The Private Production of Defense by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

The Private Production of Defense Reviews

• 
  Daniel Moss

  This is a chapter "Democracy: The God That Failed"
• 
  Ryan

  Hoppe’s weakest argument
  
  While Hoppe makes a moderately good argument for private defense against crime, the argument for private defense as effective against state or other action is far less solid. Fundamentally, he doesn’t know much about the technology of warfare, and in particular any new forms of warfare. He assumes attacks are symmetric and essentially conservative of value; in reality attacks can cause damage far out of proportion to their cost, can be essentially impossible to attribute, and generally can be challenging to deter even as a single entity controlling a majority of the world’s combat power.
• 
  Henrik

  I like these "light" introductions to interesting topics, like this short and concise book. In this one Hoppe discusses the notion of defense and protection in a hypothical free society. It's hard to judge the feasibility of the picture presented, it certainly seems plausible, but I wonder if it is stable. I remember being skeptic about this, after reading Huemer's The Problem of Political Authority (a wonderful book). Aggression within a free territory could quite likely be dealt with more efficiently by some agency with better aligned incentives than a state, but what happens to the dynamic between protector and protected in a longer perspective? Presumable a free society will be more steeped in the value of non-aggression and respect for private property, as well as be much more heavily armed - are these facts together with competition in the protection market enough to stop potential tyrannical tendencies from protection agencies? Hoppe's idea seems to be that protection will often be provided almost as an ancillary service by insurance companies, which is interesting. The idea that private companies could also protect against state aggression at first seems somewhat ridiculous, but it also seems unlikely that a state would invade a free territory, especially where most of the population is armed. On the contrary, a state where the population is unarmed but has a (weak) state army could be easier to take over, since they are likely to surrender once the army is beaten (plus a state has an infrastructure for controlling its population). Anyhoo, this is a much thought provoking book, well worth a read.
• 
  Jared Abbott

  This is an interesting, concise book. I like the ideas presented and agree with them in theory. The difficulty would be persuading enough people to work at transforming these theories into concrete reality.
• 
  Stephan

  The book is interesting and well written but Hoppe shows logical inconsistencies in his ideas on immigration, for seemingly no other reason than to be discriminatory. There is no place for discrimination or nationalism in libertarianism social or economic policy; libertarianism is individualist through and through. Hoppe's conveyance of racist collectivist utilitarianism in lieu of ethical egoism is a detriment to individualism.
  
  In short, while I may agree with concepts of private defense put forth in this particular publication, Hoppe can shove his collectivist ideas about people of other ethnicities straight up his pompous ass.
• 
  Joshua Park

  To go from A to B is sometimes very hard. Before this book, I simply that that privatizing defense of all things would be absolutely crazy. Point A: the idea is so impossible that it's not worth considering.
  
  Now I am convinced at least to Point B: it just might work. If you've read the synopsis and realized you're at Point A, give this a try. It's a nice, quick read. Hoppe takes you step-by-step through the problem, solution, and objections.
  
  If there's anything that held me back from giving it 5 stars, it's that I'm not 100% convinced that it would work. It could work, but given the state of the average person's beliefs, it would be hard to implement. But I can't blame Hoppe for the whole of society, I guess.
  
  Loved it.
• 
  Abhi

  If I read Friedman and thought he was bordering on insane, I am not sure what to make of Hoppe. The idea of doing away with the state is inconceivable. In Hoppe's utopia with the private defense production theory with only insurance agencies and private property owners, there would still be the need for regulation and prevention of crime. Or is my mind too ingrained in the idea of a state that I am not able to imagine such a state of affairs?
  
  A book with an incredulous, yet incredible idea.
• 
  Rob Weir

  More an essay than a book, Hoppe builds on Molinari and Rothbard and to outline a credible non-monopolistic private mechanism for insuring against the risk of aggression from persons and states. A good analysis of the incentives at play and how the mandatory state-run systems are corrupted and how a private mechanism would be an improvement.
• 
  Tim

  Short, delightful, and a little fantastic. Quite an eye opener.