What do you think?
Rate this book
Conceived in Liberty #1
Conceived in Liberty, Vol. 1: The American Colonies in the 17th Century - A New Land, a New People
Very papatable broad swath of life from early US history. Excellent guide to further study.
531 pages, Hardcover
Published January 1, 1975
5 people are currently reading
43 people want to read
About the author
Murray N. Rothbard
284 books1,126 followersMurray Newton Rothbard was an influential American historian, natural law theorist and economist of the Austrian School who helped define modern libertarianism. Rothbard took the Austrian School's emphasis on spontaneous order and condemnation of central planning to an individualist anarchist conclusion, which he termed "anarcho-capitalism".
In the 1970s, he assisted Charles Koch and Ed Crane to found the Cato Institute as libertarian think tank.
In the 1970s, he assisted Charles Koch and Ed Crane to found the Cato Institute as libertarian think tank.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 25, 2024
ROTHBARD'S ICONOCLASTIC INTERPRETATION OF AMERICAN HISTORY AS "LIBERTY VS. POWER"
Rothbard states his purpose in the Preface of this book (originally published in 1975 in four separate volumes), "A major point of this ... is to put back the historical narrative into American history... My own basic perspective ... on the history of the United States, is to place central importance on the great conflict which is eternally waged between Liberty and Power... I see the liberty of the individual... as the necessary condition for the flowering of all the other goods that mankind cherishes... And power is almost always centered in and focused on that central repository of power and violence: the state."
He suggests, "almost all revolutions... are ignited by new acts of oppression by the government. Revolutions in America... were not more 'conservative' than any other, and since revolution is the polar archetype of an anticonservative act, this means not conservative at all." (Vol. I, pg. 104) Later, he states that "the first form of government in the New World established by colonists themselves, was by no means a gesture of independence from England; it was an emergency measure to maintain the Pilgrim control over the servants and other settlers." (Vol. I, pg. 161) He concludes, "Any libertarian revolution that takes power immediately confronts a grave inner contradiction: ... liberty and power are incompatible." (Vol. I, pg. 435)
He argues that the historical reputation of Benjamin Franklin is "the most overinflated of the entire colonial period in America." Franklin, according to Rothbard, was able to develop his lucrative printing business "through an ability to win a favored place at the public trough by gaining the patronage of older and influential men... he was able to snag highly profitable plums of government privilege." (Vol. II, pg. 64-66) He criticizes how money was "pumped into the economy essentially out of thin air," and states, "Creation of paper or bank money ('inflation'), therefore, confers a special privilege on some groups, at the expense of the producers and at the expense of the society's money." (Vol. II, pg. 124-126)
He argues that with the Stamp Act, "Great Britain had smashed at America with a mailed fist. The die was cast. The colonists were faced with a fateful choice: abject submission or open resistance." (Vol. III, pg. 95) He asserts that "Violence against state officials is an attempt by a rebellious people to cast off their rule. Violence against individual leaders of the people... reveals the unending tendency of oppressors to think of a revolutionary movement as ... a frenzied mob whipped up by a few radical and obstreperous demagogues." (Vol. III, pg. 197)
He suggests that "a guerrilla war would be the libertarian way to fight a war fully consistent with the American revolutionary ideals of liberty and equality of rights, and, therefore, the only way to achieve the libertarian goals of the Revolution." (Vol. IV, pg. 24) He insists that "The radicals... were engaged in fighting a war against centralized government, its taxation, restrictions and privileges, and were not about to favor establishing an equivalent at home to what they were fighting to eject from American shores." (Vol. IV, pg. 244) He later adds, "The conservatives would not simply give up and abandon their dreams of centralized rule." (Vol. IV, pg. 404)
Students of libertarianism, as well as of American history, will find a great deal to like in this work (notwithstanding that he sometimes goes into too much DETAIL on some historical points!).
Rothbard states his purpose in the Preface of this book (originally published in 1975 in four separate volumes), "A major point of this ... is to put back the historical narrative into American history... My own basic perspective ... on the history of the United States, is to place central importance on the great conflict which is eternally waged between Liberty and Power... I see the liberty of the individual... as the necessary condition for the flowering of all the other goods that mankind cherishes... And power is almost always centered in and focused on that central repository of power and violence: the state."
He suggests, "almost all revolutions... are ignited by new acts of oppression by the government. Revolutions in America... were not more 'conservative' than any other, and since revolution is the polar archetype of an anticonservative act, this means not conservative at all." (Vol. I, pg. 104) Later, he states that "the first form of government in the New World established by colonists themselves, was by no means a gesture of independence from England; it was an emergency measure to maintain the Pilgrim control over the servants and other settlers." (Vol. I, pg. 161) He concludes, "Any libertarian revolution that takes power immediately confronts a grave inner contradiction: ... liberty and power are incompatible." (Vol. I, pg. 435)
He argues that the historical reputation of Benjamin Franklin is "the most overinflated of the entire colonial period in America." Franklin, according to Rothbard, was able to develop his lucrative printing business "through an ability to win a favored place at the public trough by gaining the patronage of older and influential men... he was able to snag highly profitable plums of government privilege." (Vol. II, pg. 64-66) He criticizes how money was "pumped into the economy essentially out of thin air," and states, "Creation of paper or bank money ('inflation'), therefore, confers a special privilege on some groups, at the expense of the producers and at the expense of the society's money." (Vol. II, pg. 124-126)
He argues that with the Stamp Act, "Great Britain had smashed at America with a mailed fist. The die was cast. The colonists were faced with a fateful choice: abject submission or open resistance." (Vol. III, pg. 95) He asserts that "Violence against state officials is an attempt by a rebellious people to cast off their rule. Violence against individual leaders of the people... reveals the unending tendency of oppressors to think of a revolutionary movement as ... a frenzied mob whipped up by a few radical and obstreperous demagogues." (Vol. III, pg. 197)
He suggests that "a guerrilla war would be the libertarian way to fight a war fully consistent with the American revolutionary ideals of liberty and equality of rights, and, therefore, the only way to achieve the libertarian goals of the Revolution." (Vol. IV, pg. 24) He insists that "The radicals... were engaged in fighting a war against centralized government, its taxation, restrictions and privileges, and were not about to favor establishing an equivalent at home to what they were fighting to eject from American shores." (Vol. IV, pg. 244) He later adds, "The conservatives would not simply give up and abandon their dreams of centralized rule." (Vol. IV, pg. 404)
Students of libertarianism, as well as of American history, will find a great deal to like in this work (notwithstanding that he sometimes goes into too much DETAIL on some historical points!).
Displaying 1 of 1 review