My podcast consumption has varied over the years. Of late, here are the main ones I listen to when I find time—driving, walking, falling to sleep (some are only on youtube and do not appear to have a podcast feed or home, despite being referred to as a podcast). I listen to many others; these are the main ones in my current rotation.
Tom Woods Show — still the best and premier libertarian podcast
Haman Nature — Adam Haman; check out his crossover episodes with Bob Murphy
All-In Podcast — annoying mainstream techbros (Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, David Sacks, and David Friedberg) 1 but I can’t help listening
I dub Labor Day the worst day of the year. Worse even than the Fourth of July 1 and artificial holidays like Christmas and Mother’s Day. No, not for typical libertarian reasons but because Locke and then Smith have corrupted our understanding of “labor” and its relation to property rights, value, wealth, and economics, with the hoary and stupid labor theory of property and the labor theory of value and countless confused arguments in favor of evil intellectual property.
One “Abraham Thomas” sent me a manuscript with this note:
Your work on intellectual freedom and principled liberty has been formative for me. In Truth, I take on the subject from a broader perspective, exploring honesty as the foundation of both individual dignity and collective flourishing.
It would be a privilege if you might consider endorsing my book.
I routinely get these kind of submissions and requests. Not aware that this is published or public, so I don’t post it here.
I fed it into Grok and axed Grok:
evaluate the manucrript Truth by Thomas Abraham attached. Summarize its approach and thesis, and compare it to the approach of kinsella, attached. How would Kinsella view this argument? Is it complete, coherent, successful, libertarian, and compatible with Kinsella’s approach? Does it cite or show awareness of the arguments of Rothbard, Kinsella, Hoppe?
In grad school and law school while at LSU (1988–1991) I wrote various columns and letters to the editor to the LSU Daily Reveille1 and also to the local paper, then The Morning Advocate, now The Advocate.
I just ran across one I wrote that was published Thurs., Sep. 28, 1989, under the title “Vote against taxes and power.” Like most of the things I published in those days it’s a bit cringe. In that letter, I went through 13 proposed amendments to the Louisiana Constitution coming up for a vote and suggested how to vote on them, and why. I basically said “vote not” if it seemed to increase taxes or restrict liberties. [continue reading…]
Bert Schwitters alerted me to his book Liberating Liberty and upon my request, sent me a PDF. The book is apparently available only here, not on Amazon, and not in ebook form, and not available in PDF, epub, or other form online either. He describes some of his views and his book here too: Liberty and Libertarians. The book appears to have a subtitle but it is not clear what it is—perhaps “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and The Creator of Man,” but it’s not clear. This is obviously an amateur effort.
I’m pleased to announce the results of a project I’ve been working on with other libertarians for some time: The Universal Principles of Liberty (finalized and published Aug. 14, 2025).
I’d like to explain here how this came about.
I’ve been a libertarian since I was in high school and increasingly involved over the years learning about liberty and have devoted a lot of time to developing libertarian ideas, by my speaking and writing, 1 and even in various forms of activism. Yes, despite my regular criticisms of activists and activism, I of course have participated in activism of various types—debating with family and friends and others, voting, participating in various groups; joining the Libertarian Party years ago and now serving on its Judicial Committee. 2[continue reading…]
It’s time someone do this. I was hoping someone else had or would, but I’ve given up finding anyone comprehensive and solid on this. I guess I’ll have to do it, if I find time. Maybe I can coax Bob Murphy into doing it with he: I am decent on economic methodology; he is deeper and better. We are both solid on austro-libertarianism: he is a libertarian, and I am the libertarian. And he is probably decent on law, and I am deeper and better. I may approach El Bobborino about this at some point. Or maybe Hülsmann or Hoppe. Or Konrad Graf. 1[continue reading…]
When spanking and other issues are debated by libertarians, someone invariably brings up the issue of grabbing or touching someone in other contexts: for example, if you see a child or stranger about to run into traffic or into the path of a speeding bus, you might grab them to save them. Or you might have to grab or physically prevent a child from doing something harmful like sticking their hand into boiling water, and so on; you might even need to slap them to get their attention in an emergency situation. In these cases the third party is not trying to damage or punish or discipline the stranger or child; from it.
For defenders of spanking, they will mindlessly trot these non-analogous situations out in an attempt to justify spanking. [continue reading…]
I have mentioned before my year obtaining an LL.M. in international business law at the University of London, 1991–1992, after law school. 1 In that course I was required to take at least half my courses from King’s College London, my “base” school, and was free to take other courses from the four other University of London law schools that were then part of this program. I other half of my courses at the London School of Economics law school. 2 My favorite course in the program was “The International Law of Natural Resources,” taught by Professor Rosalyn Higgins at LSE—now Dame Higgins and later the first woman on the International Court of Justice. 3
Recent Comments