Abstract
Abstract This response to Roderick T. Long's defense of anarchism attempts to show that the ethical and the practical arguments for anarchism do not converge; that anarchism satisfies neither Ayn Rand's demand for objective justice nor Isabel Paterson's demand for structured checks on the abuse of power; that the chief economic argument for the practicality of anarchism, the argument from competition, is contrary to basic economic principles; and that crucial anarchist claims defy ordinary and defensible notions of justice, usefulness, and reasonableness. Also attempted is an identification of the legitimately coercive economic function of government.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
