Zitate von Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Hans-Hermann HoppeFoto

1  0

Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Geburtstag:2. September 1949

Hans-Hermann Hoppe ist Volkswirt der Österreichischen Schule. Er sieht sich als kulturell konservativer Libertärer und als Vertreter des Anarchokapitalismus.

Zitate Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Bestellen Sie Zitate:


Hans-Hermann Hoppe Foto
Hans-Hermann Hoppe1
deutscher Volkswirt 1949
„Freiheit statt Demokratie!“ Freiheit statt Demokratie: Der libertäre Vordenker und bekennende "Antidemokrat" Hans-Hermann Hoppe über seine provokanten Thesen. Interview in Junge Freiheit, Nr. 26/05, 24. Juni 2005. S.3. Archiv Junge Freiheit















Hans-Hermann Hoppe Foto
Hans-Hermann Hoppe22
Austrian school economist and libertarian anarcho-capital... 1949
„Incidentally, the same logic that would force one to accept the idea of the production of security by private business as economically the best solution to the problem of consumer satisfaction also forces one, so far as moral-ideological positions are concerned, to abandon the political theory of classical liberalism and take the small but nevertheless decisive step (from there) to the theory of libertarianism, or private property anarchism. Classical liberalism, with Ludwig von Mises as its foremost representative in the twentieth century, advocates a social system based on the nonaggression principle. And this is also what libertarianism advocates. But classical liberalism then wants to have this principle enforced by a monopolistic agency (the government, the state)—an organization, that is, which is not exclusively dependent on voluntary, contractual support by the consumers of its respective services, but instead has the right to unilaterally determine its own income, i. e., the taxes to be imposed on consumers in order to do its job in the area of security production. Now, however plausible this might sound, it should be clear that it is inconsistent. Either the principle of nonaggression is valid, in which case the state as a privileged monopolist is immoral, or business built on and around aggression—the use of force and of noncontractual means of acquiring resources—is valid, in which case one must toss out the first theory. It is impossible to sustain both contentions and not to be inconsistent unless, of course, one could provide a principle that is more fundamental than both the nonaggression principle and the states’ right to aggressive violence and from which both, with the respective limitations regarding the domains in which they are valid, can be logically derived. However, liberalism never provided any such principle, nor will it ever be able to do so, since, to argue in favor of anything presupposes one’s right to be free of aggression. Given the fact then that the principle of nonaggression cannot be argumentatively contested as morally valid without implicitly acknowledging its validity, by force of logic one is committed to abandoning liberalism and accepting instead its more radical child: libertarianism, the philosophy of pure capitalism, which demands that the production of security be undertaken by private business too.“ The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy




Ähnliche Autoren