StephanKinsella.com

As noted here, my book, Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023), has just been published. When I was mailing copies to some colleagues today, the UPS lady asked me how long it took me to write it. I said “about 30 years,” though in a sense, it is even longer than that. I’ve been studying libertarian ideas for over 40 years, and I wrote the articles in this book over the last 29 years. But a more accurate answer is: about a year. I’ve been working very hard on this for the last twelve months, and it’s gratifying, and a relief, to have it finally out.

For more details, see here.

More news later when the book is available for purchase on Amazon and other sites.

Libertarian Answer Man time again!

I was asked a question about voting for Javier Milei, the soi-disant anarcho-capitalist or libertarian running for President in Argentina. I can certainly say that of the few videos and statements I’ve seen from the guy, he seems amazing, compared to any politician I’ve ever heard of. Since he seems to be familiar with Austrian economics and Rothbardian anarcho-libertarianism, and a scholar to boot.¹ I doubt he get much of his radical programme enacted if elected, but even if he could dollarize the economy and stop hyperinflation, that would be a huge plus.² [continue reading…]

1. See his chapter “Capitalism, Socialism, and the Neoclassical Trap,” in David Howden & , eds., The Emergence of a Tradition: Essays in Honor of Jesús Huerta de Soto, Vol. II (Palgrave Macmillan, 2023), which unfortunately has a prohibitive academic publisher price, but I hear rumors free copies can be found online. [↩]
2. For more on Milei, see Fernando Chiocca, “O grande triunfo da esquerda: uma direita socialista,” Instituto Rothbard (July 1, 2023); and Javier Milei, “El retiro de Bernanke y el futuro de los emergentes” (Sábado 3 de agosto, 2013). [↩]

The Supreme Court’s recent decisions preventing colleges from using affirmative action—Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard College)—are wrong and unconstitutional. It’s a shame libertarians are in favor of this and sound like conservatives repeating dumb lines like “it should be merit oriented.” As if it was ever about merit: ever heard of legacy admissions or athletic admissions? Sure, mediocre-IQ Obama got into Harvard (racial affirmative action); but similarly mediocre-IQ George Bush got into Yale (legacy). Lower IQ football players get in and get scholarships too. So what?

It’s not about merit, or not only about merit; never was. Look at Harvard’s own website:

John Adams graduates

John Adams, future U.S. president, graduates. Before 1773, the graduates of Harvard were arranged in a hierarchy not of merit but “according to the dignity of birth, or to the rank of [their] parents.” By this rather undemocratic standard, Adams graduated 14th in a class of 24.

They also ignore federalism (the FedGov has no business regulating state universities) and constitutional problems with using the 14th Amendment to strike down state laws/actions they frown upon.¹ Libertarians sound like clueless rah rah patriotic type dumb conservatives who romanticize the past and pretend we should “return” to a merit based higher education system. Return? Sounds half-racist. I understand why Blacks sense hypocrisy when whites whine about racial preferences—when legacy admissions have been tantamount to racial preferences for whites for a looooong time.

[continue reading…]

1. See Libertarian Centralists; Incorporation and the Fourteenth Amendment: The 140 Year Old “Riddle”; other posts about libertarian centralism. [↩]

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (70.0MB)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 419.

This my Soho Forum debate held Aug. 21, 2023, in Manhattan, against Corey DeAngelis, of the American Federation for Children, moderated by Gene Epstein. I defended the resolution “Today’s school-choice movement in the U.S. is worthy of support by libertarians…” (taking the negative). Oxford debate rules applied which meant that whoever changed the most minds won. My side went from about 10 to 23 percentage points, gaining about 13; Corey went from about 45 to 64%, gaining about 19, so he won. I was pleased that we had an informative and civil debate about an important issue. (This is my second Soho debate; the first was KOL364 | Soho Forum Debate vs. Richard Epstein: Patent and Copyright Law Should Be Abolished.) My discussion notes are appended below. See also Reason.com article with video; Reason.com article with podcast. [continue reading…]

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (Duration: 53:18 — 48.5MB)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 418.

This is a followup to KOL414 | Corporations, Limited Liability, and the Title Transfer Theory of Contract, with Jeff Barr: Part I. See that episode for more information and notes.

In Part III, we need to talk about corporations. For more on that, see Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation.

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (18.9MB)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 417.

Part 3 of my video commentary on Larken Rose’s recent comments on IP. For more information, see the description and links at KOL415: Commentary on Larken Rose, “IP: The Wrong Question”: Part 1.

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (52.7MB)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 416.

Part 2 of my video commentary on Larken Rose’s recent comments on IP. For more information, see the description and links at KOL415: Commentary on Larken Rose, “IP: The Wrong Question”: Part 1.