Daily Anarchist Interviews Walter Block

(Austrian) Economics, Anti-Statism, Education, The Basics
Share

The Daily Anarchist has posted a nice, short interview of Walter Block by Seth King, touching mostly on Block’s history in the libertarian movement and his thoughts on the prospects for liberty and the tactics and strategy libertarians employ. A few interesting excerpts:

Seth: Would you mind explaining to me exactly what Anarcho-Capitalism means to you?

Walter: The first part of this phrase, Anarcho-Capitalism, means that there shall be no government. Private firms will undertake all supposed government functions, such as protection from foreign and domestic enemies, adjudication, supplying supposed public goods such as light houses (in a by gone era), flood control, education, welfare, health, money, etc. The second part means that the law will support private property rights, money, etc., in contradistinction to left wing or socialist anarchism.

Daily Anarchist Interviews Walter Block Read Post »

Is the Federalist Society Evil?

History, Legal System, The Right, Vulgar Politics
Share

I love this article by Paul Craig Roberts on the “true cost” of the Iraq war and think everyone should read it.

But there’s one sentence in this otherwise-outstanding piece to which I take exception.  Roberts writes: “The fascist Republican Federalist Society has put enough federal judges in the judiciary to rule that the president is above the law.”

This is nonsense.

First, let’s tackle the claim that the Federalist Society is “fascist” and “Republican.”

The Federalist Society was formed by law students who were frustrated by the left’s dominance at law schools.  They created the organization to provide a forum for alternative voices: namely, those of conservatives and libertarians.

Here’s how the Federalist Society functions.  There’s a national headquarters in Washington (a red flag, I’ll grant you), there are student chapters in almost every law school, and there are lawyers’ chapters in various cities.

The student and lawyers’ chapters generally do one thing: host lectures and debates.  These events feature speakers ranging all the way from people Roberts would probably call “fascist” to anarcho-capitalist libertarians such as Randy Barnett and Walter Block.   One frequent Federalist speaker is Roberts’s fellow columnist at Antiwar.com, Doug Bandow, whose lecture topics include the American Empire.

Who decides who will speak at these events?  Each chapter’s members.  If the members tend to be more conservative, they may bring in more conservative speakers.  If the members tend to be more libertarian, they may bring in more libertarian speakers.

Is the Federalist Society Evil? Read Post »

A Critique of Frank van Dun’s “Against Libertarian Legalism”

Libertarian Theory
Share

The Belgian libertarian legal theorist Frank van Dun, author of the great “Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom,”1 in 2003 authored “Against Libertarian Legalism: A Comment on Kinsella and Block.” This generated Walter Block’s Reply to “Against Libertarian Legalism” by Frank van Dun and my Reply to van Dun: Non-Aggression and Title Transfer.

A fairly lengthy and critical comment on van Dun’s “Against Libertarian Legalism” was just posted at Answering Van Dun about the Non-Aggression Principle. The author would probably also disagree with some of van Dun’s “Freedom and Property: Where They Conflict.”

Update: See also Van Dun on Freedom versus Property and Hostile Encirclement; and The Blockean Proviso.


  1. Libertarian Papers, 2009; see also my posts Van Dun on Argumentation Ethics and Revisiting Argumentation Ethics, and Walter Block, Reply to Frank van Dun’s “Natural Law and the Jurisprudence of Freedom” 

A Critique of Frank van Dun’s “Against Libertarian Legalism” Read Post »

Scroll to Top