The Myth of National Defense by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

The Myth of National Defense Reviews

• 
  Daniel Moss

  Unmistakably 5 stars. Such a powerful book--one that really gets your paradigm to shift. National defense is the fallback, the go-to justification, for the existence of the state by any and all who, without studying the issue, assume the state is a necessary evil.
  
  "...to argue that a tax-collecting government can legitimately protect its citizens against aggression is to contradict oneself, since such an entity starts off the entire process by doing the very opposite of protecting those under its control."
  
  -Walter Block
• 
  Nick

  I wish I could rate each essay individually because there is a wide spread. Of the 4 sections, the last one is the best because it contains Hoppe's contribution, and a good essay by Walter Block (well... good economics. Terrible philosophy). The Rothbard essay in section 1 is also a highlight.
  
  Other good parts were the historical essays explicating the mechanics of privateering and guerilla warfare.
  
  However... There were some really strange essays here basically advocating a strange form of conservative monarchism. I know this is Hoppe's angle, but its weird to read "anarchist/libertarian/feudalist" pieces nonetheless. I remain unconvinced that monarchy is preferable to democracy. Monarchy definitely has some positive tradeoffs compared to democracy, but I don't think the essays proved that it is a preferable system. I think in his zealous hatred of democracy (which I share, don't get me wrong), Hoppe (or the authors of the essays he selected) tries to prove too much. However the criticism of democracy in these is good, and they are kind of fun to read in a voyeuristic kind of way regardless.
• 
  JJ

  The Myth of National Defense is a collection of essays by great libertarian thinkers such as Marco Bassani, Carlo Lottieri, Murray Rothbard, Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Gerard Radnitzky, Bertrand Lemennicier, Joseph Stromberg, Larry Sechrest, Jeffrey Hummel, Walter Block, Guido Hulsmann, and Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Based on the definition of government as a compulsory territorial monopolist of protection and jurisdiction equipped with the power to tax without unanimous consent the contributors to this volume argue that, regardless of whether such a government is a monarchy, a democracy, or a dictatorship, any notion of limiting its power and safeguarding individual life, liberty, and property must be deemed illusory. Under monopolistic auspices the price of justice and protection must rise and its quality must fall. A tax-funded protection agency it is pointed out, is a contradiction in terms: it is an expropriating property protector and can only lead to ever more taxes and less protection. The contributors make a brilliant case towards free market security displaying the minor details how successful security production would be if left to the competitive market.
• 
  Adam

  Really opened my eyes to some of the possibilities of an anarcho-capitalist society and some of the myths that are out there. Especially liked the chapters on privateering and monarchism, totally changed my view on both subjects.
• 
  Josh Wilmoth

  This is my new favorite political philosophy book. It eviscerates arguments in favor of government monopoly of the defense industry, and in the process demonstrates the folly of democratic systems.
• 
  Andrew Carr

  This is an underpants gnome kind of book. Most of the authors argue in the following fashion:
  1. All States are inefficient and coercive, all private institutions free and efficient,
  2. ??
  3. It is impossible for states to provide defence and necessarily true that private institutions will provide perfect defence.
  
  I wanted to like this book, as I think we need many more perspectives in the discussion of national security in these troubled times. Especially from libertarians. For instance Christopher Preble's Peace, War & Liberty which I reviewed last week is a useful contribution. But almost nothing in this highly erratic collection of essays reaches that level.
  
  The better chapters offer useful analysis of both the problems of states providing security, of democracy's influence on conflict, and the plausibility of more private or non-coercive means of security. But only a few of these seriously engage with the challenges this shift faces. Almost all deal with such problems via the underpants gnome type logic above. Their arguments from 'logic' almost uniformly assume bad faith on the part of democracies (democracies can become authoritarian, therefore all democracies are effectively totalitarian), while offering heroic assumptions on the part of private institutions (perfectly efficient, perfectly adaptive, perfectly strategic etc.)
  
  Then there are the few absurd essays. It's tempting to absolve the editor, given edited books are a pain and invite such challenge - I've done a few myself and faced recalcitrant authors. But it beggars belief to read essays calling for monarchism as the ideal path to peace and liberty. Apparently a concern for dynasty and honour means monarchs are perfectly peaceful. Who knew? Others indulge in vast conspiracy theories, with FDR both foreknowing and even forcing the Japanese to bomb the US at Pearl Harbour a favourite of a few authors. It was hard believe some of the authors were actually libertarians, rather than conservatives who detest democracy and taxes.
  
  There is much that libertarians can contribute to discussing national security and defence. Full credit to the editor for getting this most vital of subject discussed. But this book suggests there is a long way to go before the standard of average libertarian thought on these issues is where it needs to be. Let's hope the publication of books like Preble's and work of places like CATO suggests that is changing.
• 
  Garrick Morales

  Great book with some incredible insights. The last 4 chapters and the introduction are paradigm changing essays, the rest of the book is ok. Those 4 last essays really destroy the contractualist and the liberal position, and make a strong case for the privatization of the legal system. It gives historical examples and a ton of references; it makes a strong case theoretically and empirically.
• 
  Josh Schubert

  Hoppe's essay The Private Production of Defense completely altered my worldview, and reading it in context of the surrounding essays only further cements this change in my thinking.
• 
  Dennis Beery

  This series of essays gets to the very heart of why tax-funded, government sponsored "national defense" is inefficient and utterly incapable of providing actual defense (e.g. 9-11). A couple of the essays were quite technical and of little value. But the essays by Rothbard, Hoppe, and Hulsmann were excellent, as were the historical essays and those dealing with the ideology behind modern warfare.
• 
  Werner Ende

  Since Molinari one of the most important books about this essential issue on discussing the institution state as as at least necessary evil.
  recommended by stay-free.org
  
• 
  Oolalaa

  12/20