Below is a recent post from Mises Deutschland: Of the Moral and Economic Benefit of Tax-Evasion (in German), Vom moralischen und wirtschaftlichen Wohl der Steuerhinterziehun.
Update: See also Presentando al prof. Hoppe la traducción de su libro; photo below.
The Brazilian Philosophy Magazine Dicta & Contradicta Interviews Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Would the change from a statist to a libertarian society help or hinder the production of high culture?
Hoppe: A libertarian society would be significantly more prosperous and wealthy and this would certainly help both low and high culture. But a free society – a society without taxes and tax-subsidies and without so-called “intellectual property rights” – would produce a very differentculture, with a very different set of products, producers, stars and failures.
You see a causal link between a society’s form of government and its moral values and social development. Do you see a similar link between type of government and aesthetic standards and quality of art and entertainment?
Hoppe: Yes I do. Democratic state government systematically promotes egalitarianism and relativism. In the field of human interaction, it leads to the subversion and ultimately disappearance of the idea of eternal and universal principles of justice. Law is swamped and submerged by legislation. In the field of the arts and of aesthetic judgment, democracy leads to the subversion and ultimately disappearance of the notion of beautyand universal standards of beauty. Beauty is swamped and submerged by so-called “modern art.” [click to continue…]
Prof. Hoppe spoke (in German) on the topic “On Taxes and Parasites,” at the occasion of the inaugural conference of the Ludwig von Mises Institut Deutschland, held at Hotel Bayerischer Hof, in Munich, on June 15, 2013.
The following is a video of Prof. Hoppe speaking at the Rafael del Pino Foundation’s Master Lecture Series in Madrid, Spain, on June 20, 2013: “From Aristocracy to Monarchy to Democracy: A Tale of Moral and Economic Folly and Decay.”
From the UK publication The Libertarian:
By Eric Field
Hans-Hermann Hoppe is one of the most defining of contemporary libertarian thinkers. A graduate of the Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany and a former Marxist, Hoppe’s is best known for his rigorously logical examination of culture, human action, and the state. Hoppe has at times courted controversy for his belief that natural hierarchies are essential to human liberty. Regardless of whether or not one agrees with much of Hoppe’s statements, he has greatly improved the quality of libertarian discourse. So much so, that “Hoppean” has become a synonym for rigorously supported scholarly support for libertarianism.
Ekonomia I Eytka Własności Prywatnej, the Polish translation of Professor Hoppe’s The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, is now available.
Economía Y Ética de la Propiedad Privada, the Spanish translation of Professor Hoppe’s The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, is available at the following links:
To right is the cover of Monarquia, Democracia Y Orden Natural. Una Vision Austriaca De La Era Americana (2nd Spanish edition of Democracy: The God That Failed), trans. and prologue by Prof. Jeronimo Molina (University of Murcia). It can be ordered by email; see also this link.
Online reviews and discussion include:
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe: razÛn y libertad (RecensiÛn: MonarquÌa, democracia y orden natural), Liberalismo.org, por Antonio MuÒoz Ballesta
- La Monarquia, revindicada (local PDF copy), por Juan Ramón Rallo
- Hoppe en Madrid: dos teorias morales, por Daniel Rodríguez Herrera
- Auge y Caída de la Ciudad (The Rise and Fall of the City, Mises.org, Nov. 23, 2005 (an extract of chapter 9 of Democracy: The God That Failed)), traducción de Rodrigo Betancur
- Monarquia, Democracia y Orden Natural, Spanish translation of The Political Economy of Monarchy and Democracy, and the Idea of a Natural Order, Journal of Libertarian Studies Vol. 11 Num. 2.
- Problemas de la Democracia, La Revista de Libertad Digital, Viernes, 5 de Noviembre de 2004 (also published in Diario de America and Venezuela Analitica); abbreviated Spanish version of Down With Democracy, Enterprise and Education, The Association of Private Enterprise Education Newsletter, Summer 1995.
For other Spanish translations of Hoppe’s works, see here.
From the Authors Forum, presented at the Austrian Economics Research Conference 2013 (formerly ASC) (21 March 2013, Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama).
Professor Hoppe’s A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism has been translated into Portugese (Mises Brazil, 2013; translated by Bruno Garschagen). It is available for free download into PDF and kindle (.mobi) formats.
Information on the new Laissez Faire Books edition of TSC may be found here. Professor Hoppe’s work now appears in at least 23 languages in addition to English.
The Economics of World Government
A transcript of the Lew Rockwell Show episode 130 of Hans-Hermann Hoppe at the 2009 Mises University talking about the economics of political centralization
Recently by Hans-Hermann Hoppe: On the Impossibility of Limited Government and the Prospects for a Second American Revolution
ANNOUNCER: This is the Lew Rockwell Show.
ROCKWELL: Recently, at the 2009 Mises University, Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe talked about the economics of political centralization. What is it that brings about unification, unfortunate unification and centralization within a country like the United States where the states gradually become irrelevant under an all-powerful D.C., and, for that matter, drives countries to join together into an even worse situation, of course, a world government?
Here’s Dr. Hoppe.
HOPPE: OK, I will begin my lecture.
At the beginning, I want to repeat a few points that I have made in my previous lecture on law and economics, and then I want to get to an entirely different subject than the one that I dealt with in that previous lecture.
Because there is a scarcity in the world, we can have conflicts regarding these scarce resources. And because conflicts can exist whenever and wherever there exists scarcity, we do need norms to regulate human life. Norms – the purpose of norms is to avoid conflicts. And in order to avoid conflicts regarding scarce resources, we need rules of exclusive ownership of such scarce resources or, to say exactly the same, we need property rights to determine who is entitled to control what and who is not entitled to control what.
These rules, I have defended in my previous lecture, the rules that Austrians regard as rules capable of doing this, avoiding conflict and, at the same time, being just rules are the following. One is every person owns himself, his own physical body. He has exclusive control over his own physical body. The second rule refers to, how do we acquire property, the right of exclusive control of scarce resources outside of our body in the external world. Previously – initially, the outside world is un-owned and we acquire property in objects outside of our body by being the first one to put certain resources to use and, thereby, we become the owner. This is also sometimes referred to as original appropriation or as homesteading. Rule number three and four are implied in the previous two. He who uses his physical body and those things that he originally appropriates in order to produce something, to transform things into a more valuable state of affairs, thereby, becomes the owner of what he has produced. Producer owns the product. And finally, we can also acquire property by a voluntary transfer from a previous owner to a later owner.
In addition, you also realize that if you would follow these rules, by and large, wealth will be maximized. And if we follow these rules, then all conflicts can conceivably be avoided.We again only emphasize in this lecture that there are intuitively sensible rules, who should own us unless – who should own us, except ourselves. Somebody else should own us sounds absurd. Should the second one be the owner who has done nothing to a resource, instead of the first one? Again, that sounds absurd. The producer does not own the product, but somebody who has not produced it should own the product? Again, that sounds absurd. And obviously, rule number four, if it would be possible to just to take something away from other people against their consent, civilization would be destroyed in a moment’s time. [click to continue…]
A new version of Professor Hoppe’s A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism has recently been published by Laissez Faire Books. Earlier editions of the book may be found here. The book is free in epub and kindle (mobi) format for members of the Laissez Faire Club (members also gain free access to dozens of other e-books in the members-only library). More information about the club.
I wrote a Foreword, which may be found here. Jeffrey Tucker also wrote a useful Editorial Preface that draws attention to the insights in the book that the reader might otherwise miss.
Below is the email message sent to Laissez Faire Club Members by Jeff Tucker in announcing the publication of the book:
The usual model of politics that most everyone uses today makes no sense. Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism utterly smashes intellectual conventions and makes a case for an alternative way of classifying political and economic systems.
This book was Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s first treatise in English and the one that put him on the map as a social thinker and economist to watch. This new edition includes a detailed analysis by one of his leading students and interpreters, N. Stephan Kinsella. Also, the editorial preface, written by yours truly, draws attention to the insights in the book that the reader might otherwise miss.
Hoppe argues that there are only two possible poles in economic affairs: socialism (violation of private property) and capitalism (respect for private property). All systems are combinations of those two types. The capitalist model he defines as pure protection of private property, free association, and exchange – no exceptions. All deviations from that ideal are species of socialism, with public ownership and interference with trade.
Within the structure of socialism, he distinguishes the left and right version. “Conservative”socialism favors high regulation, behavioral controls, protectionism, and nationalism. The “liberal” version tends more toward outright public ownership and redistribution. In addition, there is a technocratic version that intervenes based on expediency. The consequences of socialism vary based on their degree and kind, but they have similarities: high costs, resource waste, low growth, and economic stagnation.
This structure of the book is that of a comparative systems text, but it goes much further than that. What matters about this book most is the theory and the analytics that Hoppeuses to make the case. This is where we find the innovation. This is where the book shines. This is where the reader will find a more perfect form of a side of an argument that has been ongoing for hundreds if not thousands of years. The reason is Hoppe’s method. It is strictly logical, proceeding step-by-step through every thought, expanding and expanding relentlessly but never leaping from point-to-point in a way that skips or takes anything for granted.
It is through this method that Hoppe presents a thorough and compelling case for the existence and protection of private property, explaining in some detail the first condition of ownership: rivalrous use of physical resources.
His defense of self ownership is the first application of the philosophical rule against performative contradiction to issues of political economy. His case against technocratic regimes rests, implausibly, on an epistemological case for a special kind of cause and effect relationship that exists in human affairs over the natural sciences.
Even his understanding of Marxism is unique: he is careful to discard only the illogical and nonsensical parts while retaining the features that actually do make sense. It concludes with essays on the two most common objections to a fully privatized society.
This masterful book is the template for most of Hoppe’s contributions throughout his career, but here they are succinctly stated and very well organized.
16.1.2013 – Am 23. November 2012 sprach Prof. Dr. Hans-Hermann Hoppe in der “Akademie Modelhof” (Müllheim, Kanton Thurgau, Schweiz) zum Thema “Privatrechtsgesellschaft ohne Staat”.
Prof. Hoppe zeigt in seinem Vortrag, dass der Wettbewerb in der heutigen Parteiendemokratie – ein Wettbewerb im Lügen und Abkassieren, im Täuschen und Tarnen – keine guten Ergebnisse hervorbringen kann.
Als Alternative bietet er die Privatrechtsgesellschaft an, aufgebaut auf Selbstbestimmung und Freiwilligkeit. In diesem System werden Konflikte neutral gelöst.
Prof. Hoppe zeigt auch auf, dass das Modell der Privatrechtsgesellschaft keine Utopie, sondern streng durchdacht, realistisch und genau betrachtet sogar selbstverständlich ist.
Wir bedanken uns bei der “Akademie Modelhof” für die Genehmigung zur Veröffentlichung der Videos.
(Hinweis: es lässt sich leider nicht vermeiden, dass die Videos gleichzeitig starten, bitte ein Video einfach auf “Pause” stellen)
Hier können Sie die Diskussion im Anschluss an den Vortrag verfolgen: [click to continue…]
The Anarcho-Capitalist Solution
Hans-Hermann Hoppe on the megalomaniacs called the State.
Obsessed by Megalomania
Interview with Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Recently by Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Entrepreneurship With Fiat Property and Fiat Money
The following interview with Hans-Hermann Hoppe first appeared in the German weekly Junge Freiheit on November 2, 2012, and was conducted by Moritz Schwarz. It has been translated here into English by Robert Groezinger.
Are taxes nothing but protection money? The state a kind of mafia? Democracy a fraud? Philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe is not only considered one of the most prominent pioneering intellectuals of the libertarian movement, but also perhaps the sharpest critic of the Western political system.
Professor Hoppe: In your essay collection ‘Der Wettbewerb der Gauner’ (‘The Competition of Crooks’) you write that ‘99 percent of citizens, asked if the state was necessary, would answer yes.’ Me too! Why am I wrong?
Hoppe: All of us, from childhood, have been moulded by state or state licensed institutions – preschools, schools, universities. So the result you quoted is not surprising. However, if I asked you whether you said yes to an institution having the last word in each conflict, even in those it is itself involved in, you would certainly say no – unless you hoped to be in charge of this institution yourself.
Er … correct.
Hoppe: Of course, because you know that such an institution cannot only mediate in conflicts but also cause them, you can recognize that it can then resolve them to its own advantage. In the face of this I, for one, would live in fear of my life and property. However, it is precisely this, the ultimate power of judicial decision-making, that is the specific characteristic of the institution known as the state.
“Mülkiyet, Mukavele, Saldırganlık, Kapitalizm, Sosyalizm” and “Rus Tipi Sosyalizm” Turkish translations of “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism” “Part 2:Property, Contract, Aggression, Capitalism, Socialism” and “Part: 3 Socialism Russian Style”
Interview radio de Hans-Hermann Hoppe à l’Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), French translation of Radio Interview with Hans-Hermann Hoppe on Anarcho-capitalist libertarianism: What is it? Hoppe Radio Interview on Australian Broadcasting Corp.