/lit/ - Literature

>>16507844
>a priori

>>16384626
>people do things therefor *insert stupid ought as is*

>>15706319
>a priori

>>15358105
Worse than Rothbard which is impressive.

>>15359287
Rothbard supported the New Left. He literally tried infiltrating the Maoist Progressive Labor faction of the SDS in the 1960s. He supported child prostitution and gave positive reviews to the works of pederast Stirnerites like John Henry Mackay. He definitely never seriously believed "human nature" was "conservative", the relationship with paleoconservatism by the 1980s was for opportunistic reasons but his disciples turned out actually more retarded surprisingly.

>>13938485
Yes, it logically follows if you are consistent

>Hayek’s scheme of private individuals or banks issuing their own currencies—a scheme which he himself, in more sober moments, would have dismissed as absurdly “constructivist”—was not so much adopted as coming to serve as inspiration or jumping- off point for other money-crank schemes, which have proliferated ever since. They range from private currencies to schemes for private banks freely inflating credit on top of gold currency reserves. As these proposals have multiplied, however, gold has inevitably dropped out or been pushed out of the picture. Later plans range from banks inflating notes or deposits on top of Federal Reserve Notes even after the Fed has been abolished; gold being a mere shadow helping to prop up the system; and finally schemes where banks clear each others’ notes indefinitely with no possibility of the poor public’s being able to redeem its way out of bank money. Finally, standard or “high powered” money disappears altogether, and inflationary banks merely redeem their notes and deposits in the equally phony notes and deposits of other inflating banks.”

>Money-crankism is a common phenomenon of the last two centuries and, as every professor of money and banking who has received lengthy and passionate letters written in crayon on the subject can attest, it always involves schemes for radical expansion of the supply of money. The proposed monetary inflation can either be governmental, or, if proposed by the libertarian-inclined, it can be private. Economically, it makes no real difference, except that empowering every private person to print as much money as possible would bring hyper-inflationary disaster even more quickly.

I suggest you read more into epistemology my friend

To the Anon that told me to read Hoppe's Short History of Man, this doesn't really clarify anything. Hoppe really does claim that to be scientific historical analysis can only be interpreted in light of praxeology and Rothbardian ethics... and this is exactly what he does i.e. avoid real historic concert situations, since they can only be very problematic from this perspective, for more ideal pure "reasonable" situations. This is literally just pure ideology. Also Malthus seems to be the real roots of Hoppe's worldview, anarcho-Malthusianism seems kind of a weird position since Malthus was articulating a direct reaction against the emergence of modern anti-statism... if you seriously find any of this persuasive see pg. 343 here for an alternative background: https://intcssc.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/the-critique-of-science-historical-materialist-and-dialectical-studies-on-the-relation-of-the-modern-science-of-nature-to-the-bourgeoisie-and-capital-revised.pdf

In Chapter 1 Hoppe just lays down facts from the works of Nicholas Wade, Lawrence Keeley and Napolean Chagnon... but by part III he starts getting very "praxeological" in his analysis. If there's any real history in the book it's here but prehistory is probably the most contestable and fluid field e.g. recent discoveries have already pushed back the emergence of "anatomically modern man" 100,000 years from what Hoppe's claiming here fyi. The notion that hunter gatherers were "parasitic" [all life is "parasitic" to Hoppe I suppose] and that they couldn't control their population growth is questionable since if you actually look they almost all practised some form of population control fine [rationalized infanticide/cannibalism/abortion to maintain more egalitarian structures]. The notion this "problem" existed for hundreds of thousands of years but just could never be overcome until agricultural somehow emerged [not fully explained] as a "solution" and it didn't need to be imposed is questionable. You really need to look for deceit here since this transformation wasn't as "rational" as Hoppe would like to believe. Hoppe also rejects anthropological accounts of archaic land ownership structures if they don't square with Mises out of hand so ya that makes a lot of history just disappear and allows him to side step the real issue of force in history and avoid the historic transformation of communal property into private property which was a violent affair in contrast to him insisting the opposite.