Radical Privatization and Other Libertarian Conundrums

  • Walter E. BlockEmail author
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism book series (PASTCL)


A conundrum is a seeming logical contradiction, one that can actually be solved, or resolved. Perhaps the most famous example in theology is the following challenge: can God create a stone so big that even He cannot lift it. Either way, the case for religion loses out, at least at first glance. If God can create such a big stone, all well and good for Him; however, then, as He cannot also lift it, there can be no such thing as a Higher Power. On the other hand, if God is unable to create so heavy an object, then the case for belief in Him is dashed from the very start. For He cannot be truly omnipotent, since here is something He cannot do.


Radical privatization Libertarian conundrums Political economic philosophy The Martians 


  1. Barnett, Randy E., The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. Barnett, Randy, and Hagel, John, eds., Assessing the Criminal. Cambridge MA: Ballinger, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, Randy, 1977, “Whither Anarchy? Has Robert Nozick Justified the State?,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter, pp. 15–22.Google Scholar
  4. Benson, Bruce L., The Enterprise of Law: Justice Without the State. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. Benson, Bruce L., “The Spontaneous Evolution of Commercial Law,” Southern Economic Journal, 55: 644–661, 1989a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benson, Bruce L., 1989b, Enforcement of Private Property Rights in Primitive Societies: Law Without Government,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. IX, No. 1, Winter, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
  7. Block, Walter, “The Economics of Discrimination,” The Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11, 1992, pp. 241–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Block, Walter and Walker, Michael A., eds., Discrimination, Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1982.Google Scholar
  9. Block, Walter and Walter Williams, 1981, “Male-Female Earnings Differentials: A Critical Reappraisal,” Journal of Labor Research, 2(2): 383–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Block, Walter, Defending the Undefendable. New York: Fleet Press, 1976, Fox and Wilkes, 1991.Google Scholar
  11. Block, Walter, “Market Inalienability Once Again: Reply to Radin,” Thomas Jefferson Law Journal, Vol. 22, No. 1, Fall 1999, pp. 37–88.Google Scholar
  12. Block, Walter, “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Inalienability: A Critique of Rothbard, Barnett, Gordon, Smith, Kinsella and Epstein,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, forthcoming-a.Google Scholar
  13. Block, Walter, “Alienability, Inalienability, Paternalism and the Law: Reply to Kronman,” American Journal of Criminal Law, forthcoming-b.Google Scholar
  14. Block, Walter, “Epstein on Alienation: A Rejoinder,” forthcoming-c.Google Scholar
  15. Block, Walter, “Kuflik on Inalienability: A Rejoinder,” forthcoming-d.Google Scholar
  16. Block, Walter, “The Case for De-Criminalizing Blackmail: A Reply to Lindgren and Campbell,” Western State University Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 2, Spring, 1997, pp. 225–246.Google Scholar
  17. Block, Walter, “Trading Money for Silence,” University of Hawaii Law Review, Vol. 8, No. 1, Spring 1986, pp. 57–73.Google Scholar
  18. Childs, Roy A., Jr., 1977, “The invisible hand strikes back,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter, pp. 23–34.Google Scholar
  19. Epstein, Richard A., Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. Evers, Williamson M., 1977, “Toward a reformulation of the law of contracts,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter, pp. 3–14.Google Scholar
  21. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, Democracy, the God that Failed: The Economics and Politics of Monarchy, Democracy and Natural Order, New Brunswick, N.J. Transaction Publishers, 2001.Google Scholar
  22. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, Praxeology and Economic Science. Auburn, AL: Mises Institute, Auburn University, 1988.Google Scholar
  23. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (1995), Economic Science and the Austrian Method. Auburn, AL: The Mises Institute.Google Scholar
  24. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism: Economics, Politics and Ethics. Boston: Dordrecht, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy. Boston: Kluwer, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, “Austrian Rationalism in the Age of the Decline of Positivism,” Ebeling, R., ed., Austrian Economics: Perspectives on the Past and Prospects for the Future. Hillsdale, MI: Hillsdale College Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  27. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann, “The Economics and Sociology of Taxation,” Rockwell. L., ed., Taxation: An Austrian View. Boston: Dordrecht, 1992.Google Scholar
  28. King, J. Charles, A Rationale for Punishment, 4 J. Libertarian Stud. 151, 154 (1980).Google Scholar
  29. Kinsella, Stephan N., “A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights,” (volume) 30 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 607 45 (1997).Google Scholar
  30. Kinsella, Stephan N., “New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory,” 12:2 J. Libertarian Studies 313 26 (Fall 1996a).Google Scholar
  31. Kinsella, Stephan N., “Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach,” 12:1 J. Libertarian Studies 51 (Spring 1996b).Google Scholar
  32. Kinsella, Stephan N., “Estoppel: A New Justification for Individual Rights,” Reason Papers No. 17 (Fall 1992), p. 61.Google Scholar
  33. Levin, Michael, “Comparable Worth: The Feminist Road to Socialism,” Commentary, September 1984.Google Scholar
  34. Levin, Michael, Feminism and Freedom. New York: Transaction Books, 1987.Google Scholar
  35. Levin, Michael, Why Race Matters. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1997.Google Scholar
  36. Manne, Henry A., “In Defense of Insider Trading,” Harvard Business Review, 113, Nov/Dec 1966a.Google Scholar
  37. Manne, Henry A., Insider Trading and the Stock Market. New York: The Free Press, 1966b.Google Scholar
  38. McGee, Robert W., and Block, Walter, “Information, Privilege, Opportunity and Insider Trading,” Northern Illinois University Law Review, December 1989, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1–35.Google Scholar
  39. Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism: With Critical Essays, Samuel Gorowitz, ed. New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1971.Google Scholar
  40. Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism, New York: The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 1, 1957.Google Scholar
  41. Nozick, Robert, Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books, 1974.Google Scholar
  42. Rothbard, Murray N., Man, Economy and State. Los Angeles, Nash, 1962.Google Scholar
  43. Rothbard, Murray N., For a New Liberty. New York: Macmillan, 1973.Google Scholar
  44. Rothbard, Murray N., The Ethics of Liberty. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  45. Rothbard, Murray N., 1977, “Robert Nozick and the immaculate conception of the state, The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter, pp. 45–58.Google Scholar
  46. Sanders, John T., 1977, “The free market model versus Government: a reply to Nozick,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter, pp. 35–44.Google Scholar
  47. Spooner, Lysander. 1870. No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority and A Letter to Thomas F. Bayard, Larkspur, Colorado: Rampart College;

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Loyola UniversityNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations