WEBVTT

NOTE Practicing Law in Light of Rothbard

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.000
Good morning. I, too, am honored to be here. I didn't know I was conscripted into Professor Hoppe's gang.

2
00:00:08.000 --> 00:00:16.000
In keeping with Professor Hoppe's theme, Rothbard was a system builder. In Man Economy and State, Rothbard saw a need to make Mises more accessible,

3
00:00:16.000 --> 00:00:26.000
and he ended up setting out the fundamentals of Rothbardian economics. Similarly, in Ethics of Liberty, Rothbard saw that the libertarian movement lacked a systematic exposition of first principles,

4
00:00:26.000 --> 00:00:31.600
and they ended up setting forth the philosophical foundations for the anarcho-capitalist society.

5
00:00:31.600 --> 00:00:37.200
I'm going to put up another example of Murray as a system-builder.

6
00:00:37.200 --> 00:00:43.200
I hope for the technology's sake that this...

7
00:00:46.200 --> 00:00:55.400
What I'm showing you here is the syllabus from his Econ 742 History of Economic Thought class from the fall of 1994.

8
00:00:56.000 --> 00:01:05.000
As you know, Murray would die in January of 1995. Now, I am really one of the most fortunate people on the face of the planet, I think.

9
00:01:05.000 --> 00:01:14.000
I have had the distinct pleasure of and privilege of having had classes from both Professor Hoppe and Professor Rothbard.

10
00:01:14.000 --> 00:01:19.000
And this was the very last class that Murray Rothbard taught before he died.

11
00:01:19.000 --> 00:01:24.000
And this is the actual syllabus that he handed out for that class.

12
00:01:24.000 --> 00:01:29.240
Now, I want you to notice a few things about this syllabus. First of all, this is the actual

13
00:01:29.240 --> 00:01:34.600
honest-to-goodness syllabus, and it's written with a typewriter. That's the first thing

14
00:01:34.600 --> 00:01:41.400
I want you to notice. Rothbard absolutely refused to give up the typewriter. Second,

15
00:01:41.400 --> 00:01:48.480
and I know it's a little hard to read, so I'm going to put this up a little bit. Notice

16
00:01:48.480 --> 00:01:55.480
The class lectures are the central material for the course. Rothbard's lectures were always grand affairs. He never knew where he would go. He was always entertaining. His knowledge was encyclopedic, and it often filled the margins of my notebooks with references to journals and authors and books that he would just throw out in the middle of his lectures.

17
00:02:18.480 --> 00:02:35.760
Finally, I want you to notice the section marked textbooks, textbooks and other readings.

18
00:02:35.760 --> 00:02:41.620
The quote here that's fantastic is, there is no fully satisfactory textbook in the history

19
00:02:41.620 --> 00:02:43.680
of economic thought.

20
00:02:43.680 --> 00:02:47.280
Now what's interesting about this statement, what we didn't know at the time, was that

21
00:02:47.280 --> 00:02:53.480
Rothbard was writing the fully satisfactory textbook in the history of economic thought.

22
00:02:53.480 --> 00:02:59.720
Notice the outline of topics right above the textbook section there.

23
00:02:59.720 --> 00:03:03.600
For those of you that have read Rothbard's Magnificent History of Economic Thought published

24
00:03:03.600 --> 00:03:08.400
posthumously, you'll note that the outline of topics looks remarkably similar to the

25
00:03:08.400 --> 00:03:14.240
table of contents at least to the first two volumes through Marx.

26
00:03:14.240 --> 00:03:18.800
And then if you note, after Marx, there's a couple of allusions to the marginal revolution

27
00:03:18.800 --> 00:03:23.280
in the Austrians, the return of the currency through banking schools, the neoclassicals,

28
00:03:23.280 --> 00:03:25.040
the Ricardians and Keynes.

29
00:03:25.040 --> 00:03:31.600
I can think of some topics that may be appearing in volume three.

30
00:03:31.600 --> 00:03:34.760
So Murray was using his notes from the manuscript for his history of economic thought from which

31
00:03:34.760 --> 00:03:36.760
to lecture.

32
00:03:36.760 --> 00:03:40.720
In other words, Murray saw a need and once again set out to fill that need and then up

33
00:03:40.720 --> 00:03:42.320
writing another magnum opus.

34
00:03:42.320 --> 00:03:49.200
Okay, so what's all of this got to do with the practice of law and legal scholarship?

35
00:03:49.200 --> 00:03:55.980
There are kernels of libertarian jurisprudence peppered throughout Rothbard and other writers,

36
00:03:55.980 --> 00:04:00.240
but no one to my knowledge has systematically set out a cohesive, praxeological Austrian

37
00:04:00.240 --> 00:04:02.680
theory of jurisprudence.

38
00:04:02.680 --> 00:04:05.920
I see a need to do this.

39
00:04:05.920 --> 00:04:09.600
Legally speaking, libertarians get a lot of things right.

40
00:04:09.600 --> 00:04:16.320
non-aggression axiom, all rights are fundamentally a function of property rights, there's Rothbard's

41
00:04:16.320 --> 00:04:20.660
underused typology of government intervention in power and market, that's especially helpful

42
00:04:20.660 --> 00:04:29.660
in legal analysis, Kinsella's work on IP seems to be on the right track, Hubert has

43
00:04:29.660 --> 00:04:36.660
my colleague Jacob Hubert has his book coming out in June, shameless plug there, but libertarians

44
00:04:36.660 --> 00:04:46.660
also have areas that I think are lacking. For example, punishment theory. There's a lot of stuff that's not settled there, right?

45
00:04:46.660 --> 00:04:52.660
Corporations. I think there's a lot of stuff that's not settled there. Causation.

46
00:04:52.660 --> 00:04:59.660
And now let me give you an example of an area that I think is lacking that my colleague Lee and I are working on.

47
00:04:59.660 --> 00:05:04.660
So imagine if I should smack my friend Lee and give him a bump on the head. Accidentally. Accidentally.

48
00:05:04.660 --> 00:05:08.660
Now, imagine I smack my friend Lee intentionally and give him the same bump on the head.

49
00:05:08.660 --> 00:05:13.660
Now, for argument's sake, Lee doesn't know whether or not I smacked him on the head intentionally or accidentally.

50
00:05:13.660 --> 00:05:18.660
From Lee's perspective, he doesn't know whether I did that.

51
00:05:18.660 --> 00:05:22.660
He just knows that he's been injured and it's the same physical injury in both cases.

52
00:05:22.660 --> 00:05:25.660
Now, modern law treats both cases differently. Why?

53
00:05:25.660 --> 00:05:30.660
Well, in the case of the accidental smack, Lee's only entitled to recovering compensatory damages.

54
00:05:30.660 --> 00:05:34.660
Medical bills, lost wages, maybe some pain and suffering.

55
00:05:34.660 --> 00:05:40.660
In the case of the intentional smack, Lee is not only entitled to compensatory damages, but punitive damages.

56
00:05:40.660 --> 00:05:44.660
Even if he deserves it. And he does.

57
00:05:44.660 --> 00:05:50.660
Why? Well, the distinction here, of course, is my intent.

58
00:05:50.660 --> 00:05:57.660
The modern law punishes evil intent. That's so ingrained in our thinking that it's almost an automatic reaction.

59
00:05:57.660 --> 00:06:03.300
And of course intentional acts should be punished more severely than accidental acts.

60
00:06:03.300 --> 00:06:05.100
The question is why?

61
00:06:05.100 --> 00:06:08.380
From Lee's perspective the damage to him is the same.

62
00:06:08.380 --> 00:06:14.020
He still has the same bump on his head whether the act was intentional, the act was accidental.

63
00:06:14.020 --> 00:06:19.220
But really short of me confessing I intentionally hit Lee, no one can ever really know my intent.

64
00:06:19.220 --> 00:06:22.220
Utterly unknowable.

65
00:06:22.220 --> 00:06:24.060
So why all this hullabaloo about intent?

66
00:06:24.060 --> 00:06:28.420
Well the concept originally stems from canon law and ecclesiastical courts.

67
00:06:28.420 --> 00:06:32.420
Catholic priests hearing confessions of penitents were concerned about measuring offenses against

68
00:06:32.420 --> 00:06:35.180
God in order for sin to be a mortal sin.

69
00:06:35.180 --> 00:06:38.660
The sinner had to, among other things, know that he was committing a mortal sin and assent

70
00:06:38.660 --> 00:06:39.660
to it.

71
00:06:39.660 --> 00:06:41.700
That required the penitent to confess his sin.

72
00:06:41.700 --> 00:06:47.300
His government powers grew and secular courts, secular law replaced canon law.

73
00:06:47.300 --> 00:06:53.140
The secular law simply expropriated, and I would argue perverted, the concept embodied

74
00:06:53.140 --> 00:06:58.260
in the Canon Law. Thus the modern law's concept of intent is a perversion of the Canon Law

75
00:06:58.260 --> 00:07:05.260
and arguably should be jettisoned by libertarian law, libertarian jurisprudence. Okay, just

76
00:07:05.260 --> 00:07:11.140
a snapshot of maybe another paper for next year, right? So here's the challenge. I think

77
00:07:11.140 --> 00:07:16.860
there's a need to create a systematic cohesive system of libertarian jurisprudence. In order

78
00:07:16.860 --> 00:07:23.060
to create this libertarian jurisprudence, we need more legal scholars. Here's the

79
00:07:23.060 --> 00:07:28.260
The Controversy. In order to do that, the movement needs more lawyers. I know, that's

80
00:07:28.260 --> 00:07:34.420
a very popular statement to make, right? But I submit that that means that if students

81
00:07:34.420 --> 00:07:38.120
insist on going to graduate school, we should encourage graduate students perhaps to move

82
00:07:38.120 --> 00:07:44.560
away from PhDs in economics and into law degrees, at least in the United States. There's three

83
00:07:44.560 --> 00:07:50.820
advantages to that. You can do practical work like union busting, from my colleague Deanna

84
00:07:50.820 --> 00:08:00.820
you can do scholarly work like my colleague Jacob Hubert and finally in conclusion you can also have the advantage of being conscripted potentially into Hoppe's gang.