The inauguration of President Trump was immediately followed by size comparisons.
My message to you today is simple: don’t miss this book. There is a lot to be learned about liberty here.
How to evaluate the economic record of Barack Obama? To even begin answering, it’s necessary to go beyond just counting the number of jobs created during his presidency (10 million) or calculating the average growth rate (1.5%) or even looking at something more wonky like the labor force participation rate.
Obama deserves credit for helping to push the struggle for same-sex marriage to a successful conclusion, for appointing some highly capable judges (despite flaws in their judicial philosophy), and for causing the Supreme Court to establish some valuable precedents protecting federalism, property rights, and religious freedom (albeit, often unintentionally). On the other hand, we may well have occasion to rue his overly expansive approach to executive power, particularly when it comes to initiating wars without congressional authorization.
One of the most important things we can do is really explain and understand how markets, not government intervention, are our best hope for an orderly and prosperous society.
Donald Trump is president. Here are his six biggest threats to liberty.
Trump doesn’t seem like the type for self-improvement, but here are four unsolicited recommendations anyway.
To understand riots one must understand the causes of social rage, usually said to be racism, poverty, lack of economic opportunity, and why people who experience this rage manage it in such a destructive manner.
Every year the number of regulations, dictates, rules, decrees, guidelines, statutes, laws, and bylaws in the United States grows by leaps and bounds.
The following words represent the generally acknowledged mindset of a bureaucrat: “Rules are rules, fella. I don’t make ‘em. I just enforce ‘em.”
Let’s say that you’re a policymaker interested in reducing the size of government. Strategically, is it easier to cut government regulation or roll back the welfare state (thereby reducing government spending)?
I argue that freedom of association is absolutely critical to sustaining relations of social trust across difference, even if it allows people to retreat further into their echo chambers.
An astonishingly high percentage of millennials do not know who communist leaders like Mao Zedong and Vladimir Lenin were.
John Rawls famously argues that we should think about principles of justice from behind a “veil of ignorance.” How robust would you like the protection of religious freedom to be if you had no idea whether you turn out to be a Christian, Muslim, atheist, etc.? How would you like income to be distributed if […]
If we want the market order to survive, we will have to continue to treat it both in theory and practice as a realm of moral and virtuous behavior.
Is tyranny of the majority still a threat? Alexis de Tocqueville would say so.
Truly virtuous behavior cannot be compelled. Demonstrating virtue and consequently inspiring people to be virtuous is a fundamental and necessary component of a free society.
With minor variations between the states, the law governing the use and ownership of real property emerged as part of English common law.
In 1930, total government expenditure was 10% of GDP. Of that, approximately 3% was federal spending, and 7% was state and local spending. Today, government expenditure is about 40% of GDP, with 25% of that spending federal, and the remaining 15% state and local.
The following is Professor Philip Pettit’s response to Jason Brennan’s piece on the nature of democracy. This is the second installment in a five-part debate between the two professors on the legitimacy of democracy as a system of social order.
Decades before the socialists gained power, Eugene Richter saw the writing on the wall.
In the absence of a compelling interest, such as preventing physical harm, governments have no right to control what goes on inside of churches and other houses of worship.
Politics isn’t just bad; It’s the worst. It brings out the literal worst in people.
Most arguments in favor of the death penalty fold under their own weight.