Smith discusses Spooner’s secular theory of natural law and his belief that no legislation is valid unless it conforms to natural law.
With his 250th essay, Smith interrupts his series on abolitionism to offer some reflections on writing essays.
Smith details the scholarly debate between Lysander Spooner and Wendell Phillips over the constitutionality of slavery.
Smith provides some background on Spooner’s influential book The Unconstitutionality of Slavery.
Smith discusses the schism in the abolitionist movement over the constitutionality of slavery, and he begins his analysis of Lysander Spooner’s arguments in The Unconstitutionality of Slavery.
Smith summarizes Lysander Spooner’s objections to the most popular arguments in favor of the prohibition of alcohol.
Smith discusses the influence of puritanism, the religious revival in the early 19th century, and Spooner’s disagreements with Christian ethics.
Smith explains some reasons why the temperance movement switched from advocating voluntary methods to calling for coercive prohibitory laws during the 1830s.
Smith continues his discussion of Lysander Spooner’s objections to confusing vices with crimes.
Smith begins his discussion of Lysander Spooner’s libertarian classic, “Vices are not Crimes.”
Smith discusses Lewis’s rare insights on Spooner’s personal life, and his libertarian case against prohibition.
Smith discusses Gerrit Smith’s arguments for prohibition and the reply by Lysander Spooner, as published in a book by Dio Lewis, Prohibition: A Failure.
Smith continues his explanation of why so many abolitionists supported the compulsory prohibition of alcohol by linking them to the ideology of the Whig Party.
Smith begins his explanation of why so many abolitionists joined the crusade for the legal prohibition of alcohol.
Smith concludes his discussion of the no-voting theory of Wendell Phillips by explaining Phillips’s attitude toward taxes and the limits of democracy.
Smith discusses how William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phillips differed in their approaches to non-voting.
Smith discusses some similarities between the anti-political abolitionists and contemporary voluntaryists.
Smith continues his discussion of the arguments in Can Abolitionists Vote or Take Office under the United States Constitution?