Discover more from The Libertarian Alliance
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Related posts:
Trump Accounts: Capitalism by Permission
Dirty Capitalism: Water Monopolies, and the Fraud of Privatisation
What should be the functions of government?
Waverley Local Plan: Issues and Options Consultation Response
An Examination in the Philosophy of Liberty
A message to Wes Streeting MP and others on mask-wearing for ’flu
Just governance
Summary Response to “Informal Engagement” on Farncombe Local Streets Improvements
The Corruption of Science
The May 7th 2026 West Surrey Local Elections
Notes on the “People’s Emergency Briefing” film
Powered by YARPP.
Has the first ever really existed?
Mark – you, unintentionally, show the problem.
Formally speaking there is nothing much wrong with the economics of the late Murray Newton Rothbard – he did NOT claim that economies of scale were the result of state intervention, or that without state intervention there would be no very rich people, or that without state intervention there would be no large business enterprises employing many thousands of people.
On the contrary – Rothbard accepted that without state intervention those things would still occur. The big Walmart might be near the railroad station (if that is the form of transport that won out in a free market) rather than on an interstate road – but there would still be a big Walmart (or whatever).
But look at what you wrote “Has the first type ever existed”.
Murray Rothbard did NOT intend to suggest that the wealth of people in the past (such as J. Wedgewood) or the present (such as Jon Huntsman senior) was somehow not legitimate – but that is what your own comment does imply.
Rothbard meant to make people hostile to government subsidies to business and so on (a TINY proportion of government spending – but still wrong, just as most regulations do NOT benefit “big business” but those regulations that do are still wrong, just as those regulations that harm “big business” are also wrong), but instead people take Rothbard’s rhetoric and use it to attack business generally.
The Black Flaggers (not just the Red Flaggers) go around denouncing “the rich” and “the corporations”. As if state “force and violence” was the normal way these people and enterprises made their money – which it is not (and Rothbard agreed that it was not).
Murray Rothbard did NOT believe that – but his rhetoric (and his citing of socialists such as G. Kolko as if they were trustworthy) leads some people in that direction.
Murray Rothbard was a supporter of capitalism – but, in the end, his rhetoric (his tactics) have not had good results.
” …but, in the end, his rhetoric (his tactics) have not had good results.”
The day I read ‘For a New Liberty’ was the day I knew I was a libertarian. Sean Gabb has said on these very pages that he feels libertarians are born, not made. I’ve come to agree with that sentiment. Rothbard’s rhetoric is just right for tipping a receptive mind in our direction. The non-receptive minds will misunderstand or misuse Rothbard’s writings, anyway. When his writing reaches the right people, it brings them to our light. I think his results have been outstanding!