Mises says somewhere something like that public school for the little childeren to teach them math and to read, could be acceptable.
It could be in Human Action, I don’t know.
" In countries which are not harassed by struggles between various linguis-
tic groups public education can work if it is limited to reading, writing, and
arithmetic. With bright children it is even possible to add elementary notions
of geometry, the natural sciences, and the valid laws of the country. But as soon
as one wants to go farther, serious difficulties appear. Teaching at the elementary
level necessarily turns into indoctrination. " Pg. 876 of Human Action
Contrast with his views on education in ‘Liberalism: the Classical Tradition’, where he denounces it properly.
Some of Theory and History, “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth”, some of The Anti-Capitalist Mentality & some of Nation, State, Economy.
Can’t thank you all enough for your kind responses!
PopTech – A History of Libertarianism would actually be perfect to start me off. I’m not completely new to Libertarianism, I’ve actually been a fan of it for a couple of years, or rather a follower of Ron Paul. I just think I should start to properly learn as I’ve only gone so far with it. Are there any more Libertarian History books out there for recommendation? Or is Radicals for Capitalism quite enough?
Conza88 & Laughing Man – I will definitely check out Ralph Raico. Apart from Mises, are there any other Classical Liberalists with some work worth reading? Obviously not too advanced though ;D
AdrianHealey – At first I wanted to study just mainly about Libertarianism. But to my naivety I didn’t realise that Libertarianism has quite a lot of different types within it. So really I would love to learn about:
-
The History of Classical Liberalism (or History of Libertarianism such as PTs recommendation)
-
and Classical Liberalism ideas. I’ve noted the book ‘Liberalism’ by Mises, and I do already own The Road To Serfdom (which I have yet to start reading!)
You don’t need to respond to the questions I asked if you don’t wish to, most are just general questions rather than user specific.
Oh and, I’m open to any advice at all that anyone wants to give! Even if it might not make complete sense to me straight away, I’m sure it will be helpful.
Final thing: off-topic but, Happy Christmas!
I believe it is enough but there are none that cover the Libertarian movement like Radicals for Capitalism that I know of. Everything about the movement, institutions and major players will make sense once you read it. I cannot recommend reading it enough before you read anything else. It will help you decide who and what you want to read next.
Personally, I don’t know of any book that covers the modern history of libertarianism.But I’m not sure if the history of a movement is as interesting as the ideas the movement has. But that’s a decision for you to make.
More interesting (I think) would be books that summarizes a lot of different view within the classical liberal/libertarian movement.
I don’t know any books in English that have something like a summarizing view of the visions of Hume, Smith, Mises, Rand, Hayek, Nozick & Rothbard (to give an example). I know some exist in Dutch, but I don’t know any in English.
Good introductions within the literature of classical liberalism are the following:
-
Road to Serfdom (Easy) & Constitution of Liberty (more advanced), both from Hayek in which he advocates something I would call a ‘minimal welfare statist’ vision. Free to choose & Capitalism and Freedom, both by Milton Friedman are also both classical liberal ‘minimal welfare statist’ books, which are within the broader classical liberal tradition.
-
Liberalism: The Classical Tradition by Mises is more intermediate, in which he gives a good defense of a minarchist position. More recently, you have ‘Libertarianism: a Primer’ by David Boaz, which I believe is an excellent book and introduction in Libertarianism.
-
For a New Liberty & The Ethics of Liberty, both by Rothbard are both good introductions in the anarcho-capitalist way of thinking. The first is more ‘practical’ (how would private roads, welfaresystem, etc. work?) The second one is more philosophy of right; what is justified and what isn’t in a libertarian society (according to Rothbard).
-
The Machinery of Freedom by David Friedman is also an anarcho-capitalist libertarian vision, but this comes from a utilitarian perspective.
-
A few days ago, The Adam Smith Institute (England) has published a new book, called ‘A beginners Guide to Liberty’, which is an AWESOME introduction, in just a 100 pages and very easy to read. Not as radical as some might want, but I think the central ideas of liberty are expounded in a clear and articulate way. You can find the book here: http://www.adamsmith.org/publications/economy/a-beginner’s-guide-to-liberty-200912184616/ (and you can download the pdf!)
But more important: ‘classical liberalism’ isn’t just about a few policy ideas. The global perspective of classical liberal in general, and libertarianism (and anarcho-capitalism) more specific has a whole bunch of arguments: from economics, sociology, history, law, philosophy, ethics, etc. It’s good to start with the more ‘general’ works, but everyone has the find his own way. Some libertarians are more interested in the private provision of ‘social security’, others tend to focus more on the working of the law in a free society (customary, common, etc.) So if you are interested in pursuing a particular subject further than what you get from these introductory books, feel free to ask.
The important thing to realize is that classical liberalism isn’t just about just stating things. The normative conclusions are based upon scientific research: I think it’s more important that you introduce yourself in the scientific line of arguments in favour of liberty than just to ‘know’ that there are people who wantt lower taxes and less governmentprogram. If you understand why people want this, I think you have a better understanding of and a better dedication to classical liberalism. But I’m digressing.
This has been taking care of. I personally think that you can get the most important part of this from wikipedia and just reading the relevant literature. Knowledge about the history of classical liberalism as a movement will automatically come with it.
I’ve mentioned a few books that are good introductions in classical liberalism in general. But there are a few books that don’t advertise themself as being ‘liberty-minded’ per se, but they explain some of the basic arguments from which the classical liberal movements draws it’s conclusions.
-
Economics for real people~Gene Callahan is an easy to read (a 12 year old can understand it) introduction in the Austrian scole.
-
Try to read ‘Competition as a Discovery Procedure’, and ‘the Use of knowledge in society’ by Hayek a few time. Those are good essays, even though not everyone (including me) doesn’t agree with everything in it.
-
Read ‘Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth’ by Mises: he explains why a socialist society is impossible. (This will also require you to read a few times to get the whole gist of it.) This essay is important, because it helped the Austrian school in general to think about the relation between economic freedom and human welfare. That’s why ‘austrians’ are so often ‘libertarians’ too: because we think that markets are a moral and an ‘efficient’ (I’m using this in the subjective way, not the neoclassical way) way of handling stuff.
-
I would recommend ‘A beginners Guide to liberty’ once again. It’s not a classic, but it should become one.
I’m here to serf. 
I’ll give you one last advice: follow the blog world. 50% of it isn’t interesting, 30% is much of the same (in the beginning this is new and interesting, after a while it’s get old and repetitive), 10% is sort of interesting but old news, 5 is stuff you don’t get and 5% is genuinely new and interesting. I follow about 25 blogs, so every day I get an interesting article. 
Seriously; find your own way. And use google and wikipedia. They do help you a lot. And feel free to ask me questions as much as you want.
You do now - Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement.
As soon as we get our warehouse issues settled, we are going to pick this book up for our store. It is really good. The final bias is toward Friedman but, to me, that doesn’t take away from the book at all. Rothbard is the star throughout. I enjoyed it immensely even though the author does not see things the way I do. I learned from it and appreciated it.
Does anyone else agree or disagree?
I haven’t read all of this topic yet. I think the book the OP is referring to is the Libertarian Manifesto. I would recommend to go ahead and read it anyways. It was really radical to me at first. It kind of converted me to libertarian ideals pretty quickly… I was interested in Ron Paul back then, and, I went to www.mises.org, I read the book about socialism, that was interesting. I wanted to learn about libertarianism so I read this book… and basically I had to fight with a lot of the ideas since a lot of the new ideas seemed really radical to me and were completely different from the philosophy I had at the time… and but I’d go ahead and read it anyways. It contains a bulk of the philosophy on property rights. Read it-- and you’ll understand the majority of the libertarian thought. Ludwig Von Mises takes more of a moderate approach to his works and he doesn’t try to convert you in the way Rothbard does… so if you don’t like Rothbard’s style I’d recommend reading Liberalism. I’m reading it right now. He’s more of a minarchist. You may find that more to your liking.
Indeed. The correct sentence was: ‘I don’t know of any [other] book [besides the one mentioned].’
I disagree with the idea of bringing in Radicals for Capitalism. I don’t think a Beltaway libertarian like Brian Doherty offers the right perspective on a lot of issues to do with liberty and the Austrian school, though he is certainly sympathetic. I would prefer if Mises.org brought back Harry Browne instead.
The book is effectively a historical narative of five of the biggest players in the Libertarian movement. The reviewer has a problem with the book because it offers Libertarian opinions and perspectives that are not 100% Austrian and do not hold Rothbard as the only authority on ideas. The book’s apparent crime is to include third party opinions on Rothbard which I have found consistent outside of those associated with the Ludwig von Mises Institute. I found the book to be quite fair with Rothbard as the reviewer even noted,
“Doherty considers Rothbard one of the five thinkers who “form the spine of the story this book tells, five people without whom there would have been no uniquely libertarian ideas or libertarian institutions of any popularity or impact in America in the second half of the twentieth century” (p. 8). (The other four are Mises, Hayek, Rand, and Friedman.) He is by no means hostile to Rothbard. Quite the contrary, he praises him for embodying “the purest form of the libertarian political philosophy” (p. 569).”
The main chapters on Rothbard are fair, objective and entertaining. They offer an insight into how and why he is who he is.
I don’t think hiding or sugar coating the disagreements inside the libertarian movement are helpful. Anyone new to all of this will come away with a much better understanding of the structure and organization of the movement after reading this book. I cannot stress enough how I had wished I had read this book before anything else.
What book are you referring to by Harry Browne?
Yes, Doherty is so much Beltway he was praising Rothbard and ancap in Reason and defending them against Callahan in the last few weeks.
Where was this Doherty/Callahan thing? The Callahan issue truly mystifies me. Maybe just too caught up in UK intellectual circles.
http://www.gene-callahan.org/blog/2009/12/callahan-responds-to-doherty-responding.html
It’s not really a discussion, imo.