Monthly Archives: October 2015

I’m so fisking. You already know.

I have a commentary on Gender and Freedom, an incredibly stupid and appallingly written article that makes me embarrassed to be associated with Libertarian Home. The quoted text is verbatim if you can believe it.

Longtime readers (if there are any left) might feel a wave of nostalgia wash over them, as I relive the days of Bogpaper trollishness. A sample:

Gender, genitals, sex, sexuality… What is the essay meant to be about? Should we just toss a coin? But, yeah, sure, rocking a pair of great pendulous bollocks shouldn’t hold you back from being a strong, confident woman. If anything, they’ll help. You go, girl!

Enjoy! Or don’t. Do whatever feels comfortable. I don’t want to put any, like, pressure on you. Because I respect you, yeah?

Libertarianism is a Social Construct

Patricians, Paternalism, Free Riders, and The Guillotine

Tim Worstall at the Adam Smith Institute blog is not at all keen on Polly Toynbee’s “very patrician idea” that the government is there to provide “entertainments” and “diversions”.

“And what really grates is that at least the Romans insisted that it was the patricians that paid for the bread and circuses, Polly‚Äôs insistent that we must be charged for what she insists we must have“. [My italics]

Continue reading Patricians, Paternalism, Free Riders, and The Guillotine

Ed Stringham on “private governance”

Ed Stringham writes the lead essay for the new Cato Unbound: How private governance made the modern world possible.

By “private governance” Stringham, an anarcho capitalist (or “anarcho” capitalist, or anarcho “capitalist”, or “anarcho” “capitalist”, or “anarcho capitalist” according to taste) means decentralised rule-enforcement in clubs, and he explains how it, not the state, maintains order in some very complex and sprawling activities like stock markets and online shopping.

An earlier paper of his on the extra-legal evolution of securities trading in seventeen century Amsterdam is available here.