Customer Reviews

The market for liberty

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Actually, as any Austrian economist including Murray Rothbard would have told independentwhig, the existence of a free market that serves the "subjective" (which does not mean "arbitrary") desires (not "whims") of consumers _requires_ a foundation in objective "natural" law -- and such a foundation positively precludes the existence of a parasitic State.

Opponents of anarchocapitalism (including those who, like our apparently Randian friend below, speak Objectivese rather than English) have never come satisfactorily to grips with the fact that market-based law not only is possible but has actually existed. In order for anarchocapitalism to work, what is required is that objective "natural" law be permitted to affect the preferences of "consumers of law," so that the legal system consumers tend to prefer is one that is aligned with the nature of reality. That system _is_ the libertarian system of individual rights and private property. There is no need to impose it from the "top down," because it is what consumers would generate from the "bottom up" precisely in order to secure the conditions for the best and most efficient fulfillment of their "subjective" wants.

Morris and Linda Tannehill provide here an imaginative account of how various "State" functions might actually be fulfilled by the free market, and indeed fulfilled _better_ than any State could do. Ignore the opinions of people who don't know what they're talking about and consider their case on its own merits.

This book was a fascinating read. When I began reading it book, I was quite sceptical that government could be practically eradicated. By the end of it, I wasn't convinced. The chapters devoted to the subject of defense and the waging of war I found particularly interesting, if a bit unrealistic. Everybody ought to read a book like this, just to explore the ideas it contains. Late in the book, it discusses the power of ideas. Ideas are definitely the most powerful force in the universe and if a majority of people were aware of ideas such as the ones discussed in this book, we would be well on the way towards building a far better world (not perfect of course as that is impossible).

If you care about freedom, read this book. The passages about Defense particularly are illuminating. Government is not anything magic. It is comprised of people of no more ability than anyone else and only can be funded from the resources of the individuals that live under the government's rule. The other reviewers mustn't have read the book very carefully. They selected a quote about objective law, but neglected to communicate that there is only one law/principle in the free society that Morris and Tannehill describe--no individual shall infringe on the property or person of another through force or fraud. There is no such thing as a body of law in the way that we are taught to think of it in civics class. Read the book for yourself.

I checked this book out from the library and liked it so much I'm going to have to add one to my collection.

The Tannehills make a stronger case for liberty and a free market in all commodities, even law and protection, than even Murray Rothbard does. I have to admit that I had my doubts when I sat down to read this book, but by the end I had to conceed that even if the system wasn't completely worked out(after all, how can you work out a system based on the free choices of individuals before the fact), it was at least possible.

The gentleman who cited the passage about objective law tried to misrepresent the position of the authors. They do indeed believe that objective law is fundamental and immutable, based only on the objective nature of man humself. However, when they talk about "subjective whims" they are actually refering to legislators, and their irrational quest to enact statuatory law divorced from reality, as in fact they themselves are. It is not the subjective whims of the market that are the cause of our present troubles, but those of the government. The Tannehills simply argue that, by removing the pretended authority of government to "create" law, market law will eveolve that much closer to objective, natural law.

I have always found it interesting how businessmen (and women) are simultaneously depicted as predatory and ultra-conservative (as in against change). Yet it is only those businesses that benefit from government intervention, the "arms dealers" of old and the "defense contractors" as they are called now, who benefit from predation.

When examined closely, business thrives when there is peace, by catering to peoples differences just as much as their commonalities. No one makes a fortune by selling 500 very expensive refrigerators to the nobility. No, they get rich by selling 500,000,000 inexpensive refrigerators, to living and productive customers.

It's easy to say that one's particular special interest can only be provided by government: some would consider private roads but not "national defense"; others would consider private law enforcement but not private health care.

But all that ignores the fact that every service at one time or another through history has been provided privately. There are many times more private security agents in the US than there are government police. Private business and even employment contracts increasingly stipulate private arbitration as their recourse in disputes rather than law suits in government courts.

Why? Because of cost. Private security, private arbitration, are demonstrably more efficient than government police and government courts.

Tannehill has taken the efficiency of market competition and extended it to many aspects of what are usually considered "public goods", and done it in one volume. As the other reviewers have said, it is not a requirement to be convinced on each and every specific application of market competition to "public goods" in order to accept the general axiom that market competition creates more efficient answers that benefit more people than central planning and coercion can.

This is true if for no other reason than that private efforts tolerate competition itself. If I don't like the same product or service as the majority, I can still buy that product or service. Pepsi doesn't strafe the villages of Coke drinkers.

I have to admit, it sounds cliche, but this book changed my life!

I've been all over the political and ideological spectrum throughout my life, but this was the first time I'd seen a concise, consistent and well-written explanation of a very basic concept. The impact of coming to understand the free market, why it works and how it impacts me has filled me with a sense of confidence, understanding and empowerment. This isn't a self-help book, but I challenge anyone to read it, understand it and then not use the concepts introduced in it to improve your life.

This book is a mind blower for anyone who doesn't already consider themselves a free marketeer, a voluntaryist, anarcho-capitalist or the like.

The Tannehills evaluate human nature and social conditioning to set the stage for the very foundations of the market and then go on to explain what the market actually is, why it works, and why interfering with it is both a stupid and impossible task.

They then begin evaluating various goods and services, from washing machines to currencies, from hair color to police services and explain why these services are best left to the marketplace. Morris and Linda then begin offering arguments to their own position, including most of the common arguments against "capitalism" and proceed to tear these down with sound logic and real world examples.

I can not recommend this book more highly. I got a free audio book of it, loved it and passed it on. I bought several printed copies of this book to pass on to friends and in two cases, even strangers.

There are few books that are so monumental as to change one's life. Market for Liberty is one. It describes how an anarchy could work (without once mentioning "anarchy"). It is essential reading to understand freedom and free markets.

I almost put this down during the first chapter, which is very off-putting in its inflammatory tone. But it is short (less than 200 pages), so I stuck with it and am glad I did. There are a number of insightful gems in here, and the book is still relevant 30+ years after the original publication. I would not recommend this book as an introduction to Libertarianism, both for its condescending tone (the word "stupid" is over-used throughout), as well as its scattered argument. The concept of Natural Law is not named until Chapter 12, but I think it should have been explained sooner. But maybe that is because the book I read right previous to this one was Whatever Happened to Justice? (An Uncle Eric Book) which focuses on Natural Law and has a much calmer, well-reasoned tone. Then I followed up this book with For a New Liberty by the incomparable Murray Rothbard (Mr. Libertarian himself). Both of these books are "better" though as I said there are some decent quotes to be mined from this one.

I found the Tannehill's book to be an eye opening, refreshing view of politics and the truth about the marketplace. A long time libertarian, after reading this book I am firmly convinced of the efficiency and morality of market anarchy, otherwise known as voluntaryism. The ideas in this book have changed my life and my purpose. I am now moving to NH as part of the Free State Project to join in the liberty movement toward a truly voluntary society.

Other authors that have a powerful and logical message include Ayn Rand, Harry Browne, Milton Friedman and Gardner Goldsmith. If you are interested in liberty, free trade, and voluntary interaction between humans without monopolistic coercion read this book! It contains infallable logic and true recognition of what the human spirit is.

The Thernstroms have accomplished with this little book what many have attempted but failed to accomplish... life without government. They have cleared the air of confusion regarding the role and necessity of government in our lives.