Scan barcode
alexdelnorte's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
5.0
Whatever you do, read this book. Lysander Spooner is one of America's greatest minds.
tomebro's review against another edition
3.0
A provocative and interesting way of thinking of the Constitution in the context of ourselves and it's authority over us. I have to disagree, however.
jdferron's review against another edition
4.0
A articulate, passionate critique of the Constitution of the United States. I'm not sure what to think of his arguments and whether our society could exist without it. A political mindscrew of a book, but worth reading.
cronosmu's review against another edition
3.0
La teoría contractualista del Estado y el endiosamiento de la democracia representativa constituyen dos de los mitos más característicos y, para muchos, repulsivos de la modernidad. Los argumentos de Spooner, agudos pero torpemente desarrollados, se tambalean bajo el peso de una escritura febril y un espíritu libertario indomable. Por lo mismo, una crítica sistemática a los dogmas del Estado moderno habría que buscarla en otra parte (en Hoppe, por ejemplo). Esto no es un tratado destinado a la academia, sino un panfleto que se dirige al pueblo. Ahí radica su trascendencia. Desde los márgenes y sin pedanterías, Spooner escribió uno de los textos más influyentes en la historia de los movimientos anarquistas e individualistas.
manicmeg's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.25
very sexy roasting of the legitimacy of USA's constitution. I always love a good on usas government. it was very cool of him to live at the time of the civil war and also see that it wasn't just about the abolition, it was about the north defending America and what America stood for but without realising that they were fighting for a different sort of "enslavement", one to the economy itself, while the south were fighting for slavery and also free labour. It also feels like he downplayed what the actual slavery conditions were, considerably worse than the enslavement to the economy as such.
But also if I had to take a shot for every time this man wrote "secret band of robbers and murderers" or "secret voting (by secret ballot)" I would be very very dead
But also if I had to take a shot for every time this man wrote "secret band of robbers and murderers" or "secret voting (by secret ballot)" I would be very very dead
shanehawk's review against another edition
5.0
Holy hell. Spooner was a beast.
Shortly after the American Civil War concluded Spooner penned this scathing repudiation of the social contract and the contractarian view of the state in general. He didn’t hold back in the slightest. He referred to the amorphous federal government as “robbers and murderers” about 40 times throughout.
The numbering of the essays can be tricky. No Treason 3-5 were never published so all we have to read are I, II, and VI. I believe he’s mostly known for the last piece which was finished in 1870, the others earlier in 1867. Spooner is rabid and lucid here. I would hate to have been on the receiving end of any of his writings.
Highly recommended to see a different point of view within the framework of the Civil War era. He was an intense abolitionist because he was a very principled individualist/anarchist. Once the Civil War took hold he defended the South as being victim of Northern aggression and for being forced to comply to a government they wished to split with. This is still in line with his principles as he also advocated for using violence to free slaves from Southern oppressors. He was a radical even within radical abolitionist circles. He had a very unpopular opinion that the secessionist South derived its rights from the natural rights of slaves to be free. Neither the Union or the Confederacy agreed with this sentiment.
I’ll add some quotes below:
“The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.”
“In short, the North exults beyond measure in the proof she has given, that a government, professedly resting on consent, will expend more life and treasure in crushing dissent, than any government, openly founded on force, has ever done.”
“The principle that the majority have a right to rule the minority, practically resolves all government into a mere contest between two bodies of men, as to which of them shall be masters, and which of them slaves; a contest, that—however bloody—can, in the nature of things, never be finally closed, so long as man refuses to be a slave.”
“A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.”
Shortly after the American Civil War concluded Spooner penned this scathing repudiation of the social contract and the contractarian view of the state in general. He didn’t hold back in the slightest. He referred to the amorphous federal government as “robbers and murderers” about 40 times throughout.
The numbering of the essays can be tricky. No Treason 3-5 were never published so all we have to read are I, II, and VI. I believe he’s mostly known for the last piece which was finished in 1870, the others earlier in 1867. Spooner is rabid and lucid here. I would hate to have been on the receiving end of any of his writings.
Highly recommended to see a different point of view within the framework of the Civil War era. He was an intense abolitionist because he was a very principled individualist/anarchist. Once the Civil War took hold he defended the South as being victim of Northern aggression and for being forced to comply to a government they wished to split with. This is still in line with his principles as he also advocated for using violence to free slaves from Southern oppressors. He was a radical even within radical abolitionist circles. He had a very unpopular opinion that the secessionist South derived its rights from the natural rights of slaves to be free. Neither the Union or the Confederacy agreed with this sentiment.
I’ll add some quotes below:
“The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.”
“In short, the North exults beyond measure in the proof she has given, that a government, professedly resting on consent, will expend more life and treasure in crushing dissent, than any government, openly founded on force, has ever done.”
“The principle that the majority have a right to rule the minority, practically resolves all government into a mere contest between two bodies of men, as to which of them shall be masters, and which of them slaves; a contest, that—however bloody—can, in the nature of things, never be finally closed, so long as man refuses to be a slave.”
“A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.”
More...