Related
Alessandro Fusillo recently appeared on LA NOSTRA LIBERTÀ [OUR FREEDOM] – FUSILLO live – Puntata 156 (01-10-2025).
A summary and translation of the transcript are provided below. [continue reading…]
Christos Armoutidis, “Who Owns Public Property? Libertarian Property Theory and the Problem of Immigration,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 29 (2): 56–71
Related:
No time to read just yet, but here is Grok: [continue reading…]
Dear Mr. Kinsella,
I am [], greets again. I hope this message finds you well. Sorry to bother you, but I would like to ask you a question regarding “use-based property” and argumentation ethics.
We know that capitalists own means of production, often through inheritance. However, if we cannot determine historically who first acquired these means, or whether the property was originally obtained through theft, it is usually justified under the principle of homesteading. My question is: if we cannot provide ontological evidence for the ownership of scarce resources, and if a resource is not in active use, would such ownership be illegitimate? [continue reading…]
Related:
Someone snarkily suggested I read Hayek’s Road to Serfdom. As if I hadn’t. Just because I’m not a Hayek fan. In my view, other than his Capital theory (Pure Theory of Capital, which I hear is good but have never read; I think Hoppe said maybe only 3 people have read and… pic.twitter.com/nkqHuMLDWV
— Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) September 30, 2025
Related
Re discussions with @Fhoer and Hoppe re Usury from an OrdoNaturalist Perspective A Hoppean Critique of Contractually Invalidity Interest. Abstract:
This article proposes a critique of the practice of usury — understood as the imposition of contractually invalid interest — from an OrdoNaturalist approach inspired by Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s argumentation ethics. Unlike utilitarian, Marxist, and religious views, which treat usury as acceptable if useful or condemnable if exploitative, it is argued here that usury is null ab initio because it violates the principles of self-ownership and contractual reciprocity. The text distinguishes legitimate loans, based on mutual risk and limited guarantees, from usurious loans, characterized by unlimited liability, perpetual debt, and the alienation of the debtor’s autonomy. It concludes that usury is incompatible with natural order and constitutes a disguised form of economic slavery.
The piece argues that certain debt arrangements are invalid ab initio because they violate self-ownership and reciprocity.
An edited exchange: [continue reading…]
Re Michael Oakeshott, On Human Conduct (1991) 1
ChatGPT query:
summarize and analyze the attached book by Oakeshott. Provide a concise overview followed by a chapter by chapter summary. Consult the work of Hans-Hermann hoppe, Stephan Kinsella, and Murray Rothbard, on the internet and in the attached documents. Is Oakeshott compatible with the libertarian views of Kinsella and Hoppe and Rothbard? If not, explain where they would differ or disagree with Oakeshott’s approach and parts Hoppe might agree with. What part would libertarians influenced by Hoppe, Rothbard, and Kinsella most agree with or profit from?
A. J. Carlyle, A History of Mediæval Political Theory in the West, Vol. I: A History of Political Theory From the Roman Lawyers of the Second Century to the Political Writers of the Ninth (1903; archive; kindle)
Concise Overview of the Book
“A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West, Volume I: The Second Century to the Ninth” by A.J. Carlyle (published 1903) argues for the continuity of political thought from ancient to modern times, challenging the notion of a sharp break after the fall of ancient civilizations. Carlyle posits that medieval political theory evolved from Roman philosophical and legal traditions, integrated with Christian ideas and Teutonic customs, rather than emerging abruptly in the Renaissance. Drawing on sources like Cicero, Seneca, Roman jurists (e.g., from Justinian’s Digest and Institutes), the New Testament, Church Fathers (e.g., Augustine, Ambrose, Isidore), and ninth-century Frankish writers, the book examines key concepts: natural law as the foundation of justice; human equality and its tension with institutions like slavery and coercive government; the origins of property and authority; the divine basis of rulership balanced by justice; and the evolving relationship between church and state. Structured in four parts—introduction via Cicero and Seneca, Roman legal theory, New Testament and patristic ideas, and ninth-century developments—Carlyle emphasizes that these ideas, rooted in Stoic philosophy and Christian theology, laid the groundwork for later medieval thought. Justice is central to legitimate governance, and natural equality counters hierarchical institutions. Acknowledging gaps (e.g., post-Aristotelian Greek philosophy), the work highlights how medieval theory adapted ancient principles, influencing liberty, consent, and ecclesiastical independence. This volume sets the stage for later ones covering up to the 17th century, underscoring the organic development of political ideas amid empire, church, and barbarian influences. [continue reading…]
Thoughtful new article, Juan I. Núñez, “Flagpole Libertarianism: A Refutation of the Suicide Pact,” Libertarian Alliance [UK] Blog (Sep. 29, 2025):
The Enemy Within
Every libertarian would refuse to steal a ladder to save their mom from a burning building, and refuse to steal a penny to stop aliens from destroying the world, because every libertarian is a libertarian.
The moment this statement appeared on my X feed, I wasn’t so much at a loss for words as I was struck by a familiar, wearying conclusion: this person believes libertarianism to be a death cult. And sadly, they are not alone. It would seem that for a growing number of people, libertarian ethics have been flattened into a binary matter, where a strict, Spartan adherence is demanded of a “true” libertarian, even if the price is one’s own life. [continue reading…]
Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology (1957). Grok summary:
Overview and Summary of the Book and Its Arguments
Ernst H. Kantorowicz’s The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology (1957) is a seminal exploration of how medieval political thought conceptualized the ruler as possessing dual natures: a “body natural” that is mortal, fallible, and subject to human frailties, and a “body politic” that is immortal, infallible, and eternal, ensuring the continuity of sovereignty beyond the individual’s lifespan. Drawing from legal, theological, and philosophical sources, Kantorowicz argues that this “mystic fiction” emerged as a mechanism to sustain political order in pre-modern societies lacking strong bureaucratic institutions. The book traces the idea’s genealogy from Tudor England backward to late antiquity, emphasizing its roots in Christian theology—particularly the dual nature of Christ (human and divine)—and its adaptation through Roman and canon law, where concepts like the eternal dignity of office (dignitas) and the mystical body of the Church (corpus mysticum) were secularized to apply to kingship and the state. This duality, Kantorowicz posits, resolved practical issues like succession, inalienability of crown lands, and the perpetuity of royal authority, while reflecting broader tensions between sacral and rational governance. [continue reading…]
Econ Journal Watch, Volume 22, Issue 2, September 2025:
Isaiah Berlin on Karl Marx: An earlier exchange (1, 2, 3, 4) touched upon whether Karl Marx’s having become a big deal was adventitious or destined. Two selections from Isaiah Berlin are here republished, by permission, to suggest that it was rather destined: (1) a selection from Berlin’s book Karl Marx; (2) “Marxism and the International in the Nineteenth Century”. Daniel Klein provides a Foreword.
Oliver Janich, The Order of Freedom: The Only Principle That Can Save the World (2020). Description:
To solve a problem, one must recognize the true cause of it. The true cause of social and political problems is that the conflict resolver must not be part of the conflict. This cannot work because the state is the ultimate judge in all conflicts, including those that it is involved in.This book’s thesis, which is new in libertarian theory, is that property rights and the realization of the non-aggression principle are merely the consequence of respecting the principle of the neutral judge. After describing this logically, the author presents a natural legal system that functions without a state. The consequence: wars are a thing of the past, the power of influential groups, both clandestine and publicly known, is reduced to zero, the mafia and the deep state cease to exist. Crime rates fall dramatically, prosperity increases and social safeguards improve significantly.Oliver Janich’s best-selling books have been praised by leading scholars like Hans-Herman Hoppe, Thorsten Polleit, Jörg Guido Hülsmann and celebrities like the singer Xavier Naidoo, Golden Globe winner Christine Kaufmann and political comedian and actress Lisa Fitz. Janich is one of the leading journalists in social media with videos that have been viewed over 40 million times. As an individual, he has the largest following on Telegram worldwide.
Grok analysis: [continue reading…]
Stephan Kinsella is a libertarian writer and retired patent attorney in Houston, Texas. He has published widely on various areas of libertarian legal theory and on legal topics such as intellectual property law and international law. His publications include Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Papinian Press, 2023), Against Intellectual Property (Mises Institute, 2008), International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide (Oxford, 2020), and The Universal Principles of Liberty (2025).
My Failed Libertarian Speaking Hiatus; Memories of Mises Institute and Other Events, 1988–20192025
© 2012-2025 StephanKinsella.com 
To the extent possible under law, Stephan Kinsella has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to material on this Site, unless indicated otherwise. In the event the CC0 license is unenforceable a 
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License is hereby granted.
Recent Comments