Government Regulation vs. The Free Society

Abstract

Over the years I have been persistent in my criticism of petty tyrannies such as government regulation of business, government licensing of professions, and so on.1 My central objection is that they all involve prior restraint, the coercive intervention in people's conduct that does not have anything to do with defending individual rights, the only goal that justifies the use of force in human affairs. Very recently, and finally, someone in mainstream circles has chosen to address my argument. Edward Soule, of Georgetown University's McDonough School of Business, wrote a book, Morality and Markets, The Ethics of Government Regulation, in which he spends some time addressing the essentially libertarian, natural rights case I have made against this widespread practice. It is a very respectful, civilized criticism the tone of which is unobjectionable. Given that the position I have defended is quite radical, some would even call it extreme, I am very pleased that someone of such distinction as Soule has chosen to address it. Let me now get to the substance of Soule's critique. First of all, he argues against the libertarian argument against regulation I put forth by claiming that ifit were consistently applied, such a very practical institution as central banking would have to be abolished. As he puts it,