Smith continues his series on the Declaration of Independence by looking to the intellectual history behind its famous reference to unalienable rights.
Jefferson drew on a rich intellectual tradition when he drafted the Declaration of Independence. But did he draw directly from contemporary works, as well?
Smith begins a series of essays on the Declaration of Independence by examining colonial reaction to its list of grievances.
Caplan debunks the widely accepted myth of the rational voter, arguing instead that voters are rationally irrational and vote economically.
Nephrologist Dr. Benjamin E. Hippen critically examines the legal market for kidneys in Iran.
Smith distinguishes “tolerating” religious difference from recognizing a genuine right to religious freedom.
Stephen Moore and Julian L. Simon detail the myriad ways in which Americans were better off at the end of the 20th century than at the end of the 19th century.
Hoskins and O’Driscoll explore the role of property rights in economic development
Mabry and Sharplin argue that technology improves the standard of living, and that it is rent-seeking that causes the true problem.
Michael Weiss and Cathy Young critique radical feminist jurisprudence, arguing the latter constitutes neo-paternalism and a dire threat to individual liberty.
In this criticism of Naomi Klein’s “The Shock Doctrine”, Johan Norberg identifies common misconceptions about the nature of Milton Friedman’s libertarianism.
Moore reflects on his former teacher, Julian L. Simon, whose theories, though widely derided during his lifetime, have been vindicated posthumously.
Boaz singles out freedom of choice as the fundamental difference between libertarian and conservative viewpoints.
Palmer takes on the misconceptions of individualism common to communitarian critics of liberty.
Branden identifies what he sees as a disconnect between the values we are taught to revere and the values that actually enhance human lives.
Pilon cites the gutting of the 10th Amendment and the Doctrine of Enumerated Powers in this statement before Congress on why the people no longer trust Washington.
Simon refutes the commonly-held view that the world is becoming a worse place to live, arguing that all available data paints a much more optimistic picture.
Doherty explores how misinformation spreads through the media, focusing particularly on commonly-quoted statistical errors.
Nozick attributes left-leaning intellectual’s animosity to capitalism to the difference in value judgments between formal schools and capitalist society at large.
Barnett traces a history of Supreme Court decisions that have eviscerated the individual rights he argues the Constitution was originally intended to protect.
Murray reflects on his own book, “Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950”
Attempting to reclaim the term “bourgeois” from its Marxist detractors, McCloskey examines the dual myths of the innate virtues and the innate evil of capitalism.
Doherty combines a short biography of the mother of Objectivism with an analysis of the intellectual impact of her published works.
Affluence is not an evil to be belittled but it is a good that the West is fortunate to have attained, and that is increasingly benefiting the rest of the world.
In an attempt to understand what makes capitalism tend to work better than communism, Wilkinson turns to evolutionary psychology.