Trevor Burrus discusses his perspective and philosphical interests.
Trevor Burrus is a research fellow at the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies. His research interests include constitutional law, civil and criminal law, legal and political philosophy, and legal history. His work has appeared in the Vermont Law Review, the Syracuse Law Review, and the Jurist, as well as the Washington Times, Huffington Post, and the Daily Caller. He holds a BA in Philosophy from the University of Colorado at Boulder and a JD from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.
Burrus derides the self-aggrandizing, simplified arguements rampant in the media, arguing for greater introspection.
How should libertarians interact with politics?
Burrus draws an important distinction between merit and output and cautions libertarians from relying on merit-based arguments.
How much say should the political process have over what we can freely buy and sell?
Burrus continues his discussion of whether libertarians should argue their cause on the basis of merit.
Burrus furthers the libertarian argument against the widely-held belief that we “all belong to government.”
Increasing the sphere of politics leads to bad policy and increased vice.
Conservatives use the precautionary principle to justify domestic spying just as the left uses it to justify environmentalism. Neither is convincing.
Trevor Burrus offers some advice to those who want to argue against libertarianism.
Libertarians often get called “anti-community.” Aaron and Trevor explain why that’s wrong and why it leads to so many bad arguments against libertarianism.
John Samples joins us on the show for a discussion on the relationship between money and political speech.
Julian Sanchez joins us for a discussion on the political philsophy of Robert Nozick.