Table of Contents

Contents: Preface, Roderick T. Long and Tibor R. Machan; Part 1 Minarchism: Why the state needs a justification, Lester H. Hunt; Libertarianism, limited government and anarchy, John Roger Lee; Rationality, history and inductive politics, Adam Reed; Objectivism against anarchy, William R. Thomas; Reconciling anarchism and minarchism, Tibor R. Machan. Part 2 Anarchism: Radical freedom and social living, Aeon James Skoble; The state: from minarchy to anarchy, Jan Narveson; The obviousness of anarchy, John Hasnas; Market anarchism as constitutionalism, Roderick T. Long; Liberty, equality, solidarity: towards a dialectical anarchism, Charles Johnson; Index.

About the Author

Roderick T. Long is Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy, Auburn University, Alabama, USA. Tibor R. Machan holds the R. C. Hoiles Chair in Business Ethics, Chapman University, Orange, CA. Roderick T. Long,Tibor R. Machan, Lester H. Hunt, John Roger Lee, William R. Thomas, Aeon James Skoble, Jan Narveson, John Hasnas, Charles Johnson.

Reviews

'This volume is a much needed revival of a debate critical to Libertarians, but also of significance to political theorists generally. The issue itself goes to the heart of what it means to do political philosophy, and the contributions found here skillfully keep those basic concerns in sight. In addition, I found the writing lucid and fair minded--something often missing in scholarly debate anthologies. I have no doubt that this volume will become a standard reference source for those interested in this particular debate and among the sources one consults when considering the foundations of the state generally.' Douglas J. Den Uyl, Liberty Fund, Inc., USA The forceful philosophical and historical challenges to the state presented in this volume should be read not just by libertarians, but by everyone who believes that government is either necessary or legitimate. Elaine Sternberg, London School of Economics, UK ’The book will be of most interest to students of libertarianism and classical liberalism, but it also has value for a broader readership.’ Political Studies Review