Podcast appearances and mentions of Walter Block

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 465. GROK SHOWNOTES: [0:00–9:16] In this engaging episode of the Kinsella on Liberty podcast, Stephan Kinsella and Sheldon Richman tackle the contentious issue of pharmaceutical price controls under Trump's executive order, questioning their equivalence to traditional price controls that distort markets. Kinsella, drawing on his extensive critique of intellectual property (Patents and Pharmaceuticals, 2023; Patents, Pharma, Government: The Unholy Alliance, 2024), argues that patents create artificial monopolies, so price controls countering these are not standard interventions but responses to government-granted privileges. Richman highlights FDA-imposed costs, which patents partially offset, though Kinsella counters that these costs are overstated, citing lower drug prices abroad (Drug Reimportation, 2009). They endorse reimportation as a market-based solution, referencing Connor O'Keefe's analysis (Mises: How Trump Can Lower Drug Prices Without Price Controls, 2025), but criticize Trump's coercive tactics as resembling a protection racket (Trump's Worst Idea: Pharmaceuticals, 2025) (0:02–6:00). The discussion also critiques antitrust laws and secondary regulations, with Richman warning against Kevin Carson's approach of layering controls atop privileges (Kevin Carson on Confiscating Property from the Rich, 2016) (6:00–9:16). [9:16–1:13:35] The conversation shifts to a robust defense of the corporate form, addressing left-libertarian criticisms of limited liability and shareholder responsibility. Kinsella, aligning with Robert Hessen's contractual view and his own writings (Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation, 2011; Left-Libertarians, Corporations, Expropriating Stakeholders, 2008), argues that limited liability is not a privilege but a logical outcome of action-based responsibility, where shareholders are not liable unless causally responsible for torts (Van Dun on Freedom versus Property and Hostile Encirclement, 2009). Richman decries the pejorative use of “corporate” by figures like Roderick Long, rejecting claims that corporations inherently rely on state favoritism (Comment on Left-Libertarianism on Roderick Long's Sub-Ex Dep Post, 2009) (9:16–36:01). They explore thick libertarianism, agreeing that individualism connects to broader values but remains distinct, and critique Walter Block's evictionism on abortion, with Kinsella arguing fetuses are not trespassers due to maternal actions (Together Strong Debate with Walter Block, 2022) (36:01–1:13:35). A lighthearted discussion on pipe tobacco reflects their commitment to personal liberty, underscoring their broader libertarian principles (Wombatrons: Why I Am a Left-Libertarian, 2009). https://youtu.be/5YaTsoDH9Eg Grok detailed shownotes: Detailed Segment Summary for Show Notes Segment 1: Price Controls, Patents, and Reimportation (0:02–9:16) Description and Summary: Kinsella andMemphis-based Robert Hessen and Sheldon Richman discuss Trump's pharmaceutical price control executive order, questioning its implications. Kinsella, per his writings (Patents and Pharmaceuticals, 2023; Patents, Pharma, Government: The Unholy Alliance, 2024), argues that patents create monopoly prices, so price controls countering these aren't standard market distortions, as patents themselves are government-granted (IP vs. Antitrust, 2005). Richman notes FDA costs inflate drug prices, but Kinsella cites lower prices abroad to argue these costs are overstated (Drug Reimportation, 2009) (0:02–2:28). They advocate reimportation, citing Connor O'Keefe's market-based approach (Mises: How Trump Can Lower Drug Prices Without Price Controls, 2025), and criticize Trump's coercive tactics as a protection racket (Trump's Worst Idea: Pharmaceuticals, 2025) (2:28–6:00). The segment critiques antitrust laws and secondary regulations, with Richman comparing them to Kevin Carson's flawed approach (Kevin Carson on Confisca...

Originally Recorded March 21st, 2025 About Professor Walter Block: http://business.loyno.edu/bio/walter-block Check out Professor Block's book, Defending the Undefendable III: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit musicallyspeaking.substack.com

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 457. I had been meaning to talk to my old friend Sheldon Richman, of the Libertarian Institute and TGIF column, about his own IP Odyssey, as he's always been great on this issue, (( My IP Odyssey; as quoted in “Your failed business model is not my problem”; Sheldon Richman, “Patent Nonsense," IP Debate Breaks Out at FEE. Others, e.g. Richman, The Articles of Confederation Versus the Constitution. )) and many others. At the same time I had been talking to André Simoni of Brazil about some questions he had about applying my/Rothbard's title-transfer contract theory to some questions he had about interest payments on student loans and other contracts, usury, and so on. I had thought of talking to André and Sheldon separately but decided to combine them, partly because I confused André's topic with a discussion I had also been having at the same time with Galambosian Brian Gladish about IP and Galambos. (( On Galambos, see the following. On Gladish, see the next note. Galambos and Other Nuts; The Galambosians strike back; “Around this time I met the Galambosian.”; Was Galambos an IP Thief?; Galambos the Crank; Shades of Galambos: Man tries to copyright his name; Rothbard and Galambosians. )) Libertopia, San Diego, Oct. 11, 2012: Anthony Gregory, Kinsella, Roderick Long, Sheldon Richman. See KOL238 | Libertopia 2012 IP Panel with Charles Johnson and Butler Shaffer; KOL237 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP—Part 2 (Libertopia 2012); KOL236 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP (Libertopia 2012) Sheldon and I talked first about IP and other topics, and then to André about contract theory, which Sheldon jumped in on anyway. (I may talk to Gladish later about Galambos and IP.) (( Gladish on Galambos at ASC; his comments at: Have You Changed Your Mind About Intellectual Property?; Galambos and Other Nuts; Mises on Intellectual Property; Why Objectivists Hate Anarchy (Hint: IP). )) We touched on a number of topics; see the summary of our discussion points by Grok, below. https://youtu.be/7vrIz8cv2Bw Of relevance: Stephan Kinsella, “The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract,” Papinian Press Working Paper #1 (Sep. 7, 2024) Napolitano on Health-Care Reform and the Constitution: Is the Commerce Clause Really Limited?  and On Constitutional Sentimentalism (re Richman's point about the interstate commerce clause); see also his comments about federal tax power in Randy Barnett's “Federalism Amendment”–A Counterproposal; and related posts The Walmart Question, or, the Unsupported Assertions of Left-Libertarianism Ep. 382 Sheldon Richman Says Corporate Isn't a Dirty Word, Bob Murphy Show Four questions for “anti-capitalist” libertarians (Carpio)/Is Capitalism Something Good? (Richman) (2010) Left-Libertarians Admit Opposition to “Capitalism” is Substantive Capitalism, Socialism, and Libertarianism Should Libertarians Oppose “Capitalism”? Richman: Leave the “Left” Behind? Doug French, Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth On libertarians who support voluntary slavery contracts: Block, Nozick, Casey: “A Tour Through Walter Block's Oeuvre”; KOL442 | Together Strong Debate vs. Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery (Matthew Sands of Nations of Sanity) Concise Grok summary using the transcript (below): Here's a concise summary of the "Interview by Stephan Kinsella of Sheldon Richman and Andre from Brazil" in about 7 bullet points with time markers: 0:02 - 2:11: Stephan Kinsella introduces the podcast ("Kinsella on Liberty 457") to catch up with Sheldon Richman, executive editor of the Libertarian Institute, about his libertarian history and IP views. Sheldon writes "TGIF" weekly, rooted in his Freeman editorship (late 1990s-~2012-13). 2:19 - 9:14: Sheldon, officially retired but freelancing, rejects "left-libertarian" as a tribal label (early 2000s usage),

Originally Recorded January 31st, 2025 About Professor Walter Block: https://www.loyno.edu/academics/faculty-and-staff-directory/walter-block Check out Professor Block's book Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom In All Realms: https://cdn.mises.org/defending_the_undefendable_ii.pdf This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit musicallyspeaking.substack.com

Debating Anarchy – With Dr. Walter BlockMichael engages in a thought-provoking debate with Dr. Walter Block, an Austrian School economist and anarcho-capitalist theorist. They discuss the philosophical and practical implications of anarcho-capitalism, the role of the state, and the economic foundations of a truly free society.Michael Leibowitz, host of The Rational Egoist podcast, is a philosopher and political activist who draws inspiration from Ayn Rand's philosophy, advocating for reason, rational self-interest, and individualism. His journey from a 25-year prison sentence to a prominent voice in the libertarian and Objectivist communities highlights the transformative impact of embracing these principles. Leibowitz actively participates in political debates and produces content aimed at promoting individual rights and freedoms. He is the co-author of “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime” and “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty,” which explore societal issues and his personal evolution through Rand's teachings.Explore his work and journey further through his books:“Down the Rabbit Hole”: https://www.amazon.com.au/Down-Rabbit-Hole-Corrections-Encourages/dp/197448064X“View from a Cage”: https://books2read.com/u/4jN6xj join our Ayn Rand Adelaide Meetups here for some seriously social discussions on Freedom https://www.meetup.com/adelaide-ayn-rand-meetup/

Last week, Ben Burgis debated libertarian economist Walter Block. Tonight, we're playing you the recording. (The debate was hosted by the magazine Merion West, which will be simultaneously releasing it on their podcast.) This was a continuation of a written debate that started with Ben's article "The Case for Democratic Socialism":https://merionwest.com/2024/12/07/the-case-for-democratic-socialism/...and continued with Walter's reply:https://merionwest.com/2024/12/19/rejoinder-to-ben-burgis-the-case-for-laissez-faire-capitalism/...and concluded with Ben's response to Walter:https://merionwest.com/2024/12/30/in-reply-to-walter-block-defending-democratic-socialism/Before the debate, Ben does an Opening Argument on why libertarianism has nothing to do with freedom, and in the postgame for patrons Jason Myles comes by to hang out and talk shit. A good time is had by all.Follow Ben on Twitter: @BenBurgisFollow GTAA on Twitter: @Gtaa_ShowBecome a GTAA Patron and receive numerous benefits ranging from patron-exclusive postgames every Monday night to our undying love and gratitude for helping us keep this thing going:patreon.com/benburgisRead the weekly philosophy Substack:benburgis.substack.com

In this episode, Ben Burgis once more debates Walter Block.

Austrian Economics and Market Dynamics Economist Walter Block joins John Golden to discuss the Austrian School of Economics, highlighting its focus on human action, voluntary exchange, and market-driven entrepreneurship. Learn how Austrian principles challenge traditional neoclassical economics and the pitfalls of central banking and government regulation. This episode offers actionable insights for understanding market processes and fostering economic innovation. Key Points: Deductive reasoning vs. empirical testing. Entrepreneurship as the engine of progress. Free-market approaches to money and trade.

Originally Recorded November 20th, 2024 About Professor Walter Block: https://www.loyno.edu/academics/faculty-and-staff-directory/walter-block Check out Professor Block's book Defending the Undefendable: https://cdn.mises.org/Defending_the_Undefendable_2018.pdf This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit musicallyspeaking.substack.com

I had a delightful conversation with Professor Walter Block, a prominent economist and staunch anarcho-capitalist. Renowned for his extensive publications and contributions to the field, Block offered insightful perspectives on anarcho-capitalism, explaining its core principles and their relevance to contemporary society.Watch this episode on YouTube.Cozen O'Connor Public Strategies - The Beltway BriefingListen for of-the-moment insider insights, framed by the rapidly changing social and...

You can't have more titles to cars than the number of cars that exist. If you do, you don't have a car title, you have a lottery ticket, and you may or may not have access to a car if each person wants to make use of his own car title at the same time. Walter Block and I discuss the following lecture and take some rabbit trails on morality and legality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXO4oCTYmQs

In this special episode of The Rational Egoist, host Michael Liebowitz debates Walter Block, the Harold E. Wirth Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University, New Orleans, on the merits and challenges of anarcho-capitalism. With Tom Woods, renowned historian and libertarian commentator, moderating the discussion, the debate dives deep into the philosophy, practicality, and implications of a stateless society. Despite some microphone and technical issues, Liebowitz and Block bring sharp perspectives to the table, making this an intellectually charged conversation that explores the future of freedom and governance. Tune in for a dynamic and rigorous debate on one of the most controversial topics in libertarian thought. Michael Leibowitz, host of The Rational Egoist podcast, is a philosopher and political activist who draws inspiration from Ayn Rand's philosophy, advocating for reason, rational self-interest, and individualism. His journey from a 25-year prison sentence to a prominent voice in the libertarian and Objectivist communities highlights the transformative impact of embracing these principles. Leibowitz actively participates in political debates and produces content aimed at promoting individual rights and freedoms. He is the co-author of “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime” and “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty,” which explore societal issues and his personal evolution through Rand's teachings. Explore his work and journey further through his books:“Down the Rabbit Hole”: https://www.amazon.com.au/Down-Rabbit-Hole-Corrections-Encourages/dp/197448064X“View from a Cage”: https://books2read.com/u/4jN6xj join our Ayn Rand Adelaide Meetups here for some seriously social discussions on Freedom https://www.meetup.com/adelaide-ayn-rand-meetup/

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 442. This is a debate between me and Walter Block about voluntary slavery contracts, hosted by Matthew Sands of the Nations of Sanity project as part of his "Together Strong" debate series. (See previous episode KOL426) Unedited transcript (from Youtube) below. https://youtu.be/x6ecMmBpGs8?si=veUW9EnXhwujEAo1 Notes: For further discussion of this topic, see: chapters 9–11, from Legal Foundations of a Free Society (2024; LFFS), namely "A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability," "Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith," and "Selling Does Not Imply Ownership, and Vice-Versa: A Dissection" Re the "Zombicide" comments, see ch. 10, text at n.37 My paper, The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract (Papian Press Working Paper #1) KOL004 | Interview with Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery and Inalienability Other than Block and Nozick, Gerard Casey also seems to favor voluntary slavery: “Can You Own Yourself?“, Research Depository UCD Dublin (Dec. 2011) A few comments. African Slavery Walter favors voluntary slavery but not involuntary slavery;  this was one reason he sued the New York Times for defamation, since they claimed he supported slavery (if I recall correctly; 1, 2, 3). But how do we know that all the African slaves in antebellum America were involuntary slaves? Is it established that every African shipped to the US from Africa went against their will? What if they heard life was better in America, and they volunteered to go even knowing they would be enslaved. Wouldn't such a slavery contract be enforceable in Walter's view of slavery? Or take another example. Suppose Jones, owner of a plantation in Louisiana, owns a slave Toby, but he starts to feel bad about slavery and he manumits Toby, and tells him to leave. Toby says he has no money, no food, and he doesn't want to wander around in Louisiana where he might be attacked or enslaved again, and says he would prefer to just stay on Jones's plantation and work for him. Jones says well okay but only if you sell yourself to me and be my slave. So Toby sells himself to Jones. Wouldn't this be legitimate and enforceable, according to Walter's theory? Forced Sex with a Prostitute Walter says that if you sell yourself into slavery, then if you try to run away you are stealing the property of your owner. He is entitled to use force against you since you are disobeying him. Now around 52:13, Mathew asks Walter about my hypothetical about kissing a girl. I had explained that it's not assault/battery or aggression if you kiss a girl if she consents. If during dinner she promises to let you kiss her when you drop her off, and you do, it's also not consent, since her last communication set up a sort of standing presumption. As I write in ch. 9 of LFFS, Part III.C.1: If a girl promises a kiss at the end of the date and the boyfriend an hour later kisses her, she cannot claim it was nonconsensual. In effect, she communicated her consent, she set up a standing presumption that is reasonable to rely on—until and unless she changes her mind. If at the end of the date she announces she no longer wants a kiss, it is that consent that matters. It is always the most recent consent that matters since this is the best evidence for what was consented to. There is nothing in libertarianism that says people cannot change their minds. Walter then responds by saying that if you pay a prostitute $100 for sex and she backs out, you can't force her to have sex, as it would be rape, you can only get your money back. But suppose you pay her an extra $900 to induce her to agree that she cannot change her mind, then if you force her it's not rape (to which I respond, "Jesus!"). Of course it's easy to see this logic could also apply to a girl you are dating. If she agrees to have sex with her date and the end of the date and agrees that she "cannot change her...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 442. This is a debate between me and Walter Block about voluntary slavery contracts, hosted by Matthew Sands of the Nations of Sanity project as part of his "Together Strong" debate series. (See previous episode KOL426) Unedited transcript (from Youtube) below. https://youtu.be/x6ecMmBpGs8?si=veUW9EnXhwujEAo1 Notes: For further discussion of this topic, see: chapters 9–11, from Legal Foundations of a Free Society (2024; LFFS), namely "A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability," "Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith," and "Selling Does Not Imply Ownership, and Vice-Versa: A Dissection" Re the "Zombicide" comments, see ch. 10, text at n.37 My paper, The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract (Papian Press Working Paper #1) KOL004 | Interview with Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery and Inalienability Other than Block and Nozick, Gerard Casey also seems to favor voluntary slavery: “Can You Own Yourself?“, Research Depository UCD Dublin (Dec. 2011) A few comments. African Slavery Walter favors voluntary slavery but not involuntary slavery;  this was one reason he sued the New York Times for defamation, since they claimed he supported slavery (if I recall correctly; 1, 2, 3). But how do we know that all the African slaves in antebellum America were involuntary slaves? Is it established that every African shipped to the US from Africa went against their will? What if they heard life was better in America, and they volunteered to go even knowing they would be enslaved. Wouldn't such a slavery contract be enforceable in Walter's view of slavery? Or take another example. Suppose Jones, owner of a plantation in Louisiana, owns a slave Toby, but he starts to feel bad about slavery and he manumits Toby, and tells him to leave. Toby says he has no money, no food, and he doesn't want to wander around in Louisiana where he might be attacked or enslaved again, and says he would prefer to just stay on Jones's plantation and work for him. Jones says well okay but only if you sell yourself to me and be my slave. So Toby sells himself to Jones. Wouldn't this be legitimate and enforceable, according to Walter's theory? Forced Sex with a Prostitute Walter says that if you sell yourself into slavery, then if you try to run away you are stealing the property of your owner. He is entitled to use force against you since you are disobeying him. Now around 52:13, Mathew asks Walter about my hypothetical about kissing a girl. I had explained that it's not assault/battery or aggression if you kiss a girl if she consents. If during dinner she promises to let you kiss her when you drop her off, and you do, it's also not consent, since her last communication set up a sort of standing presumption. As I write in ch. 9 of LFFS, Part III.C.1: If a girl promises a kiss at the end of the date and the boyfriend an hour later kisses her, she cannot claim it was nonconsensual. In effect, she communicated her consent, she set up a standing presumption that is reasonable to rely on—until and unless she changes her mind. If at the end of the date she announces she no longer wants a kiss, it is that consent that matters. It is always the most recent consent that matters since this is the best evidence for what was consented to. There is nothing in libertarianism that says people cannot change their minds. Walter then responds by saying that if you pay a prostitute $100 for sex and she backs out, you can't force her to have sex, as it would be rape, you can only get your money back. But suppose you pay her an extra $900 to induce her to agree that she cannot change her mind, then if you force her it's not rape (to which I respond, "Jesus!"). Of course it's easy to see this logic could also apply to a girl you are dating. If she agrees to have sex with her date and the end of the date and agrees that she "cannot change her...

This week the Prosecution files their response to Nick Rekieta's motion to dismiss and we find out if who might be telling the truth. BOMB SHELL Info revealed. We also play a few clips of a debate with Walter Block and Dave Smith and Darryl Cooper's appearance on Tucker Carlson. Become a LPR member Odysee: https://odysee.com/@LPR:b?view=membership Spotify: https://anchor.fm/libertypodreview/subscribe Support the show with a purchase from Fox n Sons coffee. Use the promo code "Review" for 18% off an order of $25 or more. ww.foxnsons.com LPR On Other Platforms Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1988814 Anchor: https://anchor.fm/libertypodreview Locals: https://libertarianpodcastreview.locals/ Odysee: https://odysee.com/@LPR:b Substack: tylerjanke.substack.com This show is an attempt to review the libertarian and libertarian adjacent podcasts or video podcasts. Send us your favorite podcasts or ones that you would like to have us critique it.

Do Palestinians have the same rights as everyone else, or have they collectively forfeited these rights by being "criminals"? In an article for Merion West, libertarian economist Walter Block argued the latter:https://merionwest.com/2024/06/07/yes-to-a-palestinian-state-just-not-inside-or-right-next-to-israel/Ben Burgis responded:https://merionwest.com/2024/06/10/in-reply-to-walter-block-relocation-should-be-off-the-table/...and Walter responded to that:https://merionwest.com/2024/07/06/why-i-stand-by-relocation-a-rejoinder-to-ben-burgis/Now here's the debate.Link for Andy's fundraiser so he can keep making art for this show!https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-j-andrew-world-replace-his-ipadFollow Ben on Twitter: @BenBurgisFollow GTAA on Twitter: @Gtaa_ShowBecome a GTAA Patron and receive numerous benefits ranging from patron-exclusive postgames every Monday night to our undying love and gratitude for helping us keep this thing going:patreon.com/benburgisRead the weekly philosophy Substack:benburgis.substack.comVisit benburgis.com

The Rational Egoist: Walter Block on the Libertarian Movement, Israel, and His Break with Hoppe In this episode of The Rational Egoist, host Michael Liebowitz is joined by Walter Block, Harold E. Wirth Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University, New Orleans. A longtime figure in the libertarian movement and a prolific author, Block shares his perspectives on the state of the libertarian movement today, his views on Israel, and the reasons behind his philosophical break with Hans-Hermann Hoppe. This conversation explores key ideological divisions within libertarianism, along with Block's unique approach to economics and politics. Tune in for a candid and insightful discussion that sheds light on the nuances of libertarian thought and its impact on current issues. Michael Leibowitz, host of The Rational Egoist podcast, is a philosopher and political activist who draws inspiration from Ayn Rand's philosophy, advocating for reason, rational self-interest, and individualism. His journey from a 25-year prison sentence to a prominent voice in the libertarian and Objectivist communities highlights the transformative impact of embracing these principles. Leibowitz actively participates in political debates and produces content aimed at promoting individual rights and freedoms. He is the co-author of “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime” and “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty,” which explore societal issues and his personal evolution through Rand's teachings.Explore his work and journey further through his books:“Down the Rabbit Hole”: https://www.amazon.com.au/Down-Rabbit-Hole-Corrections-Encourages/dp/197448064X“View from a Cage”: https://books2read.com/u/4jN6xj join our Ayn Rand Adelaide Meetups here for some seriously social discussions on Freedom https://www.meetup.com/adelaide-ayn-rand-meetup/

In this debate on Palestinian statehood, Prof. Walter Block argues that, after October 7, 2023, if a Palestinian state is to be granted, it must be outside the borders of Israel and occupied territories, and the Palestinians should be removed from the occupied territories. Prof. Ben Burgis argues that, not only does this violate the non-aggression principle of Block's libertarian philosophy, but also that we should avoid ethnic cleansing and end apartheid in Israel. Watch on Ben Burgis YouTube channel Give Them an Argument: Season 6 Episode 32: Debating Palestine w/Walter Block

"Resolved: the proper libertarian position is to support Israel in its war with Hamas." Sponsors: & : Coupon Code: WOODS Guests' Websites:   Guests' Twitter: @ComicDaveSmith @WalterEBlock

Originally Recorded June 20th, 2024 Walter Block is the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Chair in Economics in the College of Business at Loyola University: http://business.loyno.edu/bio/walter-block Alan Futerman is a PhD student in political economy at King's College London: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/alan-futerman Check out their book The Classical Liberal Case for Israel: https://www.amazon.com/Classical-Liberal-Case-Israel/dp/9811639523 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit musicallyspeaking.substack.com

On Episode 72 of the Radical Agenda, our uncensored production, I penned and pronounced a defense of one Walter Block after he was stripped of his titles at the Mises Institute, and the Ron Paul Institute, both libertarian think tanks. Subsequent to this I ended up in a correspondence with Mr. Block. I won’t share […] The post SurrealPolitiks S01E062 – Against Libertarianism first appeared on SurrealPolitiks.

Join us at https://www.crisisinvesting.com Doug Casey Discusses Crisis Investing, Geopolitical Conflicts, and Philosophical Insights In this episode, Doug Casey answers questions from members of his private group regarding various topics, including his choice of last meal, drink, and cigar. He delves into philosophical questions about altruism, personal ethics, and the concept of sacrifice. Doug also provides his thoughts on potential geopolitical conflicts such as a U.S. Civil War, World War III, and the situation in Ukraine. He comments on the Dollar Milkshake Theory, the potential for Civil War in the U.S., and the importance of diversifying assets. Additionally, Doug discusses Putin, China, and the state of global politics, offering insight into the Killdozer incident and the recent downgrade of Walter Block at the Mises Institute. Other topics covered include the potential of anti-aging and life extension technologies, and Doug's thoughts on personal freedom and life improvement strategies. Finally, he addresses questions about relocation to countries like Panama and shares his perspective on developing intentional communities.   Chapters: 00:00 Introduction and Member Questions 00:17 Doug's Last Meal on Earth 02:26 Fighting Evil vs. Hedonism 05:29 US Civil War and World War 3 07:45 Dollar Milkshake Theory and Asset Allocation 11:50 Killdozer Day: Hero or Nutcase? 14:32 Walter Block and the Israel-Palestine Conflict 22:47 Trump's Conviction and Legal Ramifications 25:07 China, EMPs, and Strategic Patience 29:14 Libertarian Novels and Future Projects 32:09 Thoughts on India and Putin 39:36 Global Political Shifts and Abnormal Psychology 40:26 The Complex Dynamics in Niger and the Sahel 43:29 Invention Funding: Pitfalls and Strategies 47:48 Investment Strategies: Commodities, Cash, and Treasuries 52:20 Multiple Intelligences: Beyond the IQ Test 55:42 Living Fulfilled Lives Amidst Global Chaos 01:01:07 Relocation Considerations: Panama and Beyond 01:02:17 Anti-Aging and Life Extension Technologies 01:09:15 Building Sustainable Communities

Like my work? Show your support: ⁠⁠https://paypal.com/paypalme/josephfordcotto⁠⁠. It is greatly appreciated! This episode was livestreamed on May 13, 2024.

Michael Malice (“YOUR WELCOME”) welcomes author and world-renowned economist, Walter Block, onto the show to talk about his encounters with Ayn Rand, his recent ousting as a Senior Fellow from the Mises Institute, and why some academic scholars can actually be very spiteful. twitter.com/waltereblock Order THE WHITE PILL: http://whitepillbook.com/ Order THE ANARCHIST HANDBOOK: https://www.amzn.com/B095DVF8FJ Order THE NEW RIGHT: https://amzn.to/2IFFCCu Order DEAR READER: https://t.co/vZfTVkK6qf?amp=1 https://twitter.com/michaelmalice https://instagram.com/michaelmalice https://malice.locals.com https://youtube.com/michaelmaliceofficial Intro song: "Out of Reach" by Legendary House Cats https://thelegendaryhousecats.bandcamp.com/ The newest episode of "YOUR WELCOME" releases on iTunes and YouTube every Wednesday! Please subscribe and leave a review. This week's sponsors: Fast Growing Trees – The Plant Experts: fastgrowingtrees.com, code: WELCOME (15% off) Fum – The Natural Alternative: tryfum.com/malice, promo code: Malice (Free Gift) JustThrive – Potent, Proven, Effective: JustThriveHealth.com , promo code: WELCOME (20% off) Miracle Made Sheets – Self-Cleaning Sheets: trymiracle.com/MALICE (Free Towel Set + over 40% off) PlutoTV – Stream Now, Pay Never: Pluto.tv (Free)

Walter is an American  Austrian School economist and anarcho-capitalist theorist. He was the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at the School of Business at Loyola University New Orleans and a senior fellow of the non-profit think-tank Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, AlabamaIn this episode, we talked about:•⁠  ⁠Walter's Bio & Background•⁠  ⁠Friedrich Hayek Works•⁠  ⁠Austrian Approach to Business Cycles and Economy Recession•⁠  ⁠Free Speech•⁠  ⁠Monopolies•⁠  ⁠Rent ControlUseful links:Friedrich Hayek “Prices and Production”, “Human Action”, “Man Economy”Transcriptions:Jesse (0s): Welcome to the working capital real estate podcast. My name's Jessica Galley And. on this show, we discuss all things real estate with investors and experts in a variety of industries that impact real estate. Whether you're looking at your first investment or raising your first fund, join me and let's build that portfolio one square foot at a time. ladies and gentlemen, my name's Jesse Fragale. You're listening to Working Capital. The Real. Estate Podcast. It is my special honor to have Walter Edward Block on the show. Walter is an American, Austrian School economist, and anarcho capital theorist.He was the Herald e worth eminent scholar, endowed chair in economics at the School of Business at Loyola University in New Orleans, and a senior fellow of the non profit think tank, Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama. How's it going? Walter? PrettyWalter (50s): Good. I want to add, I'm not just an American economist, I'm also a Canadian. I worked for the Fraser Institute for about 12 years from 1979 to 1991. And I am a, a Canadian citizen, so I'm, I'm also, I don't know how to say out and about yet correctly, but otherwise I'm a Canadian as well. You'reJesse (1m 12s): Out of the, out of the closet. Out of the closet on the Canadian front that, yeah, that is, that is news to me. Were you born in, in Canada or just citizenship?Walter (1m 22s): Brooklyn.Jesse (1m 23s): Brooklyn, New York. Brooklyn. Okay. That's what I thought. Interesting. Okay. Well, you know, for those that don't know on the podcast, we mainly talk real estate with, as listeners know, we sprinkle in economists. I think you're, you're definitely unique in the sense that some of your thoughts may not be in the mainstream of, of your typical left right kind of political ideology. I, I kind of discovered you in, in high school actually, with, with some of the works that I think you wrote in the seventies, if I remember correctly.And I just think that the, some of the concepts that you talk about touch on real estate, rent control, some of the economic aspects, minimum wage. But for those that that don't know your work, don't know you Walter, maybe you could give a bit of a background, you know, how, what was your journey, you know, become an economist and, and what you do today?Walter (2m 14s): Well, it all started with me and Bernie Sanders. Bernie and I went to high school together for, we overlapped for four years, and we were sort of buddies because we were on the same track team and we ran the same events. I have to tell you, my Bernie Sanders joke, it's not at his expense. Bernie Sanders joke is that Bernie doesn't run away from much, he didn't run away from socialism even before socialism became as popular as it is now.Banks, in part to his efforts, he didn't run away not only for ex-cons voting, but even convicts voting. But there's one person that he ran away from, and that's me. Why? Because we both did the same event about a mile, and his time was about four 30 and I never broke five minutes.

Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture. Sponsored by Shone and Brae Sadler.Recorded at the Austrian Economics Research Conference, 22 March 2024, in Auburn, Alabama. Includes an introduction by Joseph T. Salerno.Lecture Text: Thank you, Joseph, for your kind introduction and thank you, Shone and Brae Sadler, for your generous sponsorship in making this event possible. It is a pleasure and personal honor to be invited to deliver this Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture titled “Ayn Rand and the Austrian Economists” at the Mises Institute's Austrian Economics Research Conference.Henry Hazlitt is one of my favorite writers on economics and ethics. His thoughtful, incisive, and influential writings are marked by his clarity of style and logical analysis. Both Henry Hazlitt and Ayn Rand could really write. Hazlitt's non-fiction books, Economics in One Lesson and Foundations of Morality, along with his novel, Time Will Run Back, complement Ayn Rand's ideas in her books such as The Virtue of Selfishness, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, and Atlas Shrugged. In their philosophical, political, and economic views, Hazlitt and Rand largely agree, as they make the same points in different ways with respect to the virtue of the free market as the path to prosperity and happiness. Also, they were friends in their personal lives. In addition, Henry Hazlitt and I had a great friend in common in the late, well-respected and greatly-loved Austrian economist, Bill Peterson.I am excited to be here to give this talk on Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, and Murray Rothbard and how their ideas may be complementary to the essential ideas of Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. Perhaps I will be able to provide some new insights to you. We'll see!Like my recently deceased friend, Sam Bostaph, I have great admiration for the ideas of Carl Menger. I will begin by discussing some of Menger's key ideas and comparing them with those of Ayn Rand. I will then repeat this process with the fundamental ideas of Mises and Rothbard. I will conclude with an overall assessment with respect to the potential compatibility of Austrian economics and Objectivism.Carl Menger (1840-1921) began the modern period of economic thought and provided the foundation for the Austrian School of Economics in his two books, Principles of Economics (1871) and Investigations into the Method of the Social Sciences with Special Reference to Economics (1883). In these books Menger destroyed the existing structure of economic science, including its theory and methodology, and put it on totally new foundations.Menger was a realist who said that we could know the world through both common sense and scientific method. Menger was committed to finding exact laws of economics based on the direct analysis of concrete phenomena that can be observed and characterized with precision. He sought to find the necessary characteristics of economic phenomena and their relationships. He also heralded the advantages of verbal language over mathematical language in that the former can express the essences of economic phenomena, which is something that mathematical language cannot do.Menger viewed exchange as the embodiment of the essential desire and search to satisfy individual human needs. It follows that the intersection between human needs and the availability of goods capable of satisfying those needs is at the root of economic activity. Emphasizing human uncertainty, error, and the time-consuming nature of economic processes, Menger was concerned with the information content of economic choices and the process of acquiring information in order to increase the well-being of economic actors.As this talk will demonstrate, Carl Menger's writings are the closest to Randian doctrines that have ever emanated from any economist. It will follow that we should read and reread his great books and share them with our friends and students.Aristotelian philosophy was at the root of Menger's framework. His biologistic language goes well with his Aristotelian foundations in his philosophy of science and economics. Menger illustrated how Aristotelian induction could be used in economics and he based his epistemology on Aristotelian induction. Menger's Aristotelian inclinations can be observed in his desire to uncover the essence of economic phenomena. He viewed the constituent elements of economic phenomena as immanently ordered and emphasized the primacy of exactitude and universality as preferable epistemological characteristics of theory.Menger's desire was to uncover the real nature or essence of economic phenomena. As an immanent realist, he was interested in essences and laws as manifested in the world. His general and abstract economic theory attempted to unify all true fragments of economic knowledge.Holding that causality underpins economic laws, Menger taught that theoretical science provides the tools for studying phenomena that exhibit regularities. He distinguished between exact types and laws that deal with strictly typical phenomena and empirical-realistic types and laws that deal with truth within a particular spatio-temporal domain. Empirical laws are found by observation and exact laws are found by conceptualization. Menger's exact approach involves deductive-universalistic theory that looks for regularities in the coexistence and succession of phenomena that admits no exceptions and that are strictly ordered. His theoretical economics is concerned with exact laws based on the assumptions of self-interest, full-knowledge, and freedom. Menger's exact theoretical approach involves both isolation and abstraction from disturbing factors.Menger developed a number of fundamental Austrian doctrines such as the causal-genetic approach, methodological individualism, and the connection between time and error. He incorporated purposeful action, uncertainty, the occurrence of errors, the information acquisition process, learning, and time into his economic analysis. As an Aristotelian essentialist and immanent realist, he considered a priori essences as existing in reality. His goal was to discover invariant principles or laws governing economic phenomena and to elaborate exact universal laws. To find strictly ordered exact laws he said that we had to omit principles of individuation such as time and space. This entails isolation of the economic aspect of phenomena and abstraction from disturbing factors such as error, ignorance, and external compulsion. Menger thus argued for an exact orientation of theoretical research whose validity is totally independent of any empirical tests.Both Aristotle and Menger viewed essences, universals, or concepts as metaphysical and had no compelling explanations of the method to be employed in order to abstract the essence from the particulars in which it is indivisibly wedded. For Rand, essences are epistemological and contextual, rather than metaphysical. For her, concepts are the products of a cognitive method whose processes are performed by a human being but whose content is determined by reality.Menger's theory of needs and wants is the link between the natural sciences (particularly biology) and the human sciences. He established this link by describing the final cause of human economic enterprise as an aspect of human nature biologically understood. He analyzed economic activity based on a theory of human action. His theory emphasized individual perception, valuation, deliberation, choice, and action.The foundation of Menger's value theory is a theory of human action that involves a theory of knowledge. He believed that men can understand the workings of the economy. Menger's goal was to establish economic theory on a solid foundation by grounding it on a sound value theory. To do this, he consistently incorporated his methodological individualism into his theory of value.Menger understood that values can be subjective (i.e., personally estimated), but that men should rationally seek objective life-affirming values. He explained that real wants correspond with the objective state of affairs. Menger distinguished between real and imaginary wants and goods depending upon whether or not a person correctly understands a good's objective ability to satisfy a want. Individuals can be wrong about their judgment of value. Menger's emphasis on objective values is consistent with philosophical realism and with a correspondence theory of truth.Menger does trace market exchange back to a man's personal valuations of various economic goods and observes that scales of value are variable from person to person and are subject to change over time. There are certainly “subjectivist” features in Menger's economic analysis that are founded on his methodological individualism which implies that people differ and have a variety of goals, purposes, and tastes. Personal evaluation is therefore inherent in a principled and consistent understanding of methodological individualism.As a supreme advocate of individualist methodology, Menger recognized the primacy of active individual agents who generate all of the phenomena of the social sciences. His methodological individualism is a doctrine that reflects the real structure of society and economy and the centrality of the human agent.Menger's theory of value essentially states that life is the ultimate standard of value. According to Menger, human life is a process in which a person, given his needs and the command of the means to satisfy them, is himself the specific point where human economic life both originates and ends. Menger thus introduced life, value, individual preferences that motivate people, and individual choices into economics. He thus essentially agreed on the same standard of life as the much later Ayn Rand. Value is a contextual judgment made by economizing men. Value is related to the existential state of the individual and the ability of the good in question to change that state in a manner desired by the person.Although Menger speaks of economic value while Rand is concerned with moral value, their ideas are much the same. Both view human life as the ultimate value. The difference is that Menger was concerned with economic values that satisfy a man's needs for food, shelter, healthcare, wealth, production, and so forth. From Rand's perspective, every human value (including economic value) is potentially a moral value that may be important to the ethical standard of a man's life qua man. Their shared biocentric concept of value holds that objective values support a man's life and originate in a relationship between a man and his survival requirements.Both Rand and Menger espouse a kind of contextually-relational objectivism in their theories of value. Value is seen as a relational quality dependent on the subject, the object, and the context or situation involved.Not many Objectivists, or others for that matter, know much about Menger's Austrian Aristotelianism and his commonsense and scientific realism. This is unfortunate. His writings have the potential to provide essential building blocks for a realist construction of economics. Ultimately, they may provide the vehicle for the harmonization and integration of Austrian economics with Objectivism.As we know, the preeminent theory within Austrian economics is the Misesian subjectivist school. Mises maintained that it is by means of its subjectivism that praxeological economics develops into objective science. The praxeologist takes individual values as given and assumes that individuals have different motivations and prefer different things. The same economic phenomena mean different things to different people. In fact, buying and selling take place because people value things differently. The importance of goods is derived from the importance of the values they are intended to achieve. When a person values an object, this simply means that he imputes enough importance to it to be willing to start a chain of causation to change or maintain it, thus making it a thing of value. Misesian economics does not study what is in an object, as does the natural scientist, but rather, studies what is in the subject.Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973), the Austrian philosophical economist, is one of our most passionate, consistent, and intransigent defenders of capitalism. Mises defends the free society and private ownership on the grounds that they are desirable from the perspective of human happiness, freedom, peace, and productivity. He constructed a monumental, overarching, systematic, and comprehensive conceptual framework that elucidated the timeless, immutable laws that guide human behavior. Mises integrated his profound theories of methodology, economics, political science, history, and the social sciences in his 1949 magnum opus, Human Action.There is an important dissemblance within Austrian value theory between Menger and Mises. However, it is possible for Menger's more objective-value-oriented theory to coexist and complement Mises's pure subjectivism which is based on the inscrutability of individual values and preferences. Although Menger agrees with Mises that an individual's chosen values are personal and, therefore subjective and unknowable to the economist, he also contended that a person ought to be rationally pursuing his objective life-affirming values. Menger thus can be viewed as a key link-pin figure between Misesian praxeology and Objectivist ethics.According to Mises, economics is a value-free science of means, rather than of ends, that describes but does not prescribe. However, although the world of praxeological economics, as a science, may be value-free the human world is not value-free. Economics is the science of human action and human actions are inextricably connected with values and ethics. It follows that praxeological economics needs to be situated within the context of a normative framework. Praxeological economics does not conflict with a normative perspective on human life. Economics needs to be connected with a discipline that is concerned with ends such as the end of human flourishing. Praxeological economics can stay value-free if it is recognized that it is morally proper for people to take part in market and other voluntary transactions. Such a value-free science must be combined with an appropriate end.Economics, for Mises, is a value-free tool for objective and critical appraisal. Economic science differentiates between the objective, interpersonally valid conclusions of economic praxeology and the personal value judgments of the economist. Critical appraisal can be objective, value-free, and untainted by bias. It is important for economic science to be value-free and not to be distorted by the value judgments or personal preferences of the economist. The credibility of economic science depends upon an impartial and dispassionate concern for truth. Value-freedom is a methodological device designed to separate and isolate an economist's scientific work from the personal preferences of the given economic researcher. His goal is to maintain neutrality and objectivity with respect to the subjective values of others.Misesian economics focuses on the descriptive aspects of human action by offering reasoning about means and ends. The province of praxeological economics is the logical analysis of the success or failure of selected means to attain chosen ends. Means only have value because, and to the degree that, their ends are valued.The reasons why an individual values what he values and the determination of whether or not his choices and actions are morally good or bad are certainly significant concerns but they are not in the realm of the praxeological economist. The content of moral or ultimate ends is not the domain of the economist qua economist. There is another level of values that value in terms of right preferences. This more objectivist sphere of value defines value in terms of what an individual ought to value.Mises grounds economics upon the action axiom which is the fundamental and universal truth that individual men exist and act by making purposive choices among alternatives. Upon this axiom, Mises deduces the entire systematic structure of economic theory. Mises's advocacy of free markets and his opposition to statism stem from his analysis of the nature and consequences of freely acting individuals compared to the nature of government and the consequences brought about by government intervention.For Mises, economic behavior is a special case of human action. He contends that it is through the analysis of the idea of action that the principles of economics can be deduced. Economic theorems are seen as connected to the foundation of real human purposes. Economics is based on true and evident axioms, arrived at by introspection into the essence of human action. From these axioms, Mises derives the logical implications or truths of economics.Through the use of abstract economic theorizing, Mises recognizes the nature and operation of human purposefulness and entrepreneurial resourcefulness and identifies the systematic tendencies which influence the market process. Mises's insight was that economic reasoning has its basis in the understanding of the action axiom. He says that sound deductions from a priori axioms are apodictically true and cannot be empirically tested. Mises developed, through deductive reasoning, the chains of economic theory based on introspective understanding of what it means to be a rational, purposeful, and acting human being. The method of economics is deductive and its starting point is the concept of action.According to Mises, all of the categories, theorems, or laws of economics are implied in the action axiom. These include, but are not limited to: subjective value, causality, ends, means, preference, cost, profit and loss, opportunities, scarcity, marginal utility, marginal costs, opportunity cost, time preference, originary interest, association, and so on.As an adherent of Kantian epistemology, Mises states that the concept of action is a priori to all experience. Thinking is a mental action. For Mises, a priori means independent of any particular time or place. Denying the possibility of arriving at laws via induction, Mises argues that evidence for the a priori is based on reflective universal inner experience.However, Misesian praxeology could operate within a Randian philosophical structure. The concept of action could be formally and inductively derived from perceptual data. Actions would be seen as performed by entities who act in accordance with their nature. Man's distinctive mode of action involves rationality and free will. Men are thus rational beings with free wills who have the ability to form their own purposes and aims. Human action also assumes an uncoerced human will and limited knowledge. All of the above can be seen as consistent with Misesian praxeology. Once we arrive at the concept of human action, Mises's deductive logical derivations can come into play.Knowledge gained from praxeological economics is both value-free (i.e., value-neutral) and value relevant. Value-free knowledge supplied by economic science is value-relevant when it supplies information for rational discussions, deliberations, and determinations of the morally good. Economics is reconnected with philosophy, especially the branches of metaphysics and ethics, when the discussion is shifted to another sphere. It is fair to say that economic science exists because men have concluded that the objective knowledge provided by praxeological economics is valuable for the pursuit of both a person's subjective and ultimate ends.Advocating the idea of “man's survival qua man” or of a good or flourishing life involves value judgments. To make value judgments, one must accept the existence of a comprehensive natural order and the existence of fundamental absolute principles in the universe. This acceptance in no way conflicts with the Misesian concept of subjective economic value. Natural laws ae discovered, are not arbitrary relationships, but instead are relationships that are already true. A man's human nature, including his attributes of individuality, reason, and free will, is the ultimate source of moral reasoning. Value is meaningless outside the context of man.Praxeological economics and the philosophy of human flourishing are complementary and compatible disciplines. Economics teaches us that social cooperation through the private property system and division of labor enables most individuals to prosper and to pursue their flourishing and happiness. In turn, the worldview of human flourishing informs men how to act. In making their life-affirming ethical and value-based judgments, men can refer to and employ the data of economic science.Mises and Rand were passionate critics of collectivism. Whereas Mises criticized the economic and political functioning of collectivism, Rand attacked the morality of collectivism. They agree that collectivism in the form of people, races, or nations does not exist independently from the individuals who comprise them. In addition, they both dismissed positivism's rejection of the human mind as real and as the tool of knowledge about the world, man, and his actions. They also believed that free-market capitalism is the best possible arrangement for society. Their promotion of rationality, free choice, and subjective (i.e., personally estimated) and objective values (in their respective contexts) make their worldviews compatible. Mises's arguments for capitalism in terms of its utility can be interpreted to be in harmony with Rand's criterion of man's life as the standard of value. There is a great deal in Mises's science of human action that is consistent with Objectivist principles. As stated by Walter Block, on the majority of issues Rand and Mises “are as alike as two peas in a pod”.Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) was a grand system builder. In his monumental Man, Economy, and State (1962), Rothbard continued, embodied, and extended Mises's methodological approach of praxeology to economics. His magnum opus was modeled after Mises's Human Action and, for the most part, was a massive restatement, defense, and development of the Misesian praxeological tradition. Rothbard followed up and complemented Man, Economy, and State with his brilliant The Ethics of Liberty (1982) in which he provided the foundation for his metanormative ethical theory. Exhibiting an architectonic character, these two works form an integrated system of philosophical economics.In a 1971 article in Modern Age Rothbard declares that Mises's work provides us with an economic paradigm grounded in the nature of man and in individual choice. He explains that Mises's paradigm furnishes economics in a systematic, integrated form that can serve as a correct alternative to the crisis situation that modern economics has engendered. According to Rothbard, it is time for us to adopt this paradigm in all of its facets.Rothbard defended Mises's methodology, but went on to construct his own edifice of Austrian economic theory. Although he embraced nearly all of Mises's economics, Rothbard could not accept Mises's Kantian extreme aprioristic position in epistemology. Mises held that the axiom of human action was true a priori to human experience and was, in fact, a synthetic a priori category. Mises considered the action axiom to be a law of thought and thus a categorical truth prior to all human experience.Rothbard agreed that the action axiom is universally true and self-evident, but argued that a person becomes aware of that axiom and its subsidiary axioms through experience in the world. A person begins with concrete human experience and then moves toward reflection. Once a person forms the basic axioms and concepts from his experiences and from his reflections upon those experiences, he does not need to resort to external experience to validate an economic hypothesis. Instead, deductive reasoning from sound basics will validate it.In a 1957 article in the Southern Economic Journal, Rothbard states that it is a waste of time to argue or try to determine how the truth of the action axiom is obtained. He explains that the all-important fact is that the axiom is self-evidently true for all people, at all places, at all times, and that it could not even conceivably be violated. Whether it was a law of thought as Mises maintained, or a law of reality as Rothbard himself contended, the axiom would be no less certain because the axiom need only be stated to become at once self-evident.Both Murray Rothbard and Ayn Rand were concerned with the nature of man and the world, natural law, natural rights, and a rational ethics based on man's nature and discovered through reason. They also agreed that the purpose of political philosophy and ethics is the promotion of productive human life on earth. In addition, both adopted, to a great extent, Lockean natural rights perspectives and arguments that legitimize private property. Additionally, they both disagreed with Mises's epistemological foundations, and on similar grounds.Both Rothbard and Rand endeavored to determine the proper rules for a rational society by using reason to examine the nature of human life and the world by employing logical deductions to ascertain what these natures suggest. They agreed with respect to the volitional nature of rational human consciousness, a man's innate right of self-ownership, and the metanormative necessity of noncoercive mutual consent. Both thus subscribed to the nonaggression principle and to the right of self-defense.Rothbard and Rand did not agree, however, on the nature of (or need for) government. They disagreed with respect to the practical applications of their similar philosophies. Rejecting Rand's idea of a constitutionally-limited representative government, Rothbard believed that their shared doctrines entailed a zero-government or anarcho-capitalist framework based on voluntarism, free exchange, and peace.Rothbard and Rand subscribed to different forms of metanormative libertarian politics—Rothbard to anarcho-capitalism and Rand to a minimal state. Unlike Rand, Rothbard ended his ethics at the metanormative level. Rand, on the other hand, advocated a minimal state form of libertarian politics based on the fuller foundation of Objectivism through which she attempted to supply an objective basis for values and virtues in human existence. Of course, Rothbard did discuss the separate importance of a rational personal morality, stated that he agreed essentially with most of Rand's philosophy, and suggested his inclination toward a Randian ethical framework. The writings of Rothbard, much like those of Menger, have done a great deal toward building a bridge between Austrian economics and Objectivism.Although Misesian economists hold that values are subjective, and Objectivists argue that values are objective, these claims are not incompatible because they are not really claims about the same things. They exist at different levels or spheres of analysis. The methodological value-subjectivity of the Austrians complements the Randian sense of value objectivity. The level of objective values dealing with personal flourishing transcends the level of subjective value preferences. The value-freedom (or value-neutrality) and value-subjectivity of the Austrians have a different function or purpose than does Objectivism's emphasis on objective values. On the one hand, the Austrian emphasis is on the value-neutrality of the economist as a scientific observer of a person acting to obtain his “subjective” (i.e., personally-estimated) values. On the other hand, the philosophy of Objectivism is concerned with values for the acting individual moral agent, himself. There is a distinction between methodological subjectivism and philosophical subjectivism. Whereas Austrians are methodological subjectivists in their economics, this does not imply that they are moral relativists as individuals.Austrian economics is thus an excellent way of looking at “social science methodology” with respect to the appraisal of means but not of ends. Misesian praxeology therefore must be augmented. Its value-free economics is not sufficient to establish a total case for liberty. A systematic, reality-based ethical system must be discovered to firmly establish a total case for liberty. Natural law provides the groundwork for such a theory, and both Objectivism and the Aristotelian idea of human flourishing are based on natural law ideas.Austrian economics and Objectivism agree on the significance of the ideas of human actions and values. The Austrians explain that a person acts when he prefers the way he thinks things will be if he acts compared to the way he thinks things will be if he fails to act. Austrian economics is descriptive and deals with the logical analysis of the ability of selected actions (i.e., means) to achieve certain ends. Whether these ends are truly objectively valuable is not the concern of the praxeological economist when he is acting in his capacity as an economist. There is another realm of values that views value in terms of objective values and correct preferences and actions. Objectivism is concerned with this other sphere and thus studies what human beings ought to value and act to attain.When thinkers from the Austrian school speak of subjective knowledge they simply mean that each person has his own specific and finite context of knowledge that directs his action. In this context, “subjective” merely means “subject-dependent”. Subjectivism for the Austrians does not mean the rejection of reality—it only focuses on the view that consumer tastes are personal.Austrian economists contend that values are subjective and Objectivists maintain that values are objective. These claims can be seen as compatible because they are not claims about the same phenomena. These two senses of value are complementary. The Austrian economist, as a neutral examiner, does not force his own value judgments on the personal values and actions of the human beings that he is studying. Operating from a different perspective, Objectivists maintain that there are objective values that stem from a man's relationship to other existents in the world.At a descriptive level, the economist's idea of demonstrated preferences agrees with Rand's account of value as something that a person acts to gain and/or keep. Of course, Rand moves from an initial descriptive notion of value to a normative perspective on value that includes the idea that a legitimate or objective value serves one's life. The second view of value provides a standard to evaluate the use of one's free will.Praxeological economics and Objectivism are complementary and compatible disciplines. Economics teaches us that social cooperation through the private property system and division of labor enables most individuals to prosper and to pursue their flourishing and happiness. In turn, Objectivism informs men how to act. In making their life-affirming ethical and value-based judgments, men can refer to and employ economic science.Objectivism's Aristotelian perspective on the nature of man and the world and on the need to exercise one's virtues can be viewed as synergic with the economic coordination and praxeology of Austrian economics. Placing the economic realm within the general process of human action, which itself is part of human nature, enables theoretical progress in our search for truth and in the construction of a systematic, logical, and consistent conceptual framework. The Objectivist worldview can provide a context to the economic insights of the Austrian economists.In conclusion, there is much common ground between Rand and the Austrians and much to be gained through the intellectual exchange between Objectivism and Austrian economics. Objectivism can be viewed as an ethical and logical augmentation of Austrian economics and Austrian praxeology can be seen as the ideal means for Objectivists when addressing economic issues. Economics would focus on attempting to discover economic principles but would leave ethical issues to philosophy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDh4AtNM2QM Patrick covers Hans-Hermann Hoppe's article kicking Walter Block out of Libertarianism for his views on Israel, the latest on the South African ICJ case against Israel for its alleged genocide in Gaza, and the ICJ judgement in Ukraine's ICJ case against alleged Russian sponsored terrorism. Vital Dissent websit LibertyWeekly.club Join my membership and newsletter site! Vital Dissent Merch 10% off with code VD10 Show Notes: Dave Smith tweet on ICJ ruling Kit Klarenberg tweet on ICJ case against Russia ICJ ruling on Ukraine v Russia What Will the International Court of Justice Order on Genocide in Gaza? | Lawfare The International Court of Justice's Interim Measures to Prevent Genocide in Gaza | Lawfare Counter-Genocidal Governance – Verfassungsblog State of Palestine | International Criminal Court Scott Horton tweet on Hope article Hoppe - Breaking Up is Hard to do but Sometimes Necessary - Lew Rockwell.com

Patrick covers Hans-Hermann Hoppe's article kicking Walter Block out of Libertarianism for his views on Israel, the latest on the South African ICJ case against Israel for its alleged genocide in Gaza, and the ICJ judgement in Ukraine's ICJ case against alleged Russian sponsored terrorism.   Vital Dissent website LibertyWeekly.club Join my membership and newsletter site! Vital Dissent Merch 10% off with code VD10   Show Notes: Dave Smith tweet on ICJ ruling Kit Klarenberg tweet on ICJ case against Russia ICJ ruling on Ukraine v Russia What Will the International Court of Justice Order on Genocide in Gaza? | Lawfare The International Court of Justice's Interim Measures to Prevent Genocide in Gaza | Lawfare Counter-Genocidal Governance – Verfassungsblog State of Palestine | International Criminal Court Scott Horton tweet on Hope article Hoppe - Breaking Up is Hard to do but Sometimes Necessary - Lew Rockwell.com

Tips help keep me on the air. You can send one here: ⁠https://paypal.com/paypalme/josephfordcotto⁠. Your support is greatly appreciated! This episode was livestreamed on January 4, 2024.

Bob launches a new miniseries, and starts by summarizing his chapter for a Festschrift in honor of Walter Block.Mentioned in the Episode and Other Links of Interest:[As of release, no information was available on the actual collection in honor of Walter. RPM will update when available.]Callahan and Murphy's critique of Hans Hoppe's argumentation ethics.Help support the Bob Murphy Show.

Don't miss this episode in which Jorge Besada returns to the podcast to discuss an Austro-libertarian take on the Israel-Palestine situation. (This also serves as Jorge's response to libertarian scholar Walter Block, who appeared on this podcast's Episode 65.) We considered the quandary of what should be done as far as a one-state or two-state solution, how to defend innocent civilians, and what the "clear pilled" solution might entail. Jorge Besada on X Jorge Besada on Instagram Follow California Liberty Project on Instagram Follow California Liberty Project on X --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/californialibertyproject/message

Ryan McMaken and Benjamin Seevers examine the reasoning behind efforts to destroy Americans' right to sell land to foreign nationals, especially the Chinese. It seems some think that Chinese nationals' ownership of 0.03% of American farmland is a big problem. "Arkansas' Attack on Chinese-Owned Property Is Reckless and Crony-Driven" by Benjamin Seevers: https://Mises.org/RR_162_A "Should We Allow U.S. Land To Be Sold to the Chinese?" by Walter Block: https://Mises.org/RR_162_B "Foreign Investment in U.S. Ag Land – The Latest Numbers" by Daniel Munch: https://Mises.org/RR_162_C Claim your free book: https://Mises.org/RothPodFree Be sure to follow Radio Rothbard at https://Mises.org/RadioRothbard. Radio Rothbard mugs are now available at the Mises Store. Get yours at https://Mises.org/RothMug PROMO CODE: RothPod for 20% off

Dr. Walter Block is a libertarian scholar and professor at Loyola University New Orleans, and he is an author of two-dozen books. He is also a senior fellow at the Mises Institute. His work focuses on Austrian economics and libertarian political theory -- and he is not afraid to tackle thorny/unpopular topics. In this episode, we started off by discussing Walter's early years in Brooklyn, where he was a classmate of Bernie Sanders' and later met Ayn Rand and her associates as an undergrad. He credits some conversations and meetings with them for opening his eyes to liberty and free markets. Walter was also a friend and mentee of the late Murray Rothbard's. In addition to discussing some of the universities with Austrian economists in residence, we spent most of the episode talking about the Israel-Hamas conflict. Walter recently co-wrote a controversial op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal in which he defended Israel's actions and was highly critical of Palestinian-rights movements. We talked about some of theory as well as practical aspects of what he feels must be done in the wake of the October 7 attack on Israel. Learn more about Walter Block here Check out some of Walter's books here California Liberty Project (@californialibertyproject) • Instagram photos and videos Follow California Liberty Project on X --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/californialibertyproject/message

Dr. Block coined a new position as early as the 70s called "evictionism" which states that in some instances, a mother may choose to evict a baby from the womb, and never to directly kill. If the child dies because it's premature, what realm of consequences there be for her? voluntarytheocracy.org/40

Alan Futerman, co-author of The Classical Liberal Case for Israel, and Jeremy R. Hammond, author of Obstacle to Peace: The U.S. Role in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, square off in a fruitful debate over the most contentious issue of the present moment. Guests' Books: - , by Walter Block and Alan Futerman - , by Jeremy R. Hammond   Previous Debates: - Ep. 1282  - Ep. 739    Related Articles: - Walter Block and Alan Futerman, "" - Alan Futerman, Walter Block, and Rafi Farber, "" - Jeremy Hammond, "" - Jeremy Hammond, ""

Recorded at the Mises Institute Supporters Summit in Auburn, Alabama, 12-14 October 2023. Sponsored by Thomas and Lisa Dierl.

Here's a question that may cause some sleepless nights: Is the money in your checking account yours or the banks? Jonathan Newman takes a closer look at the language of the bankers and what it really means. Have you noticed how unpopular it is for anyone in business to be turning a profit? Walter Block has a great explanation of why profits are awesome and all around us. The one place where it should be acceptable to be a pack rat is when it comes to accumulating books. Annie Holmquist explains why every home needs burgeoning bookshelves. An essential part of learning to think clearly and independently starts with asking the question "why?" Dana E. Abizaid lays out the reasons why this should be taught to our kids as early as possible. Article of the Day: If you haven't read Orwell's "I984" recently, you might want to snag a copy and read it again. Bobbie Anne Flower Cox makes the case that we're seeing an astonishing amount of Orwellian revisionism right now regarding the covid response. Sponsors: Monticello College Life Saving Food  TMCP Nation Climbing Upward Quilt & Sew

Eric Peters from Eric Peters Autos stops by for our weekly chat. We talk about climate change and the general welfare clause as well as how it's getting tougher to unlock what you already "own." Are we about to see a three way race in next year's presidential election? Here's 500mg of industrial strength reality supplement, courtesy of James Howard Kunstler. If you hold to traditional values of right/wrong, freedom and individual rights--you are considered a radical. J.B. Shurk has a timely message regarding the new rules for radicals today. Article of the Day: This one is going to raise a few eyebrows. Walter Block has a fascinating take on why you shouldn't need a doctor's permission to get prescription drugs. Sponsors: Monticello College Life Saving Food  TMCP Nation Climbing Upward Quilt & Sew

Michael and Walter Block discuss the Ukrainian conflict, reparations, immigration, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Michael and Walter Block discuss the Ukrainian conflict, reparations, immigration, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Dr. Walter Block goes right for the controversial issues in the battle for freedom. Instead of looking at the low-hanging fruit that most people agree on, Dr. Block makes persuasive arguments for extending freedom into even the most controversial areas of our lives - including roads, prostitution, and child labor. Links Referenced in Episode:Defending the Undefendable: https://amzn.to/3NefY7rPrivatization of Roads and Highways: https://amzn.to/3Jo8xt9Dr. Walter Block's substack: https://substack.com/@walterblockSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Can a libertarian or anarchist support the state of Israel? In this debate, Austrian economist Walter Block argues the affirmative and makes the case for why Israel is a force for liberty, while Saifedean argues political Zionism is the socialist central planning of land ownership, and is not possible without the violation of the property of Palestinians.ReferencesPalestineRemembered.comIsraeli soldiers recount Tantoura massacre: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ1TAOibLssIsraeli settler stealing Palestinian home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNqozQ8uaV8Enjoyed this episode? You can take part in podcast seminars, access Saifedean's courses – including his ongoing course ECO22: The Fiat Standard – and read chapters of his forthcoming book, Principles of Economics, by becoming a Saifedean.com member. Find out more here. 

Adam Carswell shares his Next Level interview with Dr. Walter Block, Austrian Economics expert and Marc J. Victor, President & Managing Partner of Attorneys for Freedom, at the Capitalism & Morality Summit as they discuss Austrian economics, rights through private property ownership, and how morality affects the law. In this episode, Adam, Walter and Marc talk about:How to be the “live and let live” guy in your community Austrian economics and free enterpriseMorality versus the lawThe power of private property ownership  Adam would like to give a huge thanks to Walter and Marc for coming on the Dream Chasers platform and sharing his knowledge and experience.Contact Dr. Walter Block: http://www.walterblock.com/ Contact Marc J. Victor: https://attorneysforfreedom.com/ Episode Resources:Adam J. Carswell Facebook Group | RaiseMasters | Capitalism & Morality Summit | WalterBlock.com | Attorneys for Freedom | The Privatization of Roads and Highways | Carswell.ioTimestamped Shownotes:01:13 – How did Adam start his journey into capital raising and Austrian economics?03:49 – What is Marc J. Victor's background and what are his beliefs? 07:56 – What is Dr. Walter Block's background and what are his beliefs?12:55 – Why does Marc believe that morality and the law should be separate?16:41 – How does Walter believe that evil people affect the public and legal systems?19:22 – How does the Chicago school of economics differ from Austrian economics?24:51 – What are the differences between Austrian economics and mainstream economics29:24 – What does Walter mean when he talks about transparency and negative externalities?32:22 – Why do libertarians like Marc believe in private property rights?35:07 – How does Marc believe that the government and individuals differ in evil intent?37:55 – Did the public create and scale the government or did the government take over power?40:12 – How many laws does the public need and why should they be calibrated to aggression?43:39 – How does money affect is and is not legal? 46:21 – How do principals of morality clash with laws? 50:22 – How do consent, aggression and ownership affect the interpretation of the law? 53:53 – What is an example of morality affecting what laws are created?56:06 – What is the role of the government in the media?59:02 – How does Walter view the government?59:32 – What does Walter think we should change about private property? 1:03:34 – How does Marc believe private property dictates laws?

I was joined by Walter Block, who has been a leading intellectual in the modern libertarian movement since his encounters with Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard in the 1960s, to talk about the history of American libertarianism and some of its intellectual problems.   Go to https://www.magicmind.co/unregistered and get 40% off your MAGIC MIND subscription for the next 10 days with my code UNREGISTERED20   Become a PATRON OF UNREGISTERED at www.patreon.com and get: Access to Unregistered Live, the weekly live Zoom meeting with Thad and patrons of Unregistered Bonus episodes featuring interviews with Curtis Yarvin, Ben Burgis, Michael Malice, Cody Wilson, Batya Ungar-Sargon, Hotep Jesus, and Buck Johnson   BECOME A MEMBER OF THE UNREGISTERED ACADEMY at https://www.unregisteredacademy.com/ for courses you won't find in college: American Slavery with Thaddeus Russell and Adam Rothman History of NATO with Scott Ritter and James Carden Malcolm X with Thaddeus Russell The Religious Right with Neil Young and Gio Pennacchietti World War II: The Great Blowback with Thaddeus Russell The JFK Assassination with Larry Hancock History of the CIA with Thaddeus Russell Reading The Unabomber Manifesto

Professor Per Bylund of Oklahoma State University, author of How to Think About the Economy joins Jeff and Bob to dissect how economics went so badly wrong. A discipline rooted in theory, axioms, and deduction has devolved into statistics, models, and hard science envy. Is the economics profession doing any good, or active harm? Per's new book How to Think About the Economy: Mises.org/Primer Gary North and Walter Block debate "Is it Smart to Get a PhD in Economics": Mises.org/HAP380a]]>

Professor Per Bylund of Oklahoma State University, author of How to Think About the Economy joins Jeff and Bob to dissect how economics went so badly wrong. A discipline rooted in theory, axioms, and deduction has devolved into statistics, models, and hard science envy. Is the economics profession doing any good, or active harm? Per's new book How to Think About the Economy: Mises.org/Primer Gary North and Walter Block debate "Is it Smart to Get a PhD in Economics": Mises.org/HAP380a

Professor Per Bylund of Oklahoma State University, author of How to Think About the Economy joins Jeff and Bob to dissect how economics went so badly wrong. A discipline rooted in theory, axioms, and deduction has devolved into statistics, models, and hard science envy. Is the economics profession doing any good, or active harm? Per's new book How to Think About the Economy: Mises.org/Primer Gary North and Walter Block debate "Is it Smart to Get a PhD in Economics": Mises.org/HAP380a

In this Topical Tuesday's episode, I spoke with Dr. Walter Block who is currently a professor and the chair of economics in the college of business administration at Loyola University. He is also an Adjunct Scholar at the Mises Institute and the Hoover Institute, as well as the author of over two dozen books, including Defending the Undefendable. Be sure to tune in if you're interested in learning about: How a chance encounter with Ayn Rand completely changed his world view The differences in ideology between Left-Keynesians, Right-Keynesians and Austrian economists Why Keynesian economic theory has captured the major institutions of today The hidden downsides of minimum wage law Why profits should be celebrated and not admonished To your success, Tyler Lyons Resources mentioned in the episode: 1. Dr. Walter Block Website Loyola University Interested in investing in ATMs? Check out our webinar.   Please note that investing in private placement securities entails a high degree of risk, including illiquidity of the investment and loss of principal. Please refer to the subscription agreement for a discussion of risk factors. Tired of scrambling for capital?  Check out our new FREE webinar -  How to Ensure You Never Scramble for Capital Again (The 3 Capital-Raising Secrets). Click Here to register.   CFC Podcast Facebook Group

Prompted by his advice to a young student entering a debate competition, Bob describes the way he would explain a Rothbardian free-market society to a skeptical conservative American Christian. Mentioned in the Episode and Other Links of Interest: Bob's essays on private law and military defense in his pamphlet https://mises.org/library/chaos-theory-two-essays-market-anarchy-0 (Chaos Theory.) Bob's http://libertarianpapers.org/murphy-libertarian-law-military-defense/ (journal article) on private military defense. Walter Block's https://mises.org/library/privatization-roads-and-highways (book on private roads). Rothbard's essay on https://cdn.mises.org/rae6_1_2_2.pdf (how not to desocialize). http://bobmurphyshow.com/contribute (Help support) the Bob Murphy Show. The audio production for this episode was provided by http://podsworth.com/ (Podsworth Media).