Authors > Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Hans-Hermann Hoppe Quotes
What is the purpose of norms? The avoidance of conflict regarding the use of scarce physical things. Conflict-generating norms contradict the very purpose of norms. Yet with regard to the purpose of conflict avoidance, no alternative to private property and original appropriation exists. In the absence of prestabilized harmony among actors, conflict can only be prevented if all goods are always in the private ownership of specific individuals and it is always clear who owns what and who does not. Also, conflicts can only be avoided from the very beginning of mankind if private property is acquired by acts of original appropriation (instead of by mere declarations or words of latecomers).
Source: The Ethics and Economics of Private Property (2004) [link] #18
The state is anything but the result of a contract! No one with even just an ounce of common sense would agree to such a contract. I have a lot of contracts in my files, but nowhere is there one like this. The state is the result of aggressive force and subjugation. It has evolved without contractual foundation, just like a gang of protection racketeers.
Source: Obsessed by Megalomania (2012) [link] #24
It is necessary to recognize that the ultimate power of every government--whether of kings or caretakers--rests solely on opinion and not on physical force. The agents of government are never more than a small proportion of the total population under their control. This implies that no government can possibly enforce its will upon the entire population unless it finds widespread support and voluntary cooperation within the nongovernmental public. It implies likewise that every government can be brought down by a mere change in public opinion, i.e., by the withdrawal of the public's consent and cooperation.
Source: On the Impossibility of Limited Government and the Prospects for a Second American Revolution (2001) [link] #30
History is ultimately determined by ideas, and ideas can, at least in principle, change almost instantly.
Source: The Rise and Fall of the City (2005) [link] #37
The monopolization of money and banking is the ultimate pillar on which the modern state rests. In fact, it has probably become the most cherished instrument for increasing state income. For nowhere else can the state make the connection between redistribution-expenditure and exploitation-return more directly, quickly and securely than by monopolizing money and banking. And nowhere else are the state's schemes less clearly understood than here.
Source: Banking, Nation States, and International Politics: A Sociological Reconstruction of the Present Economic Order (1990) [link] #55
The state spends much time and effort persuading the public that it is not really what it is and that the consequences of its actions are positive rather than negative.
Source: A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (1989) [link] #64
Let me begin with the definition of a state. What must an agent be able to do to qualify as a state? This agent must be able to insist that all conflicts among the inhabitants of a given territory be brought to him for ultimate decision-making or be subject to his final review. In particular, this agent must be able to insist that all conflicts involving him be adjudicated by him or his agent. And implied in the power to exclude all others from acting as ultimate judge, as the second defining characteristic of a state, is the agent’s power to tax: to unilaterally determine the price that justice seekers must pay for his services. Based on this definition of a state, it is easy to understand why a desire to control a state might exist. For whoever is a monopolist of final arbitration within a given territory can make laws. And he who can legislate can also tax. Surely, this is an enviable position.
Source: To Battle the State (2008) [link] #75
According to the pronouncements of our state rulers and their intellectual bodyguards (of whom there are more than ever before), we are better protected and more secure than ever. We are supposedly protected from global warming and cooling, from the extinction of animals and plants, from the abuses of husbands and wives, parents and employers, from poverty, disease, disaster, ignorance, prejudice, racism, sexism, homophobia, and countless other public enemies and dangers. In fact, however, matters are strikingly different. In order to provide us with all this protection, the state managers expropriate more than 40 percent of the incomes of private producers year in and year out. Government debt and liabilities have increased without interruption, thus increasing the need for future expropriations. Owing to the substitution of government paper money for gold, financial insecurity has increased sharply, and we are continually robbed through currency depreciation. Every detail of private life, property, trade, and contract is regulated by ever higher mountains of laws (legislation), thereby creating permanent legal uncertainty and moral hazard. In particular, we have been gradually stripped of the right to exclusion implied in the very concept of private property. ... In short, the more the state has increased its expenditures on social security and public safety, the more our private property rights have been eroded, the more our property has been expropriated, confiscated, destroyed, or depreciated, and the more we have been deprived of the very foundation of all protection: economic independence, financial strength, and personal wealth.
Source: The Private Production of Defense (1999) [link] #126
A government is a compulsory territorial monopolist of ultimate decision-making (jurisdiction) and, implied in this, a compulsory territorial monopolist of taxation. That is, a government is the ultimate arbiter, for the inhabitants of a given territory, regarding what is just and what is not, and it can determine unilaterally, i.e., without requiring the consent of those seeking justice or arbitration, the price that justice-seekers must pay to the government for providing this service.
Source: Government, Money, and International Politics (2003) [link] #156
It does not follow from the fact that the state provides roads and schools that only the state can provide such goods. People have little difficulty recognizing that this is a fallacy. From the fact that monkeys can ride bikes it does not follow that only monkeys can ride bikes... It must be recalled that the state is an institution that can legislate and tax; and hence, that state agents have little incentive to produce efficiently. State roads and schools will only be more costly and their quality lower. For there is always a tendency for state agents to use up as many resources as possible doing whatever they do but actually work as little as possible doing it.
Source: The Great Fiction (2012) [link] #166
As for the moral status of majority rule, it must be pointed out that it allows for A and B to band together to rip off C, C and A in turn joining to rip off B, and then B and C conspiring against A, and so on. This is not justice but a moral outrage.
Source: Democracy: The God That Failed (2001) #171
The greatest achievement of the statist intellectuals is the fact that they have cultivated the masses' natural intellectual laziness (or incapacity) and never allowed for the subject to come up for serious discussion. The state is considered as an unquestionable part of the social fabric.
Source: The Role of Intellectuals and Anti-Intellectuals (2008) [link] #180
What is true, just, and beautiful is not determined by popular vote. The masses everywhere are ignorant, short-sighted, motivated by envy, and easy to fool. Democratic politicians must appeal to these masses in order to be elected. Whoever is the best demagogue will win. Almost by necessity, then, democracy will lead to the perversion of truth, justice and beauty.
Source: Interview with Hans-Hermann Hoppe, an Anti-Intellectual Intellectual (2008) #210
Since money or other resources must be withdrawn from possible alternative uses to finance the supposedly desirable public goods, the only relevant and appropriate question is whether or not these alternative uses to which the money could be put (that is, the private goods which could have been acquired but now cannot be bought because the money is being spent on public goods instead) are more valuable--more urgent--than the public goods. And the answer to this question is perfectly clear. In terms of consumer evaluations, however high its absolute level might be, the value of the public goods is relatively lower than that of the competing private goods because if one had left the choice to the consumers (and had not forced one alternative upon them), they evidently would have preferred spending their money differently (otherwise no force would have been necessary). This proves beyond any doubt that the resources used for the provision of public goods are wasted because they provide consumers with goods or services that at best are only of secondary importance.
Source: Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security (1989) [link] #221
In a private law society the production of law and order -- of security -- would be undertaken by freely financed individuals and agencies competing for a voluntarily paying (or not-paying) clientele -- just as the production of all other goods and services. How this system would work can be best understood in contrast to the workings of the present, all-too-familiar statist system. If one wanted to summarize in one word the decisive difference -- and advantage -- of a competitive security industry as compared to the current statist practice, it would be: contract. The state operates in a legal vacuum. There exists no contract between the state and its citizens. It is not contractually fixed, what is actually owned by whom, and what, accordingly, is to be protected. It is not fixed, what service the state is to provide, what is to happen if the state fails in its duty, nor what the price is that the "customer" of such "service" must pay. Rather, the state unilaterally fixes the rules of the game and can change them, per legislation, during the game.
Source: Interview (2011) [link] #237
The incentive structure inherent in the institution of government is not a recipe for the protection of life and property, but instead a recipe for maltreatment, oppression, and exploitation. This is what the history of states illustrates. It is first and foremost the history of countless millions of ruined human lives.
Source: The Idea of a Private Law Society (2006) [link] #388
The greatest danger to liberty is not the tyrant but the citizen who has been taught to love his chains.
Source: Unknown #582
About Hans-Hermann Hoppe
(From Wikipedia)
Hans-Hermann Hoppe (born 2 September 1949) is American paleolibertarian and anarcho-capitalist political theorist. He is Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), Senior Fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and the founder and president of the Property and Freedom Society.
Hoppe identifies as a culturally conservative libertarian. He has expressed criticism towards democracy, stating that a monarchy would preserve individual liberty more effectively. Hoppe's statements and ideas concerning race and homosexuality have repeatedly provoked controversy among his libertarian peers and his colleagues at UNLV. His belief in the right of property owners to establish libertarian communities that engage in racial discrimination, and his assertion that homosexuals and political dissidents will have to be "physically removed" from these communities if they are to survive, have proven particularly divisive. Hoppe also garners controversy due to his support for governmental enforcement of immigration laws, which critics argue is at odds with libertarianism and what they describe as "libertarian anarchism".
Editor’s note: despite his aforementioned controversies, Hans-Hermann Hoppe has made major contributions to libertarian theory, including but not limited to his concept of argumentation ethics. He is excellent at distilling and clarifying the fundamentals of liberty and Austrian economics, for example in his analysis of private property norms, free market banking, competitive moneys, the private law society, and so forth. In addition to the numerous books and essays he has written, he has also delivered some great lectures which can be found on YouTube. A student and close friend of Murray Rothbard, he may be counted amongst the greatest living libertarians.
Additional Resources
Hans-Hermann Hoppe on YouTubeHansHoppe.com
