replace humans in all kinds of work. As with any technological revolution, people in general think the technology will cause job losses rather than the other way around. Many economists, who have studied the role and impact of technological revolutions, disagree.

In an era of clueless voters and profoundly dishonest candidates, cynicism is one of the last best checks on political power run amok. Regardless of the final vote count in Tuesday’s midterm congressional elections, both Republicans and Democrats have earned all the distrust they will reap.

America has a deadly addiction to war. Since 1950, presidents of both political parties have sent American troops into conflicts across the globe, killed countless people, sacrificed the lives and limbs of American servicemen and women, and wasted trillions of dollars. Yet these wars have consistently failed to achieve the objectives proclaimed when the killing began.

According to a practitioner of behavioral economics, Vernon Smith, an individual’s emotional state rather than reason is the driving factor in influencing one’s choices. He writes,