N. Stephan Kinsella
Born
in The United States
January 01, 1965
Website
Genre
![]() |
Against Intellectual Property
15 editions
—
published
2001
—
|
|
![]() |
Louisiana Civil Law Dictionary
2 editions
—
published
2011
—
|
|
![]() |
A Libertarian Theory of Contract
|
|
![]() |
Online Contract Formation
—
published
2004
|
|
![]() |
Contra la propiedad intelectual
by |
|
![]() |
Libertarian Papers, Vol. 7 (2015)
|
|
![]() |
Libertarian Papers, Vol. 8 (2016)
|
|
![]() |
Trademark Practice & Forms
|
|
![]() |
A civil law to common law dictionary
|
|
![]() |
Digest of Commercial Laws of the World
by
—
published
1998
|
|
“Nowadays the job of the judge is not to do justice. The judge is more of a functionary . He's like a civil servant whose job is to interpret words written down by another branch of the government, whether those words are just or not.”
―
―
“As I explain in 'What It Means to be an Anarcho-Capitalist', to be an anarchist simply means you oppose aggression, and you realize the state necessarily commits aggression. If you are not an anarchist, it means you either condone aggression, or think the state does not necessarily commit aggression. As you say you are not an anarchist, can you please tell us which one describes you? Are you in favor of aggression (like socialists and criminals are)? Or, do you think the state does not commit aggression (like children brainwashed by government schools think)?”
―
―
“Libertarian opponents of anarchy are attacking a straw man. Their arguments are usually utilitarian in nature and amount to "but anarchy won’t work" or "we need the (things provided by the) state." But these attacks are confused at best, if not disingenuous. To be an anarchist does not mean you think anarchy will "work" (whatever that means); nor that you predict it will or "can" be achieved. It is possible to be a pessimistic anarchist, after all. To be an anarchist only means that you believe that aggression is not justified, and that states necessarily employ aggression. And, therefore, that states, and the aggression they necessarily employ, are unjustified. It’s quite simple, really. It’s an ethical view, so no surprise it confuses utilitarians.
Accordingly, anyone who is not an anarchist must maintain either: (a) aggression is justified; or (b) states (in particular, minimal states) do not necessarily employ aggression.”
―
Accordingly, anyone who is not an anarchist must maintain either: (a) aggression is justified; or (b) states (in particular, minimal states) do not necessarily employ aggression.”
―
Topics Mentioning This Author
topics | posts | views | last activity | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Science and Inquiry: March 2020 - Demon Under the Microscope | 12 | 87 | Mar 04, 2020 05:10PM |
Is this you? Let us know. If not, help out and invite N. to Goodreads.