What do you think?
Rate this book
The Myth of National Defense: Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production
With eleven chapters by top libertarian scholars on all aspects of defense, this book edited by Hans-Hermann Hoppe it represents an ambitious attempt to extend the idea of free enterprise to the provision of security services. It argues that "national defense" as provided by government is a myth not unlike the myth of socialism itself. It is more viably privatized and replaced by the market provision of security.
453 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2003
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
September 30, 2017
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
"...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
July 28, 2010
From the horror of wars of ideology to the democratic state killing its own people to the ability to defend oneself even from foreign attack, the Myth of National Defense is essential reading for anyone ready to question his or her assumptions that the all-encompassing modern state is the only way or even the best way to defend oneself.
July 14, 2016
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.
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.
November 23, 2019
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.
February 17, 2021
I cannot think of another book that fundamentally changed not only the way I look at the world, but my life in general as The Myth of National Defense. This compilation of essays thrusted my personal Overton Window so far from its original position would make your run of the mill 'red pilling' look like an expectation of tomorrows weather had shifted three degrees. Before reading this compilation I would describe my political views as a recent soft shift to Libertarianism thanks in large part to Ron Paul, that considered I probably wouldn't have called for the abolition of state run education, roads, defense, or even to an extent the regulation infrastructure of the state. This book opened a world of new possibilities and made me question the necessity of every 'public goods' necessity of state provision. I'm certain that Stringham's work on Anarcho-Capitalism would of had the same impact on me, but I happened to read The Myth of National Defense first so I rate in my top three favorite books of all time.
December 19, 2017
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.
January 13, 2011
Really good collection of essays, especially the one which explains why more weapons among people results in less crime(and also more nukes results in less nuclear war).
April 1, 2014
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.
June 11, 2019
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.
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.
July 23, 2022
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.
December 26, 2021
Aside from how blatantly scripted right- wing economics can get, I generally agree. Left- wing ideological scriptedness is another matter and a separate one at that. But like I said, I agree with a lot of what’s said here- state monopolies on violence never turn out well.
June 16, 2018
The author spends many pages ruminating on a topic on which he isn’t particularly familiar.
October 4, 2021
Amazing book! Would recommend for anyone, especially college students and private security providers
October 13, 2021
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.
April 26, 2013
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.
December 23, 2012
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
recommended by stay-free.org
April 4, 2017
12/20
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews