When communism fell with the USSR, Murray Rothbard realized that the greater threat to liberty was social democracy. Events of the past few years have proven him correct.
While Andrew Koppelman has made a good faith effort to understand and portray libertarianism, he makes some serious errors regarding Rothbardian thought. David Gordon helps to set him straight.
Instead of worrying about which documents Donald Trump may or may not have had in his Florida home, the real issue is the proliferation of state secrets that should not be secrets at all.
Economic libertarianism, with its sole focus on government budgets and taxation, is a highly limiting political strategy. Libertarians should proceed as enemies of the state.
A libertarian view of the law by definition means that there can be no immunity from legal consequences. Anything else perverts the very meaning of law.
All too often, people accept the state-sponsored "solution" to a perceived problem as the logical choice. But this "solution" really is a non sequitur.
Is this trend toward soft secession necessarily illiberal? Is the potential for creating more states or political subdivisions, even if smaller and less sclerotic, moving us further from an idealized Hoppean private community model?
To adopt monasticism before the international fascism we face today would amount not only to seceding but also to ceding everything worth saving to the monsters
