Anarcho-capitalist libertarianism: What is it? Hoppe Radio Interview on Australian Broadcasting Corp.

Anti-Statism, Libertarian Theory, Private Security & Law
Share

Professor Hoppe was previously interviewed on Australian Broadcasting Corp. Radio, on the topic “Anarcho-capitalist libertarianism: What is it?” (approx. 25 minutes). It was aired on Jan. 23, 2012; audio is available here. As described on the ABC site, “What is anarcho-capitalist libertarianism? Hans Herman Hoppe explains the idea behind it and why it’s a very different and quite radical way to think about government, society and the economy.”

Anarcho-capitalist libertarianism: What is it? Hoppe Radio Interview on Australian Broadcasting Corp. Read Post »

Self-ownership and Teeth-ownership in Communist China: A Lesson for Confused Libertarians

Libertarian Theory, Statism
Share

A recent NPR feature, The Secret Document That Transformed China (h/t Vijay Boyapati), tells the fascinating story about one of seminal events at the dawn of the modern Chinese experiment in their version of capitalism.

In 1978, the farmers in a small Chinese village called Xiaogang gathered in a mud hut to sign a secret contract. They thought it might get them executed. Instead, it wound up transforming China’s economy in ways that are still reverberating today.

The contract was so risky — and such a big deal — because it was created at the height of communism in China. Everyone worked on the village’s collective farm; there was no personal property.

“Back then, even one straw belonged to the group,” says Yen Jingchang, who was a farmer in Xiaogang in 1978. “No one owned anything.”

At one meeting with communist party officials, a farmer asked: “What about the teeth in my head? Do I own those?” Answer: No. Your teeth belong to the collective.

Because of communism, “In Xiaogang there was never enough food, and the farmers often had to go to other villages to beg. Their children were going hungry. They were desperate.”

So the farmers agreed to a form of personal property, where each farmer could keep some of his own crop, above a certain threshold. This would give them incentives to work harder and the ability to keep some of the fruits of their labor. However,So, in the winter of 1978, after another terrible harvest, they came up with an idea: Rather than farm as a collective, each family would get to farm its own plot of land. If a family grew a lot of food, that family could keep some of the harvest.

This was done in secret for fear of reprisal by the state. Their agreement “recognized the risks the farmers were taking. If any of the farmers were sent to prison or executed, it said, the others in the group would care for their children until age 18.”

Their new pact was a success: “At the end of the season, they had an enormous harvest: more, Yen Hongchang says, than in the previous five years combined.”

Self-ownership and Teeth-ownership in Communist China: A Lesson for Confused Libertarians Read Post »

Bastiat Weeps For The Billionth Time

Business, IP Law, Protectionism, Technology
Share
@pablodPablo Defendini
LOL self-pub is the new piracy! “@DigiBookWorld: Heard at #dbw12: Self publishing costs publishers $100 million in opportunity”

Mentioned in this Tweet

  • DigiBookWorld
    DigiBookWorld Digital Book World · Follow
    Digital Book World focuses on publishing strategies, not tools; solutions, not theories; practicality, not punditry. Tweets by@mrmullin

Retweeted by GAPlauche and others

Bastiat Weeps For The Billionth Time Read Post »

SOPA is the Symptom, Copyright is the Disease: The SOPA wakeup call to ABOLISH COPYRIGHT

Anti-Statism, IP Law, Technology
Share

[Update: See also EU’s controversial copyright law rejected by parliament, July 5, 2018]

Over at C4SIF, I’ve blogged quite a bit lately about SOPA and PIPA and the recent Internet blackouts and other protests against these bills, which threaten free speech and the open Internet (Mike Masnick et al. at Techdirt have also been great on exposing and analyzing SOPA). As Jeff Tucker noted recently,1 the protests against SOPA started not with conservatives or even “libertarians,” but with civil libertarians of the “left,” as well as Silicon Valley tech types. Of course, some libertarians have been opposed to SOPA (and copyright) from the beginning–the more radical and anti-state libertarians, in particular Austro-libertarians and left-libertarians (such as some of the people associated with C4SS2 ).

Aside from the anti-state libertarians, however, most of the protests against SOPA concede that copyright is good, intellectual property is important, and piracy is bad–but then they bemoan that SOPA “goes too far.” For example, as I noted in Where does IP Rank Among the Worst State Laws?, consider this article in PC Magazine, providing the response of 11 PCMag staffers asked for their take on SOPA. The response to SOPA was universally negative, but most of them first prefaced their opposition to SOPA by genuflecting to copyright and recognizing that IP piracy “is of course a real problem”. …


  1. See Tucker: Protesting Government Digitally

  2. See, e.g., Kevin Carson: So What if SOPA Passes? 

SOPA is the Symptom, Copyright is the Disease: The SOPA wakeup call to ABOLISH COPYRIGHT Read Post »

Scroll to Top