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.
Adin Ballou’s Hopedale Community was committed to proto-libertarian positions on the state’s use of violence and the individual’s responsibility not to participate in state violence.
Natural rights are an essential part of the liberal tradition.
Smith discusses the influence of puritanism, the religious revival in the early nineteenth century, and the significance of Lysander 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.
Nazi comparisons serve the rhetorical purpose of designating one’s political opponents as acceptable targets for extreme, even violent, actions.
Pope Francis has thoughtlessly rehashed the old lie that libertarianism is an anti-social philosophy.
Smith begins his discussion of Lysander Spooner’s libertarian classic, “Vices are not Crimes.”
Natural rights underdetermine a society’s legal institutions and leave the door open for a much larger state than minarchists or anarchists want.
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.