For vols. 1-3 (2009-2011), cite articles as: Author, “Title,” Libertarian Papers [volume #], [article number] (year).  Example: Jan Narveson, “Present Payments, Past Wrongs: Correcting Loose Talk about Nozick and Rectification,” Libertarian Papers 1, 1 (2009).

For vol. 4 (2012) onward, cite articles as: Author. Year. "Title." Libertarian Papers. Volume # (issue #): [page numbers]. Example: Michael F. Reber. 2012. "The Role of Work: A Eudaimonistic Perspective." Libertarian Papers. 4 (1): 1-26.

6. “Why Libertarians Should Reject Positive Rights”

by Joshua Katz

View the .pdf for this article View the .doc for this article Listen to or Download the Audio version of this article

Abstract: Maloberti, in “Why Libertarians Should Accept Positive Rights” argues that, as normally presented, libertarianism entails anarchism.  He argues that libertarians should, therefore, accept a limited form of positive rights, which will allow for the creation of a libertarian government.  In this paper, it is argued that the entailment of anarchism is not a problem for libertarianism, and that the form of positive rights endorsed by Maloberti is unfounded, ill-defined, and inconsistent with libertarian notions of individual freedom.  It is further argued that Maloberti’s positive rights, as defined in his paper, cannot withstand the analysis prompted by Austrian value theory.

Written by Stephan Kinsella (Editor) — 2009.01.22

2 responses

Added to: Volume 1 (2009)

«
»

2 Comments

Follow responses to this article via RSS or TrackBack to '6. “Why Libertarians Should Reject Positive Rights”'.

Leave a Reply

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.