Smith explores some features of Spooner’s philosophy of law, as found in The Unconstitutionality of Slavery.
Smith discusses Spooner’s defense of the right to use violence in self-defense, even against agents of a government.
Smith explains how Spooner reconciled his theory of nonvoting with his view that the Constitution is antislavery, and how he treated discussions of slavery during the Constitutional Convention.
Not this again.
Smith summarizes the arguments of delegates as to whether the slave trade should be prohibited in the Constitution.
Smith explains some features of the slave trade and the constitutional provision that it would not be banned in America for at least 20 years.
Early anarchist thinkers blurred the line between socialist and capitalist.
Smith discusses some controversies over slavery during the framing of the Constitution, especially the three-fifths clause.
Smith discusses some major controversies provoked by the debate over ratification of the U.S. Constitution.
Smith discusses some early justifications of slavery and how they repudiated natural rights.
When the people fear to criticize their stone and metal icons, there is tyranny. When the icons fear criticism from the people, there is liberty.
Smith discusses Spooner’s secular theory of natural law and his belief that no legislation is valid unless it conforms to natural law.
What did Popper actually believe about speech and tolerance in a liberal, pluralistic society?
Most “history” has been the result of cyclical violence—expropriation, subjugation, civil war, and bloody revolution. How, then, can we build a better future?
Though they don’t think there’s anything wrong with unequal wealth distribution per se, libertarians can and do criticize the unjust processes that can lead to inequality.
With his 250th essay, Smith interrupts his series on abolitionism to offer some reflections on writing essays.
The USSR tried to plan its economy without prices for capital goods. It failed, vindicating the scholarship of Ludwig von Mises.
If you think certain policies will lead to a bad outcome, it doesn’t mean supporters of those policies intend that bad outcome.