Hubbry Logo
Walter BlockWalter BlockMain
Open search
Walter Block
Community hub
Walter Block
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Walter Block
Walter Block
Walter Block
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Walter Edward Block (born August 21, 1941) is an American Austrian School economist and anarcho-capitalist theorist.[1] He was the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at the School of Business at Loyola University New Orleans and a former senior fellow of the non-profit think-tank Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama.[2]

Key Information

Personal life

[edit]

Walter Block was born in Brooklyn, New York to Jewish parents Abraham Block, a certified public accountant, and Ruth Block, a paralegal, both of whom Block has said were liberals.[3] He attended James Madison High School, where Bernie Sanders was on his track team.[4] Block earned his PhD degree in economics from Columbia University and wrote his dissertation on rent control in the United States under Gary Becker.[5] Block identifies himself as a "devout atheist".[6]

In an interview, Block stated, "In the fifties and sixties, I was just another commie living in Brooklyn."[7] Block credits his shift to libertarianism to his having attended a lecture by Ayn Rand while he was an undergraduate student.[3] Block later attended a luncheon with Rand, Nathaniel Branden, and Leonard Peikoff at which Branden suggested that Block read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt.[3] He says that the final push to his conversion came from having met Austrian School and anarcho-capitalist theorist Murray Rothbard.[3] While Block is an anarcho-capitalist and, unlike the Objectivist followers of Ayn Rand, ultimately opposed to limited or minimal government, and even while criticizing her movement as "cultish", Block still describes himself as "a big fan" of Rand and considers Atlas Shrugged to be "the best novel ever written."[8][better source needed]

Professional career

[edit]
Portrait of Block

Walter Block received a B.A. in philosophy from Brooklyn College in 1964 and a PhD in economics from Columbia University in 1972. He taught at the University of Central Arkansas, Holy Cross College, Baruch College and Rutgers University. He now holds the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at the Butt College of Business, Loyola University, in New Orleans.[9]

From 1979 to 1991, Block was the senior economist with the Fraser Institute.[5] He was also a senior fellow at the think-tank Ludwig von Mises Institute from 2000 to 2024, where he has published various blog posts, papers, and books.[9][10]

In the years since 1971, his work has been published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, the Review of Austrian Economics, the American Journal of Economics and Sociology, the Journal of Labor Economics and Public Choice[11][12] and in Psychology Today and other popular media.[13] In 2017, he hit the milestone of publishing over 500 peer-reviewed articles.[14]

Defending the Undefendable

[edit]
Further information: Defending the Undefendable

Walter Block has written two dozen books.[15] He is best known for his 1976 book Defending the Undefendable.[16][17] The book has been translated into ten foreign languages.[9] Fox Business Channel pundit John Stossel wrote that Block's "eye-opening" book inspired him to see that economics "illuminates what common sense overlooks."[18]

Viewpoints

[edit]

Slavery and segregation

[edit]

"Voluntary slave contract"

[edit]

Block believes that people should have the legal right to sell themselves into slavery, or to buy and keep slaves who have sold themselves into slavery, in a libertarian legal order.[citation needed]

In an essay on "inalienability" of natural and legal rights, Block defends what he calls a "voluntary slave contract", arguing that it is "a bona fide contract where consideration crosses hands; when it is abrogated, theft occurs". He notes that Robert Nozick agrees with him, and critiques the views of the libertarians who disagree. Block seeks to make "a tiny adjustment" which "strengthens libertarianism by making it more internally consistent." He argues that his position shows "that contract, predicated on private property [can] reach to the furthest realms of human interaction, even to voluntary slave contracts."[19]

Slavery and civil rights in the United States

[edit]

A January 2014 article in the New York Times said Block "suggested in an interview that the daily life of the enslaved was 'not so bad – you pick cotton and sing songs.'"[20] The piece also reported that Block said Woolworth's had the right to exclude black people from its lunch counters, asserting that "no one is compelled to associate with people against their will." Block responded to the article by accusing the Times of libel for taking quotes out of context and claiming the latter quote was not accurate.[21] In his response, he called slavery "depraved and monstrous" while arguing that it is not the nature of the work slaves perform that makes slavery monstrous, but rather it is the fact that they are forced to perform it and are not free to leave. According to Block's argument, forcing a slave to perform pleasant tasks would be no less monstrous because it equally violates the libertarian non-aggression principle. An Inside Higher Ed piece noted that, in response to the story, seventeen faculty members at Block's university publicly called for him to be censured for his "recurring public attacks ... on the civil rights of all." The piece also reported that Reverend Kevin Wildes, the President of Block's university, took the "unusual step" of publicly critiquing his arguments as fallacious.[22]

Pay gap for black people and women

[edit]

In a 2008 lecture Block called "Injustices in the Politics and Economics of Social Justice" presented at the invitation of the Adam Smith Society of the Economics Department of Loyola College, Baltimore Block said "blacks and women" were paid less than whites because they are "less productive".[23]

In the lecture, Block defended his views on women saying among younger and unmarried women, there is virtually no income disparity. When asked by an attendee to explain the difference in productivity between blacks and whites, he said that as an economist he was not qualified to explain the disparity. Block offered two thoughts that might account for the disparity: first, what he called the "politically correct" explanation, or socioeconomic disparities and historical injustices towards blacks; for the second thought, which he calls the "political incorrect", he refers to R. Herrnstein and C. Murray's book "The Bell Curve".[23]

James Gill wrote in the Times-Picayune that the lecture "ignited a furor", resulting in the president of the university, Reverend Brian F. Linnane, apologizing for what was taken as a "sexist and racist outburst", with Gill opining that, "ideas contrary to fashionable preconceptions are always likely to throw academia into a fit".[24]

According to Inside Higher Ed:

Perhaps almost as notable as the president's direct response was the condemnation issued jointly by the college's economics department and the Adam Smith Society ... "It is important to note that the remark was offensive not just because it was racially insensitive, but because it was erroneous and indicated poor-quality scholarship. There is ample scholarly evidence that, after adjusting for productivity-related characteristics (e.g., years of schooling, work experience, union and industry status, etc.) a considerable wage gap remains."[23]

Despite the criticism showing evidence questioning the veracity of his statements, Block said he "regards sensitivity as the enemy of intellectual inquiry and truth."[24][25] In a December 2008 article, Block wrote that the lessons he had learned from the incident were regarding the need for tenure if one wants to speak out, the wisdom of Murray Rothbard's words that "it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects" while remaining ignorant of economics, and the importance of Ludwig von Mises' motto: "Do not give in to evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it."[26]

Sexual assault

[edit]

Block asserts that sexual harassment "that takes place between secretary and her boss is not a coercive action like the pinching that takes place in the public sphere." He claims this is the case since the secretary "agrees to all aspects of the job when she agrees to accept the job and especially when she agrees to keep the job". He calls this a "package-deal". He further differentiates this from acts taking place in public areas as they are not privately owned and therefore there can be no agreement to what he calls the "package-deal", and since the pincher isn't the private owner. He argues that "if pinching and sexual molestation are outlawed in private places, this violates the rights of those who voluntarily wish to engage in such practice." Block argues that the proof of the "voluntary" nature of such an act in a private place is that "the person endangered" (the victim woman) "has no claim [right] whatsoever to the private place in question [...] If she continues to patronize or work at a place where she is molested, it can only be voluntary."[27]

Highway privatization

[edit]
Further information: Highway privatization and Free-market roads

Block says government management of roads and highways is not only inefficient, but also deadly. He argues that "road socialism" causes the deaths of more than 35,000 people in the United States each year. And, although many people blame highway deaths on alcohol, unsafe vehicles, or speeding, Block lays the blame on the government officials who manage the highway system. "It may well be that speed and alcohol are deleterious to safe driving; but it is the road manager's task to ascertain that the proper standards are maintained with regard to these aspects of safety. If unsafe conditions prevail in a private, multistory parking lot, or in a shopping mall, or in the aisles of a department store, the entrepreneur in question is held accountable."[28]

Punishment of government employees

[edit]

Block has written about punishment of those engaging in "statist, governmental or other gangster activity". He argues there should be "a presumption that all government employees are guilty of a crime against humanity," though he notes that this presumption can be rebutted in many cases, such as that of U.S. Congressman and Mises Institute Senior Fellow Ron Paul. Block examines issues like restitution of land taken through eminent domain and possible retribution against politicians, IRS employees, and others who cooperated in governmental activity. He describes rules by which libertarian "Nuremberg Trials" might operate.[29][30]

Evictionism (in contrast to abortion)

[edit]
Main article: Evictionism
See also: Libertarian perspectives on abortion and Stem cell controversy

According to Block's moral theory, the act of abortion must be conceptually separated into the acts of the eviction of the fetus from the womb, and the killing of the fetus. Building on the libertarian stand against trespass and murder, Block supports a right to the first act, but, except in certain circumstances, not the second act. Block believes the woman may legally abort if the fetus is not viable outside the womb, or the woman has announced to the world her abandonment of the right to custody of the fetus, and no one else has "homesteaded" that right by offering to care for the fetus.[31]

He also has written on finding a compromise between those who believe stem cell research is murder and those who favor it. He applies a libertarian theory of private property rights to his premise that even fertilized eggs have human rights and that the relevant issues are competition between researchers and those who wish to adopt the eggs.[32]

Homesteading

[edit]

Blockean Proviso

[edit]

Block argues that if property is "necessary" for others to use, to get to unowned property, they have an easement over it and compared it to a person who murders a child without feeding it.[33] He cites the example of a person with donut shaped land who doesn't allow anyone to get to the middle of his land as incompatible with the logic of homesteading.[34]

Picture a bagel (or donut) with a hole in it. Label the hole in the center as "A", the bagel itself as "B" and the surrounding territory, lying outside of the bagel, as "C". Suppose that someone, call him Mr. B, homesteads the land depicted by B. Assume away any possibility of tunneling under, or bridging or flying a helicopter over this terrain, B. Mr. B, then, controls area A, without ever having lifted a finger in the direction of homesteading this land, A. Yes, as of now, Mr. B does not own A. But, under our assumptions, he can homestead this territory whenever he wants to do so. Mr. B [has] gained an untoward advantage, vis-à-vis all other potential homesteaders of A, who are now residing in territory C, and cannot reach A, without trespassing on B, Mr. B's property. This, I claim, is incompatible with the logic of homesteading.

Stephan Kinsella, who disagreed with Block, coined the term "The Blockean Proviso" after The Lockean Proviso. It has since been called the Blockean or Blockian proviso.[35]

Negative homesteading

[edit]

Block has theorized on whether a person acting in self-defense can harm a human shield or hostage used by an aggressor. Block holds this is legitimate because the human shield is the first victim of the aggressor and, as such, cannot be allowed to pass on their misery to the defending person, the intended second victim of the aggressor. Block calls this "negative homesteading theory".[36][37]

Foreign policy

[edit]

Block supports a non-interventionist foreign policy.[38] On LewRockwell.com, he criticized Randy Barnett's Wall Street Journal editorial on presidential candidate Ron Paul and on foreign policy.[39]

Animal rights

[edit]

Block believes that the libertarian non-aggression principle does not apply to animals and that the right of human owners to kill, torture, or otherwise abuse animals may be an unavoidable corollary of libertarian premises. He articulated this position in a 2017 debate on animal rights, maintaining that groups must be able to petition for rights and respect the rights of others in order to qualify for rights themselves.[40][better source needed]

Publications

[edit]

As author

[edit]
  • Defending the Undefendable (1976; translated into ten foreign languages.[9]) ISBN 0930073053
  • A Response to the Framework Document for Amending the Combines Investigation Act (1982)
  • Focus on Economics and the Canadian Bishops (1983)
  • Focus on Employment Equity: A Critique of the Abella Royal Commission on Equality in Employment (with Michael A. Walker; 1985)
  • The U.S. Bishops and Their Critics: An Economic and Ethical Perspective (1986). ISBN 978-0889750852. OCLC 15348791
  • Lexicon of Economic Thought (with Michael A. Walker; 1988) ISBN 978-0889750814. OCLC 246846272
  • Economic Freedom of the World, 1975–1995 (with James Gwartney, Robert Lawson; 1996)
  • Labor Economics from a Free Market Perspective: Employing the Unemployable (2008). ISBN 978-9812705686. OCLC 169873717
  • The Privatization of Roads and Highways: Human and Economic Factors (2009). ISBN 978-0773458413. OCLC 64487353
  • Differing Worldviews in Higher Education: Two Scholars Argue Cooperatively about Justice Education (2010) ISBN 978-9460913501
  • Building Blocks for Liberty (2010). Ludwig von Mises Institute, ISBN 978-1933550916. OCLC 717747069
  • The case for discrimination. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 2010. ISBN 978-1-933550-81-7.
  • Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty (2012). ISBN 978-4871873239. OCLC 810904922
  • Defending the Undefendable II (2013). ISBN 978-1908089373.
  • Water Capitalism: The Case for Privatizing Oceans, Rivers, Lakes, and Aquifers (2016). ISBN 978-1498518826.
  • Space Capitalism: How Humans Will Colonize Planets, Moons, and Asteroids (2018). ISBN 978-3319746500.
  • The Classical Liberal Case for Israel (2021) (with Alan G. Futerman). ISBN 9789811639531.

As editor

[edit]
  • Zoning: Its Costs and Relevance for the 1980s (Ed.; 1980)
  • Rent Control: Myths & Realities (Ed. with Edgar Olsen; 1981)
  • Discrimination, Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity (Ed. with Michael A. Walker; 1982)
  • Taxation: An International Perspective (Ed. with Michael A. Walker; 1984)
  • Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation (Ed.; 1985; translated into Portuguese 1992) ISBN 088975067X
  • Morality of the Market: Religious and Economic Perspectives (Ed. with Geoffrey Brennan, Kenneth Elzinga; 1985)
  • Theology, Third World Development and Economic Justice (Ed. with Donald Shaw; 1985)
  • Reaction: The New Combines Investigation Act (Ed.; 1986)
  • Religion, Economics & Social Thought (Ed. with Irving Hexham; 1986)
  • Man, Economy and Liberty: Essays in Honor of Murray N. Rothbard (Ed. with Lew Rockwell; 1988)
  • Breaking the Shackles; the Economics of Deregulation: A Comparison of U.S. and Canadian Experience (Ed. with George Lermer; 1991)
  • Economic Freedom: Toward a Theory of Measurement (Ed.; 1991)
  • Libertarian Autobiographies (Ed.; forthcoming)

Notes

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Walter Block

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Walter Edward Block (born 1941) is an American economist and anarcho-capitalist theorist affiliated with the Austrian School, serving as the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at . A prolific and advocate for libertarian principles, Block applies first-principles reasoning rooted in property rights and non-aggression to critique intervention and champion market solutions across social, ethical, and economic domains. His work emphasizes of all resources, from roads to water, challenging conventional welfare-state paradigms with empirical and logical defenses of voluntary exchange. Block earned a B.A. in from in 1964 and a Ph.D. in from in 1972, with his dissertation focusing on rent control. Prior roles include senior economist at the and professorships at other institutions before assuming his endowed chair at Loyola in 2001. Among his over 20 books and hundreds of scholarly articles, Defending the Undefendable (1976) stands out for defending the economic role of stigmatized yet non-coercive activities like pimping and drug dealing, arguing they serve consumer preferences without violating rights. Other key contributions include The Privatization of Roads and Highways (2009), which details market-based infrastructure alternatives, and defenses of the right to on private property as a voluntary rather than a policy failure. Block's uncompromising positions have provoked controversies, including student-led calls for his dismissal over lectures applying libertarian to topics like reparations and private , prompting university investigations and mandatory diversity training. He has responded by recording classes to demonstrate fidelity to economic theory over ideological conformity and litigating perceived libels, underscoring tensions between and institutional pressures. Despite such pushback from sources often aligned with progressive norms, Block's output continues to influence libertarian scholarship, prioritizing causal mechanisms of markets over politically favored interventions.

Early Life and Education

Childhood and Family Background

Walter Block was born on August 21, 1941, in , New York. He grew up in a Jewish liberal community in during the 1940s and 1950s, an environment that fostered his initial political leanings toward . Block attended High School in , graduating in 1959. There, he was a classmate of and participated in socialist activities alongside him, reflecting the leftist influences prevalent in his youth. This period marked Block's early engagement with before his later ideological shift toward .

Academic Training and Influences

Walter Block received a B.A. in philosophy from , , in 1964, followed by a Ph.D. in from in 1972. His doctoral studies occurred under mainstream economists, reflecting the neoclassical and Keynesian paradigms dominant at Columbia during that era, though Block later critiqued such approaches in favor of praxeological methods. Block's intellectual trajectory began with socialist leanings in high school, where he associated with , but shifted dramatically upon exposure to Ayn Rand's in the . Rand's emphasis on rational and opposition to marked an initial pivot toward pro-market views, influencing Block's early advocacy for principles before his deeper engagement with . The pivotal influence arrived through , whom Block credits as a personal mentor and the catalyst for his adoption of Austrian School and . Rothbard's synthesis of from —drawing on —with radical libertarian ethics convinced Block of the incompatibility of any state intervention with individual liberty, redirecting his research toward critiques of coercion in all forms. This mentorship, facilitated through New York libertarian intellectual circles, later associated with the network, underscored Block's rejection of empirical positivism in favor of aprioristic analysis.

Professional Career

Early Positions and Mises Institute Affiliation

Following his Ph.D. in economics from in 1972, Walter Block held faculty positions at , (), Holy Cross College, and the , where he taught courses aligned with Austrian School principles and libertarian thought. These early academic roles provided a platform for developing and disseminating his critiques of and intervention, emphasizing praxeological methods derived from and . From 1979 to 1991, Block served as a senior fellow at the , a Vancouver-based dedicated to advancing free-market policies through and . In this capacity, he contributed to publications on indices, , and libertarian applications to issues, including co-authoring reports that quantified global variations in economic using metrics like property rights protection and regulatory burdens. This period marked his transition from academia to influential policy-oriented work, solidifying his reputation within libertarian circles for defending controversial market-based solutions, such as privatizing natural resources. Block's affiliation with the , founded in 1982 to promote Austrian economics and , began in its formative years and evolved into a senior fellowship role, where he advanced anarcho-capitalist arguments through lectures, articles, and editorial contributions. As a key figure at the Institute, he collaborated with scholars like Rothbard on topics including theory and critiques of , helping to shape its curriculum and outreach programs that prioritize praxeological deduction as the foundation of economic theory, with empirical analysis relegated to historical interpretation. His involvement underscored a commitment to radical , including defenses of in areas like and contracts, often positioning the Institute as a to mainstream academic economics.

Loyola University Role and Endowed Chair

Walter Block has held the position of of at since 2001, serving in the College of Business. In this capacity, he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in economics, emphasizing Austrian School principles and libertarian perspectives on markets and government intervention. Block occupies the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in , an endowed position funded by contributions from Harold E. Wirth to support distinguished scholarship in economic theory and application. The chair recognizes his contributions to free-market economics, including authorship of numerous books and articles critiquing state policies. Despite periodic controversies over his views—such as public defenses of controversial economic positions that drew student petitions for his removal in 2020—Block has retained the chair and continued his tenure without interruption as of 2024.

Major Publications

Defending the Undefendable

Defending the Undefendable is a book by Walter Block, published by Fleet Press Corp., that defends various stigmatized professions and behaviors through a libertarian lens, arguing they involve no initiation of force against non-consenting others and often provide economic or social benefits via voluntary exchange. Spanning categories like sexual activities, medical practices, free speech issues, financial dealings, business operations, ecological actions, and , the book challenges legal and moral prohibitions rooted in third-party objections rather than direct harm. It includes a foreword by praising Block's bold application of liberty principles to misunderstood roles and an endorsement by F.A. Hayek endorsing its economic insights. Block structures arguments around specific examples, such as the prostitute, whom he portrays as engaging in consensual trade comparable to any market transaction, like exchanging for , with bans harming participants by limiting choices. The is defended as a broker reducing transaction costs for prostitutes and clients through and management services, filling a niche others avoid. In financial contexts, the blackmailer leverages information ownership to offer silence for payment, potentially deterring crimes by incentivizing discretion without violating . For , the slumlord supplies low-income accommodations where exists but supply is deterred by ; Block attributes poor conditions to and policies like rent control, not landlord malice, asserting voluntary contracts serve tenants better than state interference. Underlying these defenses is the non-aggression axiom: legitimacy hinges on absence of , with "victimless" acts promoting and while state bans impose net harm through black markets or distorted incentives. Block critiques coercive or state-supported charity as potentially maladaptive and equates government money with counterfeiting to justify voluntary private alternatives, though such extensions draw for overreach. Reception among libertarians was largely positive, with Rothbard and highlighting its value in re-evaluating societal villains as market contributors, and the reissuing it in a reformatted edition to underscore ongoing applicability. Contemporary reviews, such as in Reason magazine, commended core analyses on rights and markets but faulted a sensational tone—labeling subjects "heroes"—and occasional logical stretches, like assuming prostitutes universally prefer their work or dismissing private charity's role outright. These elements, while provocative, compelled reassessment of biases against non-aggressive .

Other Books and Edited Works

Block has authored numerous books applying Austrian economics and libertarian principles to specific policy areas. In The Privatization of Roads and Highways: Human and Economic Factors (2006, Edwin Mellen Press), he argues that private ownership of roadways would improve , , and compared to monopolies, drawing on historical examples of private toll roads and theoretical critiques of public infrastructure failures. Similarly, Labor Economics from a Free Market Perspective: Employing the Unemployable (2008, World Scientific Publishing) challenges laws and union privileges, positing that unrestricted voluntary contracts would reduce by allowing employers to hire marginal workers at market-clearing rates. Other notable authored works include The Case for Discrimination (2010, Mises Institute), where Block defends the right to discriminate in private transactions as an extension of property rights, critiquing anti-discrimination laws as coercive interference in voluntary associations. In Toward a Libertarian Society (2014, ), he compiles essays advocating anarcho-capitalist solutions to issues like , roads, and , emphasizing restitution over for crimes. Water Capitalism: The Case for Privatizing Oceans, Rivers, Lakes, and Aquifers (2015, co-authored with Peter Lothian Nelson, Lexington Books) extends privatization arguments to aquatic resources, contending that titles would resolve externalities like and more effectively than regulatory regimes. Block has also edited several volumes featuring contributions from libertarian scholars. I Chose Liberty: Autobiographies of Contemporary Libertarians (2010, ) collects personal narratives from 82 thinkers, illustrating paths to through individual intellectual journeys rather than institutional dogma. He co-edited Man, Economy, and Liberty: Essays in Honor of Murray N. Rothbard (1988, ) with Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr., assembling papers on , monetary theory, and critiques of to honor Rothbard's foundational role in . Additionally, Block served as editor for early volumes of the Review of Austrian Economics (1995–1997, co-edited with and Joseph T. Salerno), which advanced and market process theory against neoclassical paradigms.

Recent Writings and Articles (Post-2020)

In the years following 2020, Walter Block has primarily contributed articles to libertarian and economic journals, engaging in polemical debates on topics such as pandemic policies, property rights, , and market solutions to social issues, while co-editing one volume of autobiographical essays. His output reflects a continued emphasis on applying and anarcho-capitalist principles to contemporary controversies, often through rejoinders to critics. Block co-edited Libertarian Autobiographies: Moving Toward Freedom in Today's World with Jo Ann Cavallo, published on September 8, 2023, which compiles personal stories from over 40 libertarians spanning minarchist to anarcho-capitalist perspectives, illustrating paths to libertarian thought amid modern challenges. The volume underscores Block's interest in and persuasion, drawing on contributors' experiences with state interventions and cultural shifts. On , Block critiqued rent control in "Regulating Out Renters" (November 25, 2023), contending that such regulations exacerbate shortages by discouraging investment, consistent with his broader advocacy for in . In "A Free Market in Organ Donations: When Pigs Fly" (May 24, 2024), he defended compensated as a voluntary solution to shortages, rejecting ethical objections rooted in mandates. Block addressed COVID-19 interventions in "Rejoinder to Slenzok on Covid Once Again," published July 23, 2025, in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, defending libertarian opposition to universal lockdowns as violations of non-aggression while rebutting arguments for restrictions based on externalities. This extended prior exchanges, emphasizing individual rights over mandates. In foreign policy debates, Block published "Rejoinder to Hoppe on Versus " (2023), aligning with 's defensive rights against aggression, and "Rejoinder to Bionic Mosquito on " (MEST Journal, January 4, 2025), countering paleolibertarian critiques by prioritizing property rights in conflict analysis. He further explored "Toward a Libertarian Theory of Human Shields" (The Independent Review, Fall 2025), arguing that using civilians as shields forfeits aggressors' rights and justifies proportionate retaliation, rejecting pacifist interpretations of non-aggression. Block also responded to critiques of his evictionism theory on abortion in rejoinders, such as addressing Dominiak and Wysocki's 2023 paper (published June 2, 2025), maintaining that rather than direct killing aligns with libertarian principles. These works demonstrate his pattern of rigorous, first-principles defense against both statist and intra-libertarian challenges.

Core Economic and Political Philosophy

Austrian School Economics and Anarcho-Capitalism

Walter Block is a prominent adherent of the , which employs —a deductive method starting from the axiom of human action to derive economic laws without reliance on empirical testing or mathematical modeling. He has defended this against philosophical critiques, such as Robert Nozick's 1977 essay "On Austrian Methodology," arguing that praxeological insights yield apodictically certain knowledge applicable to real-world economic phenomena, including the impossibility of socialist and the distortions from interventionism. Block emphasizes , where economic outcomes emerge from voluntary individual choices under subjective value theory, rejecting aggregate models like those in mainstream . In applying Austrian principles, Block critiques central banking and as sources of artificial booms and busts, attributing the and subsequent events to enabled by government privileges rather than free-market failures. He advocates for a return to sound money, such as or competing private currencies, to prevent malinvestment and , drawing on the developed by and . Block's economic analyses consistently prioritize —the study of exchange in a division-of-labor society—over interventionist policies, viewing government regulations as impediments to entrepreneurial discovery and capital structure maintenance. Block extends Austrian economics into , a radical libertarian framework positing that the state constitutes an unjust monopolist on coercion, violence, and services like and defense, which could be more efficiently and justly provided through voluntary market competition. He argues that private defense agencies, firms, and companies would resolve disputes via contractual reputation mechanisms, avoiding the state's predatory taxation and inefficiencies, as evidenced by historical examples of in medieval or private security in modern contexts. In this system, all property rights would stem from and voluntary transfer, with no coercive public goods; Block contends that free-market incentives would naturally supply security and order, refuting claims of a Hobbesian "state of nature" as a strawman ignoring . His anarcho-capitalist stance, influenced by , rejects minarchism as a compromised , insisting that any state, even limited, inevitably expands through democratic incentives and special interests.

Critiques of Government Intervention

Walter Block, an advocate of within the , contends that government interventions in the economy invariably distort market signals, misallocate resources, and infringe on individual liberties, leading to net welfare losses rather than gains. He argues from first principles that voluntary exchanges in free markets coordinate resources efficiently through prices reflecting scarcity and preferences, whereas coercive interventions—such as taxes, subsidies, and regulations—sever this connection, preventing the emergence of genuine economic calculation. Block maintains that purported "market failures" like externalities and public goods, often invoked to justify , are either mythical or exacerbated by prior government policies that undermine property rights. In critiquing justifications for taxation and , Block systematically dismantles arguments in standard textbooks, asserting they fail to demonstrate taxation as anything other than expropriation , incapable of improving on voluntary market outcomes. For instance, he challenges claims that government provision of public goods resolves free-rider problems, arguing that private enterprise has historically provided such services—such as lighthouses and roads—more effectively before state monopolization, and that ongoing interventions create dependency and inefficiency. Block's analysis of exemplifies this, where he posits that compulsory takings for "public use" violate principles and lead to arbitrary valuations far below market rates, as evidenced by U.S. cases where compensation averaged only 70-80% of . Block extends his critique to specific policy domains, such as labor markets and environmental regulation, where he argues interventions like s and pollution controls harm the very groups they purport to help. He cites empirical data showing minimum wage hikes correlating with increases—for example, a 10% rise linked to 1-3% higher teen joblessness in U.S. studies—attributing this to employers substituting capital for low-skilled labor rather than absorbing costs. On , Block advocates enforcement over state bureaucracies, noting that ownership of resources, as in U.S. lands comprising 28% of the nation's surface, fosters the "tragedy of the commons" through overuse, whereas privatized systems enable nuisance lawsuits to internalize externalities without blanket regulations. Further, Block's work on underscores monopoly failures, particularly in like roads, where he documents U.S. congestion costs exceeding $100 billion annually due to lack of pricing mechanisms, contrasting this with historical private toll roads that adjusted fees dynamically. He rejects frameworks, such as those of Buchanan and Tullock, as illusions of , arguing that political processes inevitably expand interventions because voters undervalue dispersed costs while politicians capture concentrated benefits, leading to fiscal deficits ballooning from 2% of GDP in the to over 5% by in the U.S. Block's overarching thesis is that all action, lacking profit-loss tests, devolves into and coercion, with no empirical instance of sustained intervention achieving promised efficiency without like black markets or bureaucratic capture.

Property Rights and Homesteading Theories

Blockean Proviso

The Blockean proviso, also known as the Blockian proviso, is a principle formulated by Walter Block to govern the of unowned within libertarian , emphasizing the prevention of physical blockages to others' access rather than welfare considerations. It posits that an individual may appropriate unowned resources through labor-mixing, provided the appropriation does not forestall or physically preclude others from similarly adjacent or enclosed unowned territory. Block introduced this as a rejoinder to the , which restricts appropriation if it leaves others worse off by failing to provide "enough and as good" in the , a condition Block contends is untenable due to resource and would invalidate nearly all existing titles. In practice, the proviso invalidates homesteading patterns that create inaccessible unowned enclaves, such as appropriating land in a thin strip 10,000 miles long and 0.5 miles wide to block rivals, or forming a "donut-shaped" around virgin land without granting access. Block argues this ensures the full privatization of land, avoiding the "" inherent in persistent unowned resources, while aligning with the of first-possession justice. For instance, if person B homesteads surrounding land that encircles unowned territory A, preventing person C from reaching A, B's title is defective unless an is provided, rendering the blocking pattern illegitimate from inception. Defenders interpret the proviso as a rational constraint on appropriation, akin to a non-contradiction rule that promotes compossible by prohibiting conflict-inducing forestalling at the stage of original . Block maintains it imposes no positive obligations—such as duties to provide goods or services—but merely negates invalid claims that thwart universal , contrasting with critics like who contend it implies rights or access mandates incompatible with strict . Kinsella, who coined the term "Blockean proviso" in opposition, argues it deviates from pure by introducing welfare-like caveats, though Block counters that such access issues can be resolved via private contracts or without endorsing positive . This debate underscores tensions in anarcho-capitalist theory over reconciling absolute property with practical appropriation in finite spaces.

Negative Homesteading

Negative homesteading is a property rights theory developed by Walter Block to address scenarios involving the initiation of , particularly the use of human body shields. In contrast to traditional positive , where an individual acquires ownership by mixing labor with unowned resources such as , negative homesteading applies to the ownership of "misery" or harm resulting from aggression. Block argues that the first victim of an aggressor's action becomes the owner of this negative state and cannot legitimately transfer it to an innocent third party without that party's . Block first elaborated the theory in discussions of defensive violence against human shields, as in a scenario where aggressor A uses innocent B as a shield to attack victim C. Here, B qualifies as the initial victim of A's , thereby homesteaded the associated misery under negative principles. This ownership prevents B (or B's defender) from shifting the harm to C, entitling C to use force, including lethal force passing through B if necessary, to repel the threat. Block contends this upholds libertarian non-aggression by prioritizing the original victim's rights over unintended secondary harms, stating: "The ownership of misery... must stay with its first victim... He cannot legitimately pass it onto anyone else without the latter’s permission." The draws on Lockean but extends it to negative externalities of , challenging strict interpretations of the that might prohibit harming innocents even in . Block applies it beyond shields to contexts like under his evictionism framework, where the mother, as initial controller of the premises, owns any eviction-related risks rather than transferring them to the . Critics within libertarian circles, such as Carl Jakobsson, argue the theory falters by implying ownership of abstract states like "misery" without clear mechanisms, potentially justifying disproportionate force against non-aggressors recently relieved of harm. Block has rebutted such critiques, maintaining that negative resolves paradoxes in defensive without endorsing . Empirical applications remain theoretical, as the concept has not been tested in courts or real-world policy, but it informs Block's broader anarcho-capitalist advocacy for private adjudication of conflicts. Detractors, including some libertarians, view it as an ad hoc justification for in military or defensive contexts, such as bombing human shields in conflicts, though Block specifies it applies only to initiated . The theory's novelty has sparked debate in journals like the Journal of Libertarian Studies, highlighting tensions between deontological and consequentialist outcomes in libertarian ethics.

Ethical and Libertarian Views on Social Issues

Evictionism Versus Abortion

Evictionism, as articulated by Walter Block, constitutes a libertarian framework for addressing abortion by emphasizing the woman's absolute right to control her body as private property while recognizing the fetus as a distinct human entity with rights commencing at fertilization. Under this theory, an unwanted fetus qualifies as a trespasser on the mother's property, entitling her to evict it through the least aggressive means available, but prohibiting any direct aggression such as intentional killing. This approach rejects both pro-life absolutism, which subordinates maternal property rights to fetal presence regardless of circumstances, and pro-choice advocacy, which endorses the mother's prerogative to terminate the fetus outright. Block delineates eviction from abortion by characterizing the latter as a composite act of followed by , whereas evictionism sanctions only the removal phase, contingent on technological and gestational feasibility. For non-viable fetuses, typically prior to 23 weeks when survival outside the womb is improbable absent advanced incubation not currently viable, eviction may incidentally result in death, but Block contends this does not violate the since no positive duty exists to sustain the evictee's life—only a negative duty against initiating force. In contrast, for viable fetuses capable of extra-uterine survival, eviction demands non-lethal methods like induced delivery, after which the mother incurs no further obligation, transferring any care responsibility to private guardians, charities, or adoption mechanisms. Block posits that post-viability killing equates to impermissible , aligning evictionism with empirical viability thresholds around 23-24 weeks as of medical consensus in the early . Grounded in Austrian economics-derived principles of and , evictionism extends analogies from landlord-tenant law and against intruders, where expulsion trumps the intruder's claim to continued occupancy absent consent. Block first explored abortion rights conflicts in a 1978 Reason magazine article but formalized evictionism across subsequent decades, culminating in his 2021 book Evictionism: The Compromise Solution to the Pro-Life Pro-Choice Debate Controversy, published by Springer. He defends its compatibility with in peer-reviewed works, such as a 2014 Journal of Medicine and Philosophy article, arguing it avoids the philosophical inconsistencies of permitting while upholding norms. Critics within libertarian circles, including some Rothbardians, contend evictionism either redundantly permits what pro-life views already allow or implicitly endorses by condoning pre-viability removals tantamount to , though Block rebuts these as misapplications of negative .

Voluntary Contracts and Slavery

Walter Block maintains that libertarian principles of self-ownership permit individuals to enter voluntary contracts transferring full control over their person and labor, including those that could be characterized as slavery, as long as the agreement is uncoerced and informed. He contends that true self-ownership logically implies the right to alienate it entirely, akin to selling property or body parts, rendering such contracts enforceable to uphold contractual integrity. Block emphasizes that this position applies only to voluntary arrangements, explicitly condemning involuntary chattel slavery as a violation of rights through kidnapping and force, as practiced historically. In a article, Block critiqued Murray Rothbard's assertion in Man, Economy, and State that contracts would be unenforceable in a , arguing that refusing enforcement undermines the by treating the "slave" as perpetually immune from their own commitments. He proposes that —compelling fulfillment of the contract—could be justified if penalties for breach (like death or , stipulated upfront) deter violation without initiating , provided the initial was genuine. Block illustrates this with hypotheticals, such as a person contracting perpetual servitude to escape destitution or pay debts, asserting that demands consistency in property rights over one's body. This stance has sparked intra-libertarian debate, with critics like arguing that cannot be fully alienated without rendering the contract void, as it would preclude future or , potentially leading to perpetual . Block counters that enforceability hinges on prior voluntary waiver of exit rights, not ongoing , and views non-enforcement as paternalistic interference favoring the contract-breaker over the counterparty's rights. He acknowledges the view's unpopularity even among libertarians, framing it as a rigorous test of principle rather than a policy endorsement, noting in 2020 that "hardly anyone" supports it but that requires tolerating such explorations. Block extends the logic to related contracts, such as or performance bonds with severe penalties, arguing they align with libertarian by prioritizing voluntary exchange over state-imposed limits on alienability. He rejects arguments against it based on inalienable rights as , insisting that if rights are truly absolute, they include the right to relinquish them. This position underscores his broader anarcho-capitalist framework, where private courts would adjudicate based on mutual rather than moral intuitions about human dignity.

Discrimination, Segregation, and Civil Rights

Block maintains that private discrimination, whether based on race, sex, or other characteristics, is a legitimate exercise of freedom of association and property rights in a libertarian framework. He argues that owners of businesses or private property have the absolute right to choose with whom they associate or transact, as prohibiting such choices violates individual liberty and the non-aggression principle. In his view, discrimination arises naturally from human preferences in a world of scarcity, where individuals must prioritize and select among limited options, and criminalizing it through legislation interferes with voluntary exchange and market efficiency. Block distinguishes sharply between private and public discrimination, contending that the latter—enforced by government—is far more pernicious because it lacks market discipline. Private discriminators bear economic costs, such as forgoing profitable customers or employees, which competitors can exploit to gain advantage, thereby providing "fail-safe mechanisms" that mitigate harm to the discriminated-against group over time. Public discrimination, by contrast, imposes blanket rules without competitive pressure, entrenching inefficiencies and harms, as seen historically in government-mandated racial policies. Regarding segregation, Block opposes state-imposed variants like Jim Crow laws but defends voluntary segregation in private contexts as an extension of associational freedom. For instance, he has stated that a private business, such as a Woolworth's lunch counter in the pre-1964 era, had the right to exclude Black customers if the owners so chose, emphasizing that freedom of association applies equally to exclusion as to inclusion. He critiques arguments for compelled integration, arguing that such policies undermine property rights without addressing root causes of social division. On civil rights legislation, Block advocates the repeal of Title II of the , which prohibits in public accommodations, viewing it as an unjust infringement on private contracts and a form of compelled association. In his analysis, such laws not only fail to eliminate prejudice but exacerbate conflicts by overriding voluntary decisions, whereas free markets would better serve minorities by allowing nondiscriminatory entrepreneurs to outcompete biased ones. He attributes opposition to these laws not to endorsement of bigotry but to principled commitment to libertarian non-intervention, cautioning that government remedies often perpetuate dependency rather than empowerment.

Pay Gaps, Minimum Wage, and Labor Markets

Block maintains that laws distort labor markets by artificially raising the price of labor above its market-clearing level, resulting in surplus labor——particularly among low-skilled, young, and minority workers who are priced out of jobs. He likens such policies to a "snare and a ," arguing they fail to boost overall worker compensation and instead exacerbate by barring entry-level opportunities that could serve as to higher and wages. , such as disemployment effects observed in studies of U.S. hikes, aligns with this Austrian analysis of creating shortages, though Block emphasizes that even without such data, basic supply-demand logic suffices to reject the intervention. In Block's framework, free labor markets without government interference—such as mandates, unions with coercive power, or subsidies—enable voluntary contracts that match workers' marginal productivity to wages, fostering efficient allocation and upward mobility. He critiques institutional barriers like and payroll taxes, which he views as reducing for the unemployable, including those with disabilities or criminal records, by inflating hiring costs beyond free-market equilibria. Labor, comprising roughly 75% of GDP, thrives under competition where employers bid for skills, not under egalitarian impositions that ignore heterogeneous . Regarding pay gaps, Block attributes observed disparities, such as the gender wage gap, primarily to individual choices in career paths, hours committed, risk tolerance, and family responsibilities rather than employer , which he argues would be unprofitable in competitive markets and thus self-correcting. For instance, never-married women without children earn approximately 94% of comparable men's wages, narrowing further when controlling for full-time work and occupational hazards, suggesting differentials drive residuals rather than . He rejects narratives of systemic as overlooking these factors, positing that free markets reward output irrespective of demographics, with any "glass ceiling" reflecting rational employer assessments of commitment and specialization, not prejudice.

Other Controversial Positions

Foreign Policy and Human Shields

Walter Block advocates a libertarian rooted in non-aggression, emphasizing strict against initiators of force while opposing offensive interventions, empire-building, and entangling alliances by states. In this framework, governments should avoid proactive engagements abroad, as they typically violate individual rights through taxation and to fund such actions, but may respond proportionally to direct threats. Block critiques mainstream libertarian inconsistencies on matters, arguing that many fail to apply non-aggression principles rigorously to state actions like foreign aid or alliances that provoke conflicts. Block's theory of human shields emerges as a key application of these principles to defensive warfare scenarios, particularly where aggressors use innocents to deter retaliation. In his analysis, if aggressor A seizes innocent B as an involuntary to attack victim C, C retains the right to defend against A, even if this foreseeably harms B, provided the response is proportionate and B cannot escape A's control. This holds because A, as the initiator of , bears for B's endangerment; B's presence does not negate C's self-defense rights, akin to how a driver may swerve to avoid a road-raged assailant hiding behind a pedestrian. Block distinguishes cases of full control by A from voluntary shields or mere proximity, rejecting blanket prohibitions on collateral harm as they would empower aggressors to paralyze defense. Applying this to real-world conflicts, Block has defended 's military responses to rocket attacks, attributing civilian casualties primarily to 's tactic of embedding launchers in populated areas like hospitals and schools, thereby using Gazan civilians as shields. He argues that under libertarian , may target these sites if maintains control over the human barriers, as the alternative—halting defense—cedes victory to the aggressor and incentivizes further shield usage. This position contrasts with pacifist libertarian views that deem any civilian deaths impermissible, which Block contends undermine by prioritizing aggressor tactics over victim rights. Block extends similar reasoning to other contexts, such as interceptions or negative analogies, where unowned threats (like incoming projectiles) can be preemptively neutralized without violating non-aggression if they stem from initiated . In debates, including against podcaster Dave Smith in 2023, he maintained that supporting Israel's defensive actions aligns with , while critiquing U.S. for broader interventions that exacerbate global tensions, such as NATO expansion provoking Russia-Ukraine hostilities. Block's framework prioritizes causal accountability: aggressors forfeit claims to shield protection, enabling victims to reclaim security without moral taint.

Punishment of Government Employees and Privatization

Block views the state as an illegitimate predicated on , primarily through ation, which he equates to , and the of monopolies on . In applying libertarian punishment theory, he argues that guilt attaches to individuals who initiate or sustain this , rather than to the abstract entity of the state or passive citizens. Government employees directly involved in coercive acts, such as tax collectors or regulators imposing unchosen burdens, incur liability under the principle of "two teeth for a ": full restitution to victims plus an equivalent penalty to deter future violations. For instance, he analogizes state to , where the aggressor must return the stolen property and forfeit an equivalent asset, potentially escalating to severe measures like proportional risk imposition (e.g., equivalents for existential threats) in extreme cases of state tyranny. Not all government personnel qualify as culpable; Block distinguishes between the ruling class—politicians, high bureaucrats, and enforcers who knowingly perpetuate the system—and lower-level functionaries acting under duress or merely reclaiming what was already stolen (e.g., tax-funded salaries viewed as partial restitution from prior thefts). He critiques blanket condemnation, noting that ordinary citizens or coerced employees are victims, not perpetrators, and thus exempt from retribution; targets identifiable aggressors, such as those in rogue regimes like , where leaders face massive accountability in a post-state order. This framework extends to working for or funding the state: voluntary high-level participation implies complicity warranting proportional penalties, while involuntary involvement does not. Privatization serves as the antidote to by dismantling monopolies and replacing them with voluntary market institutions, eliminating the structural basis for employee-enabled . Block advocates comprehensive denationalization of all state functions, including roads, courts, and defense, arguing that private ownership incentivizes efficiency and accountability absent in bureaucratic systems. In his 2009 book The Privatization of Roads and Highways, he details how mismanagement of leads to inefficiencies like congestion and accidents, resolvable through competitive private provision. For transitional phases toward full , he proposes interim strategies, such as auctioning state assets to the highest bidders or converting them to private shares, while emphasizing that legitimate functions (e.g., genuine defense) never justified in the first place. During privatization, Block's punishment theory implies selective accountability: aggressors forfeit ill-gotten gains via restitution to taxpayers, but non-aggressors transition without penalty, potentially repurposing skills in private firms. Private courts and insurance agencies would adjudicate claims, enforcing contracts over edicts and rendering state employees' prior roles obsolete. This approach aligns with his broader case for privatizing "everything," as articulated in lectures, where market competition supplants coercion, deterring future statism through economic incentives rather than perpetual punishment.

Animal Rights and Environmentalism

Block rejects the notion of animal rights within libertarian ethics, contending that rights derive from self-ownership and the capacity for contractual reciprocity, attributes animals lack due to their inability to reason, communicate propositions, or promise to respect others' rights. He argues that animals are properly classified as property owned by humans, subject to use consistent with the only insofar as it applies to human owners and third parties, rather than granting animals independent moral status. In response to utilitarian critiques, such as those from , Block maintains that while gratuitous animal suffering may be aesthetically or personally objectionable, it does not constitute a rights violation absent human contractual obligations, prioritizing human over animal welfare claims. Block has defended practices like factory farming against ethical charges, asserting that consumer demand for meat incentivizes that, under market conditions, improves conditions relative to wild existence, without imposing duties on individuals to abstain. He co-authored work positing that animal torture violates no inherent but could breach human norms if it involves unauthorized interference, though he deems most such acts permissible under strict . On environmentalism, Block advocates "," attributing ecological degradation to the absence of clearly defined rights rather than , and proposes unused resources like air corridors or fisheries to enable owners to sue polluters for . , in his view, invades adjacent properties via nuisance or doctrines under , resolvable through privatization and courts rather than state regulations, taxes, or quotas, which he criticizes as coercive distortions favoring polluters with political access. He critiques mainstream environmental policies as anti-economic freedom, arguing that government ownership of resources like public lands or air basins precludes effective stewardship, whereas private titles internalize externalities and foster conservation incentives, as evidenced by historical privatizations reducing waste in fisheries or timber. Block extends this to reject emissions trading schemes as pseudo-market that perpetuates unowned problems without genuine rights enforcement.

Controversies and Academic Freedom

Criticisms from Mainstream Academia and Media

In June 2020, a petition circulated by students at demanded the termination of Block's employment, accusing him of harboring "racist and sexist beliefs" exemplified by his scholarly arguments on voluntary contracts resembling , the 's role in , and private as a matter of free association. The petitioners specifically referenced Block's 2008 paper contending that moral opposition to derives from its violation of rights rather than an intrinsic revulsion toward the practice itself, interpreting this as downplaying historical . Similar objections targeted his economic analyses positing that laws exacerbate by pricing low-skilled workers out of jobs, which critics framed as victim-blaming the poor. Loyola's administration responded by launching multiple investigations into Block's classroom conduct and writings from 2020 through 2022, including allegations of expressing ", homophobia, transphobia, and " in emails and publications; these probes resulted in mandated diversity trainings and a temporary removal from teaching duties, though no formal termination occurred. Local media, such as a NOLA.com opinion piece by columnist James Gill on June 28, 2020, covered the episode as an instance of intolerance toward nonconformist views, while noting the petition's reliance on Block's defense of controversial practices in his 1976 book Defending the Undefendable II, where he applies non-aggression principles to acts like and . In mainstream media, a 2014 New York Times profile of Senator misrepresented Block's advocacy for enforceable voluntary long-term contracts—including hypothetical multigenerational indentures—as support for "human bondage," prompting Block to file a that yielded an undisclosed out-of-court settlement in his favor on December 22, 2014. Broader critiques from economists outside the Austrian School, such as David D. Friedman's 2023 analysis, have faulted Block's methodological commitments to and over empirical testing, portraying them as insufficiently rigorous compared to neoclassical approaches. Mainstream academic discourse often marginalizes Block's anarcho-capitalist framework as ideologically rigid, with limited direct engagement in peer-reviewed journals reflecting a systemic preference for positivist over normative .

Responses, Lawsuits, and Defenses

Block has defended his controversial positions through extensive scholarly writings, emphasizing consistency with libertarian principles such as and the non-aggression axiom. In his 1976 book Defending the Undefendable, he argues that seemingly immoral acts, including those related to voluntary contracts and , can be justified if they involve no initiation of force, using hypothetical scenarios to illustrate rights over one's body and labor. For contracts, Block maintains in multiple essays that individuals should have the right to alienate their future labor or voluntarily, analogizing it to selling organs or joining the , provided is uncoerced and revocable under certain conditions; he explicitly condemns involuntary chattel as a violation of rights. Regarding evictionism, Block's 2021 monograph Evictionism: The Compromise Solution to the Pro-Life Pro-Choice Debate posits that a is an uninvited trespasser on the mother's (her body), granting her the right to evict it via the gentlest means possible, even if lethal post-viability, as a non-aggressive enforcement of boundaries rather than . In response to intra-libertarian and external critiques, Block has engaged in rebuttals, such as countering objections to evictionism by distinguishing it from direct killing and rejecting positive obligations to sustain trespassers, while critiquing alternatives like "departurism" as incompatible with strict property rights. He has also addressed accusations of racism or leveled against his discrimination arguments, asserting in lectures and articles that market freedoms allow private actors to without state enforcement, leading to efficient outcomes that undermine irrational biases, and dismissing politically correct condemnations as attacks on libertarian consistency. Block pursued legal action against perceived misrepresentations of his views. In 2014, he filed a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times and reporters over an article quoting his defense of voluntary slave contracts out of context, portraying him as sympathetic to historical slavery despite his stated opposition; a federal district court initially dismissed the case under anti-SLAPP provisions, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals revived it in August 2017, ruling that the quotes could imply actual advocacy of enslavement. The suit settled in 2018 on non-monetary terms, with confidentiality on details. Academic freedom disputes at arose from student complaints about Block's expressed views. In June , a signed by over 100 students demanded his firing, citing his writings on contracts, pay gaps, and segregation as evidence of "racist and sexist beliefs," though signatories reportedly had not taken his classes. Block responded in a Wall Street Journal , framing his positions as thought experiments opposing state intervention and actual , while arguing that universities should tolerate unpopular ideas to uphold . subjected him to multiple investigations starting in , including for emails and statements deemed discriminatory, resulting in mandated diversity trainings and sensitivity sessions; the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression () condemned these as retaliatory sanctions infringing on protected speech. The university terminated his employment in November 2022, following complaints alleging expressions of bias in public writings and interactions. Block has characterized such institutional responses as emblematic of declining tolerance for in academia.

Intra-Libertarian Debates

Block has engaged in prominent debates within libertarian scholarship over the strict application of the (NAP) to complex social issues, often defending absolutist interpretations against more qualified or consequentialist views held by fellow libertarians. One central contention involves the enforceability of voluntary contracts, including those resembling transfers or . Block argues that individuals possess full and may alienate it via binding agreements, critiquing proponents of inalienability—such as , who posits natural duties that render certain self-sales unenforceable—as inconsistent with libertarian premises of consent and property rights. Barnett counters that such contracts conflict with inherent duties, potentially leading to exploitation, though Block maintains that third-party intervention to void them violates the NAP absent . A protracted intra-libertarian dispute pits Block against on policy under statist conditions. Block advocates unrestricted as non-aggressive, asserting that migrants do not inherently violate property rights merely by crossing borders, and that welfare concerns should be addressed by privatizing public resources rather than restrictions. Hoppe, emphasizing taxpayer stewardship of government-held property, contends that open borders in welfare states invite net fiscal burdens and cultural erosion, justifying discriminatory entry controls as defensive measures analogous to private covenants. In his 2010 rejoinder, Block accuses Hoppe of conceding state authority to ration access, arguing this undermines libertarian consistency by privileging predicted outcomes over rights; Hoppe responds that ignoring empirical incentives equates to endorsing invasion of communal resources. Block's advocacy of "evictionism" in abortion debates has also sparked divisions, positioning him against both libertarians. He proposes that entails trespass on the mother's , permitting of the (potentially via early delivery) but prohibiting active killing, as the latter constitutes . Critics like Kerry Baldwin, representing pro-life views, argue eviction equates to post-viability, while others fault the framework for overlooking fetal from conception; Block defends it as reconciling women's bodily with NAP prohibitions on . Additionally, Block rejects minarchism—the limited-state variant of —as incompatible with , insisting no theoretical rapprochement exists due to the inherent coerciveness of even minimal government monopoly on defense. He critiques minarchist reliance on constitutional constraints as empirically futile, favoring societies to resolve disputes without centralized authority. These exchanges underscore Block's commitment to deduction from axiomatic , often clashing with libertarians incorporating teleological or public-choice analyses.

Influence and Legacy

Achievements in Libertarian Thought

Walter Block has advanced libertarian thought through his prolific output of scholarly works that rigorously apply Austrian economic principles to ethical and policy questions, emphasizing voluntary cooperation over coercive state mechanisms. His book Defending the Undefendable (1976) defends non-aggressive activities—such as , dealing, and —from a libertarian standpoint, contending that criminalization of victimless exchanges violates the by initiating force against consenting adults. This text has served as a foundational challenge to moralistic interventions, influencing libertarian defenses of by testing the application of the non-aggression principle to controversial cases. A 2013 sequel expanded these arguments to additional cases, further solidifying Block's role in purifying libertarian ethics from ad hoc exceptions. Block's theoretical contributions include over 600 peer-reviewed articles in outlets like the Journal of Libertarian Studies and Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, where he critiques mainstream concepts such as externalities and public goods, advocating market-based resolutions via rights and rather than solutions. He has produced multiple papers and critiques dismantling Ronald Coase's "" theorem, arguing from an Austrian perspective that transaction costs do not justify state overrides of norms, as voluntary suffices absent . These efforts integrate praxeological reasoning with libertarian policy, promoting anarcho-capitalist alternatives including radical applications of homesteading theory to infrastructure, land, and contested resources. Through authorship of over 24 books—including Toward a Libertarian Society (2014), which synthesizes essays on , , and personal freedoms—Block has educated on the practical feasibility of stateless orders. His mentorship has resulted in over 100 student papers published in refereed journals, expanding the field of Austro-libertarian scholarship and continuing the intellectual lineage of and .

Impact on Policy Debates and Students

Block's advocacy for anarcho-capitalist principles has shaped libertarian discourse on economic policies, including opposition to laws, , and government intervention in markets. In a 2006 debate with legal scholar , Block argued against practices, contending that they violate even under minimal state frameworks, influencing subsequent libertarian critiques of compulsory takings. His writings, such as those in Toward a Libertarian Society (2014), outline policy frameworks emphasizing voluntary exchange over state coercion in areas like and personal liberties, providing intellectual ammunition for think tanks like the in advocating and . These contributions have informed intra-libertarian debates on issues like , where Block defends open borders conditional on , challenging both statist restrictions and welfare-based objections. While Block's policy influence remains confined largely to libertarian and Austrian economics circles rather than enacted , his rigorous defense of free-market outcomes has countered mainstream economic consensus in academic and forums, such as debates on externalities and public goods where he proposes market-based solutions over provision. For instance, his arguments against coercive taxation and for voluntary funding mechanisms have bolstered advocacy against fiscal policies favoring redistribution, as seen in his engagements critiquing socialist alternatives. As Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Chair in at since 1979, Block has mentored numerous students toward libertarian scholarship, with over 150 undergraduate term papers under his guidance published in refereed journals and law reviews by 2024, elevating their academic profiles and disseminating Austrian economics principles. This program emphasizes rigorous argumentation and publication, fostering skills in economic analysis and policy critique. He has inspired alumni like economist Edward Stringham to advance in libertarian academia, contributing to a pipeline of free-market advocates. Additionally, the Walter Block Scholarship, established for libertarian-leaning students supportive of free enterprise , attracts and nurtures undergraduates committed to these ideals, enhancing their engagement with policy-relevant research.

References

  1. http://business.loyno.edu/bio/walter-block
  2. https://walterblocknet.wordpress.com/biography-and-cv/
  3. https://mises.org/library/book/privatization-roads-and-highways
  4. https://store.mises.org/Defending-the-Undefendable-P136.aspx
  5. https://store.mises.org/Case-for-Discrimination-P10442.aspx
  6. https://www.econlib.org/walter-block-defends-his-academic-freedom/
  7. https://www.thefire.org/news/loyola-nola-saddles-professor-repeated-investigations-diversity-trainings-and-termination
  8. https://www.econlib.org/the-attack-on-walter-block/
  9. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/US-bishops-and-their-critics.pdf
  10. https://cdn.mises.org/I%20Chose%20Liberty%20Autobiographies%20of%20Contemporary%20Libertarians_2.pdf
  11. http://business.loyno.edu/sites/default/files/cv_files/block_walter_cv3_002_june_2021.pdf
  12. https://loyolamaroon.com/10009457/news/campus/block-and-sanders-share-a-similar-background/
  13. https://mises.org/podcasts/contra-krugman-demolishing-economic-myths-2016-election/me-bernie-and-minimum-wage
  14. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oFYdu4ln9Q
  15. https://www.thesavvystreet.com/exiling-block-what-the-mises-institute-split-reveals-about-libertarian-fragility/
  16. https://www.loyno.edu/academics/faculty-and-staff-directory/walter-block
  17. https://aier.org/people/walter-block/
  18. https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2009/07/24/SellRivers/
  19. https://cdn.mises.org/13_2_4_0.pdf
  20. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2009/07/walter-e-block/privatizing-rivers/
  21. https://www.institutcoppet.org/interview-walter-block-gregoire-canlorbe/
  22. https://mises.org/online-book/strange-liberty-politics-drops-its-pretenses/21-immigration-roundtable-ludwig-von-mises-murray-rothbard-walter-block-and-hans-hermann-hoppe
  23. https://loyolamaroon.com/10021154/showcase/opinion-prospective-libertarian-students-should-consider-the-walter-block-scholarship/
  24. https://www.independent.org/author/walter-e-block/
  25. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/profile/walter-block
  26. https://loyolamaroon.com/10028406/news/campus/petitions-call-for-walter-block-to-be-fired-given-a-raise-over-academic-work/
  27. https://reason.com/1977/02/01/defending-the-undefendable/
  28. https://cdn.mises.org/Defending_the_Undefendable_2018.pdf
  29. https://cdn.mises.org/Books%20by%20Walter%20Block.pdf
  30. https://store.mises.org/I-Chose-Liberty-Autobiographies-of-Contemporary-Libertarians-P10441.aspx
  31. https://store.mises.org/Man-Economy-and-Liberty-Essays-in-Honor-of-Murray-N-Rothbard-P340.aspx
  32. https://store.mises.org/Review-of-Austrian-Economics-Full-Collection-Digital-Book-P10847.aspx
  33. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Walter-Block-3
  34. https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=qF4Xsw0AAAAJ&hl=en
  35. https://jls.mises.org/article/142307
  36. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-29608-6
  37. https://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Autobiographies-Moving-Toward-Freedom/dp/3031296079
  38. https://philpapers.org/rec/CAVLAM-2
  39. https://www.econlib.org/author/wblock/
  40. https://jls.mises.org/section/2667-notes-and-replies
  41. https://www.meste.org/ojs/index.php/mest/article/view/1421
  42. https://www.meste.org/ojs/index.php/mest/article/download/1437/1568
  43. https://www.independent.org/tir/2025-fall/toward-a-libertarian-theory-of-human-shields/
  44. https://apcz.umk.pl/szhf/article/view/61738
  45. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Walter-Block
  46. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1879644
  47. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1845163
  48. https://mises.org/mises-wire/orwellian-libertarianism-topsy-turvy-world-walter-block
  49. https://www.buzzsprout.com/2246698/episodes/14954343-austrian-economics-with-walter-block-ep178
  50. https://cdn.mises.org/1_4_1_0.pdf
  51. https://economics-explained.simplecast.com/episodes/anarcho-capitalism-and-a-libertarian-analysis-of-covid-with-prof-walter-block-wyTOQFF7
  52. https://www.emerald.com/books/edited-volume/15092/chapter-abstract/86251089/Austrian-Economics-Praxeology-and-Intervention
  53. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1890818
  54. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4650900
  55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376359201_Walter_Block_on_Externality_Public_Goods_and_Voluntary_Government
  56. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1881082
  57. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=rrgc
  58. https://www.econlib.org/library/columns/y2023/candelagovernmentintervention.html
  59. https://www.amazon.com/Privatization-Roads-Highways-Economic-Factors/dp/193355004X
  60. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40752232
  61. https://mises.org/mises-wire/blockean-proviso
  62. http://repozytorium.uni.wroc.pl/Content/94352/PDF/03_Block_W_E_Butt_J_A_Forestalling_Positive_Obligations_and_the_Lockean_and_Blockian_Provisos_Rejoinder_to_Stephan_Kinsella.pdf
  63. https://libertarianpapers.org/dominiak-blockian-proviso/
  64. https://cdn.mises.org/22_1_30.pdf
  65. https://mises.org/journal-libertarian-studies/negative-homesteading-theory-rejoinder-walter-block-human-body-shields
  66. https://apcz.umk.pl/szhf/article/download/61783/42695/191174
  67. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24776978/
  68. https://www.independent.org/tir/2022-summer/evicitionism/
  69. https://mereliberty.com/lci/what-is-evictionism-blocks-response-to/
  70. https://apcz.umk.pl/szhf/article/download/50039/38258/136792
  71. https://www.amazon.com/Evicitionism-compromise-solution-pro-choice-controversy/dp/9811650136
  72. https://www.stephankinsella.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/others/block-voluntary-slavery-1969.pdf
  73. https://www.wsj.com/articles/some-students-want-me-fired-for-a-thought-experiment-11594854800
  74. https://www.independent.org/article/2020/08/22/happy-birthday-to-libertarian-firebrand-walter-block/
  75. https://cdn.mises.org/17_2_3.pdf
  76. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367165140_REJOINDER_TO_KINSELLA_ON_OWNERSHIP_AND_THE_VOLUNTARY_SLAVE_CONTRACT
  77. https://fee.org/articles/the-libertarian-case-for-slavery-reparations/
  78. https://mises.org/library/book/case-discrimination
  79. https://fee.org/articles/racism-public-and-private/
  80. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1885075
  81. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/02/24/loyola-new-orleans-discusses-professor-who-defends-segregation
  82. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1998.tb03275.x
  83. https://www.econlib.org/minimum-wage-laws-are-unemployment-laws/
  84. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1884544
  85. https://libjournals.mtsu.edu/index.php/jfee/article/download/1408/987/3917
  86. https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/10.1142/9789812790798_0012
  87. https://store.mises.org/Labor-Economics-From-a-Free-Market-Perspective-P516.aspx
  88. https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/6388
  89. https://books.google.com/books?id=5yqPONCZHM0C&printsec=frontcover
  90. https://cdn.mises.org/The%2520Case%2520for%2520Discrimination%2520Walter%2520Block_2.pdf
  91. https://rsei.rau.ro/images/V1N1/Walter%2520E%2520Block%2520.pdf
  92. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4465556
  93. https://www.thesavvystreet.com/transcript-the-foundations-of-a-libertarian-foreign-policy/
  94. https://mises.org/journal-libertarian-studies/human-body-shield
  95. https://apcz.umk.pl/DP/article/download/DP.2018.005/16659/46450
  96. https://www.thesavvystreet.com/who-is-responsible-for-the-death-of-innocent-gazans-hamas-or-the-idf/
  97. https://wuwr.pl/ekon/article/download/8520/8138/8138
  98. https://philpapers.org/rec/BLORTJ-2
  99. https://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-e3d383ce-39fb-4e9b-8a6e-b11d9449ef8d
  100. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt33306959/plotsummary
  101. https://czasopisma.marszalek.com.pl/uploads/periodicals/apsp/2025/apsp8817.pdf
  102. https://mises.org/journal-libertarian-studies/toward-libertarian-theory-guilt-and-punishment-crime-statism
  103. https://libertarianpapers.org/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-donating-state/
  104. https://journal.apee.org/2017_Journal_of_Private_Enterprise_vol_32_no_3_Fall_parte4
  105. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMN5FLmcwnM
  106. https://c4ss.org/content/49736
  107. https://philpapers.org/rec/BLORTH-6
  108. https://sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/sh-2021-0004
  109. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%257CA503261095&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=2360378X&p=AONE&sw=w
  110. https://cdn.mises.org/Environmentalism%2520and%2520Economic%2520Freedom%2520The%2520Case%2520for%2520Private%2520Property%2520Rights_2.pdf
  111. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1005941908758
  112. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381264621_A_Case_for_Better_Defined_Property_Rightsand_Against_Air_Pollution_Taxes_Tariffs_and_Quotas
  113. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1892376
  114. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1374&context=elr
  115. https://www.thecollegefix.com/petition-demands-ouster-of-outspoken-libertarian-economics-professor/
  116. https://www.nola.com/opinions/james_gill/james-gill-some-want-to-fire-walter-block-for-racist-and-sexist-beliefs-but-he/article_5ad35092-b71e-11ea-8d55-5b16c56536f5.html
  117. https://www.thefire.org/cases/loyola-university-new-orleans-professor-repeatedly-investigated-sanctioned-protected-speech
  118. https://daviddfriedman.substack.com/p/critique-of-a-version-of-austrian
  119. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EDykuMDLpM
  120. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/us/ny-times-must-face-defamation-lawsuit-over-professors-slavery-comments-idUSKCN1AV2FL/
  121. https://philpapers.org/rec/BLOAAM
  122. https://philpapers.org/rec/BLOTAL
  123. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1881053
  124. https://mises-media.s3.amazonaws.com/21_3_2.pdf
  125. https://cdn.mises.org/22_1_38.pdf
  126. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKU_xutF-eQ
  127. https://thedailyeconomy.org/article/happy-birthday-to-libertarian-firebrand-walter-block/
  128. https://www.amazon.com/Toward-Libertarian-Society-Walter-Block/dp/1610165950
  129. https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_060927.pdf
  130. https://mises.org/library/book/toward-libertarian-society
  131. https://benburgis.substack.com/p/walter-block-and-the-prisoners-dilemma
  132. https://www.meste.org/ojs/index.php/mest/article/download/1366/1561
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.