Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy” as Want to Read:
The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy

4.4  ·  Rating Details ·  85 Ratings  ·  6 Reviews
The collapse of socialism across Eastern Europe - as manifested most dramatically by the events of the forever memorable November 9, 1989, when the Germans of East and West reunited, moved and overjoyed, on top of the Berlin Wall - has added more support and urgency to the central thesis of this volume than I had ever hoped for. Whether the following studies deal with econ ...more
Hardcover, 265 pages
Published March 31st 1993 by Springer (first published 1993)
More Details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The Economics and Ethics of Private Property

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 310)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  Rating Details
Fabricio Terán
May 27, 2013 Fabricio Terán is currently reading it  ·  review of another edition
It integrates austrolibertarian theories of Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe into a grand, comprehensive and unified system of human sciences encompassing epistemology, praxeology, ethics, economics, politics, sociology, history and culture.

I think David Gordon have a review that should be consulted
Mike Fox
Nov 23, 2011 Mike Fox rated it it was amazing
This book is a collection of essays and articles most of which were directly written by Hans Hoppe. The first half of the book is focused on economics and the second half on philosophy. He starts by debunking the myth of public goods then moves to a unique analysis of taxation. From there he explains the illegitimate state of the banking industry and the extent of the problem. There was then a very interesting analysis of Marxist class theory which essentially states that the theory is essential ...more
Josh Hanson
Mar 22, 2011 Josh Hanson rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: economics
The four-star rating is a bit misleading in that this is a collection of essays, and I would certainly rank several of these as five-star. If you've never read Hoppe's essay "Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis", drop everything and read it now. It will completely change everything you thought you understood about class conflict.

The reason I gave this only four stars is primarily because some of the essays are very technical and complicated, and I don't want to mislead other readers into thinki
John Jolly
Apr 03, 2015 John Jolly rated it it was amazing
Thick, philosophic book, but well worth the read. Delves deep into the fundamentals and implications of Argumentation Ethics
Mar 10, 2012 Geir rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
A mixed book. Some essays are very thought-provoking and strong in their arguments. Others are very technical to the point of dry academic considerations. I should really rate each essay of the book, but won't. I recommend that all those interested in politics, sociology and philosophy in general acquire the book and read it or at least sections of it. In retrospect I can truly say that I would be mentally poorer if I had not read the book.
Charlie Pribble
Oct 10, 2015 Charlie Pribble rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
This book deserves 4.5/5 stars. One thing I really enjoyed in this book was Hoppe's discussion of the false distinction between public and private goods.
Rick Zierer
Rick Zierer rated it it was amazing
Sep 17, 2016
BookDB marked it as to-read
Sep 16, 2016
Kristen is currently reading it
Sep 16, 2016
Concerned_conrad marked it as to-read
Sep 10, 2016
Ali Ismail
Ali Ismail marked it as to-read
Sep 10, 2016
Mikael is currently reading it
Aug 27, 2016
Daniel Moss
Daniel Moss marked it as to-read
Aug 21, 2016
Carlos marked it as to-read
Aug 15, 2016
Ares marked it as to-read
Aug 14, 2016
Michele Ricci
Michele Ricci marked it as to-read
Aug 14, 2016
Zach Howell
Zach Howell marked it as to-read
Aug 08, 2016
Kai marked it as to-read
Aug 07, 2016
Rik Storey
Rik Storey rated it it was amazing
Jul 28, 2016
Daniel marked it as to-read
Jul 13, 2016
Andrew added it
Jul 12, 2016
P. H.
P. H. rated it really liked it
Jul 10, 2016
Raphael Cavalcanti
Raphael Cavalcanti marked it as to-read
Jul 10, 2016
Andrew Bernier
Andrew Bernier marked it as to-read
Jul 07, 2016
Mark Deardorff
Mark Deardorff rated it it was amazing
Jul 06, 2016
Derek Jones
Derek Jones rated it really liked it
Jun 28, 2016
Joshua Topliffe
Joshua Topliffe marked it as to-read
Jun 27, 2016
Bastiat marked it as to-read
Jun 24, 2016
Adam Keith Strahan
Adam Keith Strahan rated it it was amazing
Jun 23, 2016
Trey Smith
Trey Smith marked it as to-read
Jun 18, 2016
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
  • Bastiat Collection
  • Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, and Other Essays
  • Principles of Economics
  • Theory and History: An Interpretation of Social and Economic Evolution
  • Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles
  • The Left, The Right and The State
  • The Failure of the New Economics
  • No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority
  • The Privatisation of Roads & Highways: Human and Economic Factors
  • Our Enemy, the State
  • The Counter-Revolution of Science

Share This Book

“However, not only external expansion of state power is brought about by the ideology of nationalism. War as the natural outgrowth of nationalism is also the means of strengthening the state’s internal powers of exploitation and expropriation. Each war is also an internal emergency situation, and an emergency requires and seems to justify the acceptance of the state’s increasing its control over its own population. Such increased control gained through the creation of emergencies is reduced during peacetime, but it never sinks back to its pre-war levels. Rather, each successfully ended war (and only successful governments can survive) is used by the government and its intellectuals to propagate the idea that it was only because of nationalistic vigilance and expanded governmental powers that the “foreign aggressors” were crushed and one’s own country saved, and that this successful recipe must then be retained in order to be prepared for the next emergency. Led by the just proven “dominant” nationalism, each successful war ends with the attainment of a new peacetime high of governmental controls and thereby further strengthens a government’s appetite for implementing the next winnable international emergency.” 13 likes
“Incidentally, the same logic that would force one to accept the idea of the production of security by private business as economically the best solution to the problem of consumer satisfaction also forces one, so far as moral-ideological positions are concerned, to abandon the political theory of classical liberalism and take the small but nevertheless decisive step (from there) to the theory of libertarianism, or private property anarchism. Classical liberalism, with Ludwig von Mises as its foremost representative in the twentieth century, advocates a social system based on the nonaggression principle. And this is also what libertarianism advocates. But classical liberalism then wants to have this principle enforced by a monopolistic agency (the government, the state)—an organization, that is, which is not exclusively dependent on voluntary, contractual support by the consumers of its respective services, but instead has the right to unilaterally determine its own income, i.e., the taxes to be imposed on consumers in order to do its job in the area of security production. Now, however plausible this might sound, it should be clear that it is inconsistent. Either the principle of nonaggression is valid, in which case the state as a privileged monopolist is immoral, or business built on and around aggression—the use of force and of noncontractual means of acquiring resources—is valid, in which case one must toss out the first theory. It is impossible to sustain both contentions and not to be inconsistent unless, of course, one could provide a principle that is more fundamental than both the nonaggression principle and the states’ right to aggressive violence and from which both, with the respective limitations regarding the domains in which they are valid, can be logically derived. However, liberalism never provided any such principle, nor will it ever be able to do so, since, to argue in favor of anything presupposes one’s right to be free of aggression. Given the fact then that the principle of nonaggression cannot be argumentatively contested as morally valid without implicitly acknowledging its validity, by force of logic one is committed to abandoning liberalism and accepting instead its more radical child: libertarianism, the philosophy of pure capitalism, which demands that the production of security be undertaken by private business too.” 6 likes
More quotes…