Uncle Sam The Monopoly Man

In the minds of many, the provision of justice and security has long been linked to the state. To ask whether non-state institutions could deliver those services on their own, without the aid of coercive taxation and a monopoly franchise, runs the risk of being branded as naive anarchism or dangerous radicalism. Defenders of the state's monopoly on lawmaking and law enforcement typically assume that any alternative arrangement would favor the rich at the expense of the poor—or would lead to the collapse of social order and ignite a war. Questioning how well these beliefs hold up to scrutiny, this book offers a powerful rebuttal of the received view of the relationship between law and government. The book argues not only that the state is unnecessary for the establishment and enforcement of law, but also that non-state institutions would fight crime, resolve disputes, and render justice more effectively than the state, based on their stronger incentives.

The political impulse to secede - to attempt to separate from central government control - is a conspicuous feature of the post-cold war world. It is alive and growing in Canada, Russia, China, Italy, Belgium, Britain, and even the United States Yet secession remains one of the least studied and least understood of all historical and political phenomena. The contributors to this volume have filled this gap with wide-ranging investigations - rooted in history, political philosophy, ethics, and economic theory - of secessionist movements in the United States, Canada, and Europe.

Alfred C. Aman here examines how the U.S. public law system has adapted to change and how the regulatory structures and discourses of the past are being transformed by the global realities of the present. Tracing the evolution of administrative law during the regulatory eras of the New Deal and the environmental period of the 1960s and 70s as well as the current global deregulatory era beginning with the Reagan presidency, he illuminates key trends in the interpretation of constitutional and administrative law. In the course of examining important shifts in administrative law, Aman provides insights into the process of legal change and the discourses that shape our legal order. He also considers why such issues as the constitutionality of administrative agencies once again are serious legal concerns, and he assesses the trend toward increasing executive power over federal administrative agencies. This timely book will be welcomed by legal scholars, political scientists, American historians, policymakers, and other readers interested in the history and future of administrative law and international and domestic environmental regulation.

The Abolition of Antitrust asserts that antitrust laws--on economic, legal, and moral grounds--are bad, and provides convincing evidence supporting arguments for their total abolition. Every year, new antitrust prosecutions arise in the U.S. courts, as in the cases against 3M and Visa/MasterCard, as well as a number of ongoing antitrust cases, such as those involving Microsoft and college football's use of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Gary Hull and the contributing authors show that these cases--as well as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act itself--are based on an erroneous interpretation of the history of American business, premised on bad economics. They equivocate between economic and political power--the power to produce versus the power to use physical force. For Hull, anti-trust prosecutions are based on a horrible moral inversion: that it is acceptable to sacrifice America's best producers. The contributors explain how key antitrust ideas, for instance, "monopoly," "restraint of trade," and "anticompetitive behavior," have been used to justify prosecution, and then make clear why those ideas are false. They sketch the historical, legal, economic, and moral reasoning that gave rise to the passage and growth of antitrust legislation. All of the theoretical points in this volume are woven around a number of fascinating cases, both historical and current--including the Charles River Bridge, Alcoa, General Electric, and Kellogg/General Mills. This is a dynamic and accessible work that is not simply a polemical argument for a particular policy position. Designed for the uninformed but educated layman, The Abolition of Antitrust also makes positive arguments in defense of wealth creation, business, and profit, explains the proper role of government, and offers a rational view of the meaning of contract and economic freedom.

"The essays in this book present a sustained economic, historical, moral, and legal broadside against the various federal statutes known as antitrust doctrine. They explode the cherished myths underlying the antitrust laws, and expose their intellectual fountainhead in a morality of self-sacrifice that is incompatible with individual rights, free enterprise, and objective law. With the publication of this text, businessmen, lawyers, economists, policy makers, legislators, and judges finally have access to a systemic critique of the antitrust laws. From here on, if antitrust continues to violate the rights of businessmen and to ravage the American economy, it is not for lack of knowing how and why."--Adam Mossoff, Assistant Professor of Law, Michigan State University The Abolition of Antitrust asserts that antitrust laws--on economic, legal, and moral grounds--are bad, and provides convincing evidence supporting arguments for their total abolition. Every year, new antitrust prosecutions arise in the U.S. courts, as in the cases against 3M and Visa/MasterCard, as well as a number of ongoing antitrust cases, such as those involving Microsoft and college football's use of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Gary Hull and the contributing authors show that these cases--as well as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act itself--are based on an erroneous interpretation of the history of American business, premised on bad economics. They equivocate between economic and political power--the power to produce versus the power to use physical force. For Hull, anti-trust prosecutions are based on a horrible moral inversion: that it is acceptable to sacrifice America's best producers. The contributors explain how key antitrust ideas, for instance, "monopoly," "restraint of trade," and "anticompetitive behavior," have been used to justify prosecution, and then make clear why those ideas are false. They sketch the historical, legal, economic, and moral reasoning that gave rise to the passage and growth of antitrust legislation. All of the theoretical points in this volume are woven around a number of fascinating cases, both historical and current--including the Charles River Bridge, Alcoa, General Electric, and Kellogg/General Mills. This is a dynamic and accessible work that is not simply a polemical argument for a particular policy position. Designed for the uninformed but educated layman, The Abolition of Antitrust also makes positive arguments in defense of wealth creation, business, and profit, explains the proper role of government, and offers a rational view of the meaning of contract and economic freedom. Gary Hull is director of the Program on Values and Ethics in the Marketplace (VEM) at Duke University, and has taught philosophy and business ethics at the Fuqua School of Business, Whittier College, and the Claremont Graduate School. He is coeditor of The Ayn Rand Reader.