Property and Freedom Podcast

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 300. This talk is from the recently-concluded 19th annual PFS 2025 Annual Meeting (Sep. 18–23, 2025, Bodrum, Turkey). David Dürr (Switzerland): A Brief History of Swiss Anarchism [Sebastian Wang, “David Dürr on Swiss Anarchism – Property and Freedom Society Bodrum 2025,” Libertarian Alliance [UK] Blog (Sep. 21, 2025)] Shownotes and transcript below. Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2025 Youtube Playlist. Grok shownotes PFP300 Show Notes: David Dürr – A Brief History of Swiss Anarchism (PFS 2025) Overview In his 10th PFS appearance (coinciding with the conference’s 20th anniversary), Swiss lawyer and anarchist thinker David Dürr traces Switzerland’s history through the lens of external and internal anarchism: no vertical integration into larger empires (external) and no centralized monopoly of power within (internal). Far from chaos, anarchism here means voluntary, horizontal structures and resistance to coercion. Key Historical Arc Ancient Roots: Helvetii tribes resist Roman yoke (100 BC); early fragmentation hints at anarchist tendencies. Medieval Emergence: Switzerland forms in the 13th century as Habsburgs expand—small valleys and towns band together in defense pacts (Rütli Oath, William Tell myths). Holy Roman Empire Era: Switzerland remains a loose, recognized entity among larger blocks; internally a patchwork of cantons, towns, and languages. 1515 Marignano Debacle: Attempt to conquer northern Italy fails spectacularly—Swiss lack of centralized command proves both weakness and strength; retreat preserves autonomy. Westphalia (1648): Formal external recognition; internal diversity intact. Napoleonic Interruption: Helvetic Republic (1798–1803) briefly centralizes; Napoleon admits he cannot coordinate the quarrelsome Swiss. Vienna Congress (1815): Restores loose confederation of 22 sovereign cantons—peak of dual anarchy. The Turning Point: Sonderbund War (1847–48) Liberal Protestant cantons illegally force Catholic conservative cantons into a unified federal state via majority vote (no required unanimity). Dürr calls this an illegal coup d’état that ends internal anarchism and creates the modern Swiss Confederation. Modern External Anarchism Switzerland stays out of NATO and EU; rejects EEA in 1992 by razor-thin margin. Ongoing EU pressure via new bilateral treaties—resistance weakening. Why the Center Cannot Hold Switzerland lacks unifying glue: Two main religions (Protestant north/west, Catholic center/south). Urban/rural cultural divide. 26 cantons competing on taxes. 4 national languages (German, French, Italian, Romansh). Dürr predicts breakup by 2048 (Schlussbericht 2048—a satirical “final report” from a dissolved Confederation). Philosophical Coda Rejects “nation of will” (Willsnation) as Hobbesian fiction: Leviathan’s composite body has many people but one head. Real unity comes from diverse individual wills, not a mythical collective one. Teases his pet topic: even strong individual wills are not truly “free”… but that’s another story. Books Mentioned Schlussbericht 2048 (German; fictional dissolution narrative). Staat oder Oper (the state as grand theatrical illusion). A witty, map-rich romp through 2,000 years—proving Switzerland is less a nation than a stubborn anarchist experiment still running. Grok/Youtube transcript PFP300 | David Dürr: A Brief History of Swiss Anarchism (PFS 2025) Introduction and Anniversary Reflections [0:00] Don’t applaud too early. You have to endure me now for the 10th time already. This is my 10th anniversary as a speaker at PFS, which coincides with the 20th anniversary of your conference. So that’s a big honor for me, of course, and many thanks again for the invitation to Guido and Hans. Topic Selection and the Cradle of Anarchism [0:28] As usual, since about two or three years, I made a proposition to Hans: what about the topic of free will, which is not free but it’s very useful that we think it’s free? And he always says, “Oh, David, that’s another story. Why won’t you speak about Javier Milei?” That was last year. Or, “Why won’t you speak about a brief history of Swiss anarchism?” That’s a fine idea, that’s a suggestion. I think it’s a good one and not that other story with the free will. [1:20] Now, a brief history of Swiss anarchism. This is really something interesting. One could even say that a brief history of Switzerland is anarchism. Maybe this is a fairly good example of anarchism. However you define it, one can say some people say that in 1976 there was a football club Bakunin, and they said—this is what I found on the internet—in 1976 they said Switzerland is the cradle of anarchism. This is a football game of young people; at that time this was about like Hans looked like as a young leftist revolutionary. Maybe he did not play football, I do not know. But when they celebrated Switzerland as the cradle of anarchism, they looked back a century ago when this cradle started to exist. The 1869 Basel Convention and Bakunin [2:24] And they referred to this event in 1869: that was an anarchist workers’ union convention in Basel in Switzerland, the place I live. And the famous, internationally well-known and chased anarchist Mikhail Bakunin spoke at that convention in that beautiful hotel—I know the hotel where it is. And he did not plead against capitalists or bourgeois state or things like that, but against other socialists, against this centralist attitude of Marx. So there were not just socialist leftists but anarchists. This was very typical and important for them, and that took place in Basel. So it seems that Basel is, or Switzerland, let’s say, is the cradle of anarchism. [3:44] This is the same convention conference—you see, beautiful, this hotel. This is like anarchists celebrate their conventions, their reunions here at this beautiful hotel with this terrace with the stairs. They all looking friendly at the photographer. This is how anarchists celebrate their convention. [Applause] Swiss Anarchist Highlights: Geneva Assassination [4:18] And of course we are the heroes of anarchism because in Geneva the famous empress was assassinated by an anarchist. So Switzerland is the cradle of anarchism. Defining External and Internal Anarchism [4:38] But after this episode, let me try to go a bit deeper into what anarchism is and namely what Switzerland is about with anarchism. I distinguish between external and internal anarchism. If a country, a population has an anarchist attitude, there is an external, international so to speak aspect, and on the other side the internal one. [5:13] The external one means, I would say, not being vertically integrated into a bigger entity, not just being a small part of a bigger thing. This is the external aspect of anarchy. Anarchy which means—without a Greek—which means first superior, without central monopolized power. This is anarchy, and this is the meaning if you look at the external aspect of anarchy. What is not excluded is that you have horizontal contractual relationships that can be binding, but it’s not a vertical integration. That’s the external aspect. [6:07] And now the internal one: this means that internally, within this group, within this population, within this country, there is no center of power. There is no involuntary collectivity. This is the meaning of the internal side of anarchism. But here again, what is not excluded is that there are centers—in the plural—centers of power: economic centers, scientific, cultural centers, whatever, with voluntary memberships. So anarchism does not mean lack of structure, lack of organization, but no integration outside and no monopoly inside. Early Swiss History: Helvetii and Resistance to Rome [7:01] What does this mean now for Switzerland? The Helvetia, Switzerland, Confederatio Helvetica. This is the official notion. Helvetii, maybe from the very beginning this was a small population somewhere in the place where today we have Switzerland. This is a beautiful picture when they defeated the Romans in one battle somewhere around 100 before Christ. They tried at least to resist the Romans at that place when they forced them under the yoke in this beautiful picture here. That was an exception, by the way. On the long run they could not resist, but that was the attempt to get external anarchy, not to be integrated. [7:58] Internally, they were maybe at that time already truly anarchist because even Helvetii—that was not even a tribe. These were three smaller tribes somehow bound together. So maybe the tendency was at those earlier times already with those people that became afterwards the Swiss—you know—was anarchist. Roman Empire and Early Middle Ages [8:27] Now a bit later, 100 AD, we have this Roman Empire that grew and grew. We have these red Italian parts. We have the provinces there. But in these provinces you do not find any Helvetic province or Swiss province or things like that. In that area where today Switzerland is, there was nothing specific. There was not an entity, neither externally nor internally. So that’s not yet the anarchist Swiss Switzerland. [9:08] Now a bit later, early Middle Ages around 1000 AD, we have a multitude of medium-sized entities beginning to form a horizontal, essentially horizontal empire. So the well-known Holy Roman Empire of German Nation—that’s in principle a horizontal organization of smaller and bigger entities. And this is that situation. Here you see some entities like Burgundy, like Swabia, like Bavaria, and here northern Italy. So relatively big blocks that have some tendency to coordinate among them. Switzerland as such is not there yet at that place. What is interesting is that it’s not within one of these blocks; it’s somewhere in between. It’s maybe it once then will be just a leftover of bigger blocks, and one sees that a little bit here in this graphic already. So still neither an internal nor external e

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 299. This talk is from the recently-concluded 19th annual PFS 2025 Annual Meeting (Sep. 18–23, 2025, Bodrum, Turkey). Alessandro Fusillo (Italy): The Pirates of the Caribbean as Forebears of the Libertarians and of the American Revolution [Sebastian Wang, “Pirates, Liberty, and Revolution: Alessandro Fusillo in Bodrum,” Libertarian Alliance [UK] Blog (Sep. 19, 2025)] Shownotes and transcript below. Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2025 Youtube Playlist. Grok shownotes PFS Conference Talk: “Pirates of the Caribbean – A Libertarian Perspective” Hans Gillshin opens with humor about his non-piratical attire and thanks the audience at the Property and Freedom Society (PFS) conference. He frames the talk with St. Augustine’s famous quote (via Cicero) equating kingdoms without justice to large-scale robbery, as recounted in the story of Alexander the Great and a captured pirate. Historical Context (17th Century) The 1648 Treaty of Westphalia births the modern state, ending medieval liberties. The Thirty Years’ War introduces mass destruction, secret services, and centralized legislation. England’s 1640s Civil War (often overshadowed by later revolutions) features Levellers, religious freedom advocates, and figures like John Lilburne (“Freeborn John”). The 1688 Glorious Revolution establishes the Bank of England—model for all future central banks—enabling unlimited war financing via fiat money. Enclosure Acts expropriate medieval common lands, creating a rural proletariat, urban migration, and forced impressment into the Royal Navy. Displaced English, Scottish, and Irish peasants become the first chattel slaves in the West Indies (7-year terms), predating African slavery. The Golden Age of Piracy (ca. 1713–1726) Post-War of Spanish Succession, mutinies on brutal navy and merchant ships spawn pirate crews. Pirates fly the Jolly Roger; merchant crews often force captains to surrender and voluntarily join. Pirate justice: captains tried by crew; tyrants executed, fair ones (e.g., Captain Snellgrave) spared. Non-pirates set adrift with provisions; violence targeted oppressors, not random cruelty. Pirates attack slave ships to free captives—leading to significant Black crew members and even captains. British pardon laws and mock “forced enlistment” defenses briefly reduce piracy, but by 1726 most pirates are hanged. Pirate Governance & Libertalia Primary source: A General History of the Pyrates (Captain Charles Johnson, likely Daniel Defoe). Notable pirates: Henry Every (romantic treasure legend) and Blackbeard (terror via flaming beard). Highlight: French pirate Olivier Misson (possibly fictional) and ex-priest Caraccioli found Libertalia in Madagascar—a libertarian anarchist society based on John Locke’s principles. Universal pirate practice: every ship had a signed charter—egalitarian shares (captain 1.5–2×), revocable leadership, and a quartermaster as crew tribune. Many crews issued formal declarations of war against all states. Conclusion Pirates were not mere criminals but rebels against tyranny, slavery, and state power—early fighters for individual liberty. Gillshin closes to applause, suggesting the talk may reframe popular views of piracy. Grok/Youtube transcript Introduction and Thanks [0:01] Hans Gillshin, as usual I will start with thanking you for the invitation here at the PFS conference. It’s a great pleasure to be here year after year and a great honor to be invited as a speaker. Hans previously drew my attention to the fact that my attire today is not in line with my topic. I should have sported at least an eye patch or a peg leg or hired a local parrot to have him on my shoulder. But okay, we will do without. Topic Announcement: Pirates of the Caribbean [0:37] Today’s topics are the Pirates of the Caribbean and piracy in general. St. Augustine’s Quote on Piracy and Empire [0:45] I will start with a quote from St. Augustine, a very famous quote that he got from Cicero. It’s a story of Alexander the Great’s fleet navigating through the Mediterranean. They caught a pirate ship and as he was about to execute the pirate as a criminal, the pirate said to Alexander, “What have you in mind? What do you think, trying to rob all people and to seize the other ships? This is completely illegal.” And the pirate answered, “What thou meanest by seizing the whole earth, but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, whilst thou dost it with a great fleet, art styled an emperor.” The legend goes—maybe it’s not so much a legend—that Alexander the Great had two possible finales for this story. The first one, the nicer one, is that Alexander the Great was so pleased by the answer that he spared the pirate’s life. The other one is that he executed him nonetheless after having a good laugh at his response. In fact, this story was reminded by the late Pope Benedict XVI to the German Parliament a few years ago because the conclusion of St. Augustine is: justice being taken away, then what are kingdoms but great robberies. And I think this is a very good conclusion, a very libertarian conclusion from one of the fathers of the church. Shift to Classical Piracy and the Golden Age [2:38] But today we won’t speak about ancient piracy but of the, let’s say, the classical piracy—sometimes you hear about the golden age of piracy. And it is the piracy especially of the Caribbean, but not only the Caribbean: the Bahamas Islands, the Caribbean Islands and the whole East African coast, and especially the island of Madagascar, which was one of the base points of the pirates. Historical Context: The Birth of Modern States [3:11] But before we go on to the pirates, I would like to put the story in a general context. And so we go back on land and we go back to the 17th century. The 17th century is, in my opinion, a crucial time of modern history because during the 17th century modern states were born. In fact, the birth date and birth place of the modern states is the Westphalian Treaty of 1648, which ended the Thirty Years’ War and which established a new actor in history, which is the modern state. Modern states are what we know, and at that time they were just in their infancy, in their beginnings, but still they had already in place things which we will learn to understand during the next centuries: like legislation, like secret services—secret services began in the Thirty Years’ War—like extensive wars. I think the Thirty Years’ War was the first mass war with mass destructions and so on. And it was the end of medieval liberties. The English Revolution and Loss of Liberties [4:37] The country where this loss of medieval liberties was felt the most is for sure Great Britain—England at that time—where in the same years started the great English Revolution of 1644. It is somehow maybe a forgotten revolution because we always speak about the three great revolutions: the American Revolution, the French Revolution and of course the Russian Revolution. But in fact, especially the American Founding Fathers in some way were the heirs to the English Revolution. Where we have certain themes which will later on—in fact the pirates, as I will tell you, and the American Founding Fathers—I’m speaking especially about the Levellers, about the rebels, about religious freedom. And you have these mythical figures like John Lilburne, Freeborn John, and lots of rebels who for the first time asserted the same ideals of liberty which are our ideals of liberty in a way lots of time before but still this is what they were telling the world. Of course they lost to the beginning of the global financial elites which were born in England during that time. The Glorious Revolution and the Central Bank [6:19] In the roughly 60 years after the first English Revolution you have the second revolution, the so-called Glorious Revolution. I’m not so sure about the glorious but still it brought about a new dynasty and a new ruling elite in England and it brought about something fundamental from our libertarian point of view, namely the institution of the Central Bank of England. The Central Bank of England is the model of all later central banks and it exerted—and maybe it still exerts—a crucial influence on the world, especially by means of war. Because the big problem of all previous kings and medieval rulers was how to pay for the wars. There’s only a certain point up to which you can rob your citizens; at a certain point they stop, they don’t pay the taxes, you can count on rebellions. And this is the great invention of the central banks: to print fiat money and with this fiat money, with paper, they can just finance any war they want. Enclosures and the Destruction of Common Lands [7:34] The same financial elites who brought about this big change in English power around the world—which set up the British dominance of the world—were the same ones who made a profound change in English agriculture. Sadly enough, this is a field of study which is almost entirely occupied by Marxist scholars and it is the story of the enclosures. But I think this is very important from a libertarian point of view. Enclosures are the encirclement of big agricultural properties, especially for the raising of cattle, especially sheep for the wool industry, and what this happened through was the eviction of the common lands. Common lands were a medieval model of property which is very far away from the individual property that we consider more or less the only model of property. Because typically a British village of the 16th and 17th century would have small plots of land with maybe a small cottage for one family. The family had maybe a cow, maybe some sheep, chickens and so on. They sold their products and they could use, together with all the other villagers, these common lands which could be used for grazing, which could be used for taking wood, water and so on. And thi

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 298. This talk is from the recently-concluded 19th annual PFS 2025 Annual Meeting (Sep. 18–23, 2025, Bodrum, Turkey). Anthony Daniels (Dalrymple) (England): The Worldly Adventures of a Skeptical Doctor. Shownotes and transcript below. Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2025 Youtube Playlist. Grok shownotes Theodore Dalrymple – Snapshots of a Life (20th Anniversary Conference Talk) In this reflective lecture, Theodore Dalrymple (pen name of psychiatrist Anthony Daniels) shares personal anecdotes instead of a formal intellectual biography, emphasizing how formative experiences shaped his worldview. Key Themes & Stories: Childhood & Resilience: A close friend paralyzed by polio thrived despite disability, thanks to family focus on capability—not victimhood—prompting Dalrymple’s lifelong rejection of the “cult of the victim.” Early Encounters with Cruelty & Cowardice: At age 11, witnessing youths mock a blind street musician revealed both human malice and his own failure to intervene due to fear. Death of a Friend & Bureaucratic Inertia: A brilliant 15-year-old classmate died from an asthma attack delayed by ambulance red tape; his mother’s bitter wish (“Why not the other one?”) exposed the complexity of grief and the peril of overreach in seeking “cosmic justice.” Rhodesia (Zimbabwe): Working as a young doctor, he observed efficiency born of necessity under sanctions, stark income disparities due to tribal obligations, and the predictable collapse into corruption post-independence. Tanzania: Julius Nyerere’s admired socialist experiment in collectivized agriculture failed despite massive Scandinavian/Dutch aid, confirming Peter Bauer’s quip: foreign aid transfers from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor ones. Trans-African Journey (1986): Traveling overland from Zanzibar to Timbuktu, he met only kindness—contrasting spontaneous vs. indoctrinated hostility—and viewed bribery as informal taxation in unpaid bureaucracies. Liberia (Monrovia): Amid civil war, he witnessed deliberate, hate-fueled destruction of civilization (e.g., sawn-off hospital trolleys, a defiled Steinway piano), symbolizing fragility journalists dismissed as trivial. Nauru: Sudden phosphate wealth turned a subsistence island into the world’s richest per capita—then into obesity, diabetes, and collapse, proving unearned prosperity is no blessing. Guatemala & Peru: Communist guerrillas were led not by peasants but by frustrated, over-educated elites denied expected status—echoed in Sendero Luminoso’s origins at a revived provincial university. North Korea: A clandestine whisper from a language student—“Reading Dickens and Shakespeare is the only joy of my life”—revealed literature’s power to preserve individual voice under totalitarianism. British Prisons & Slums: Decades as a prison psychiatrist exposed a deeper poverty: not economic, but of soul, intellect, and meaning—where false ideas about addiction became institutional orthodoxy via sentimentality and self-interest. Closing Reflection: Citing Dr. Johnson’s Rasselas (“The Conclusion in Which Nothing Is Concluded”), Dalrymple offers no life prescriptions—only that reading and lived experience must dialectically inform each other to avoid pedantry or shallowness. A candid, contrarian meditation on human nature, civilization’s fragility, and the unintended consequences of ideology. Grok transcript Opening Thanks and Personal Authority 0:00 [Applause] Well, ladies and gentlemen, first as ever I should like to thank Hans and Gulchin for their very gracious hospitality, and second I should like to congratulate them on the 20th anniversary of this conference. I have never organized anything in my life and so I admire organizers, especially people who organize something that is as pleasant as this conference. But I have a third reason to thank Hans this year, because I think I have been to maybe 10 or 12 of these conferences—I do not remember how many—because he has at last asked me to speak on a subject on which I am a world authority, namely myself. Limits of Truth in Autobiography 0:58 This does not mean of course that I will tell you the whole truth about myself for two reasons. First, no one knows everything about himself, and secondly everyone has something to hide. But as a Victorian English novelist, Anthony Trollope, said in the introduction to his autobiography, I shall not tell the whole truth, but everything that I say shall be true. Snapshots of Influential Events 1:28 I thought that instead of presenting what might rather grandiosely be called my intellectual development—assuming that there has been any—I would give you a few snapshots of events and processes that have been important to me. The effect of some of these events takes years to develop because the mind can be like a frying pan or it can be like a slow cooker or anything in between. Childhood Friend with Polio and Rejection of Victimhood 1:57 When I was about six years old, my closest friend, from whom I was inseparable, was one of the last people in the country to suffer from polio. He was left paraplegic. His mother was a Christian Scientist, and Christian Scientists have a rather peculiar view of illness, as if it were an illusion. My parents, who had been very worried that I might contract polio myself, were in my recollection very, very good to my friend and took a matter-of-fact view of his problem, encouraging him to do everything that he could do and encouraging us to encourage him. His mother, who alas died very early of cancer—I am not sure whether her religious belief and rejection of medicine shortened her life; I cannot say that—and my parents, both she and my parents emphasized what my friend could do rather than what he could not do. I think that this at least in part accounted for the fact that he had a very distinguished career, in fact including travel in Africa, which at the time was not easy even for the able-bodied. The memory of my friendship with him had, I think, a subliminal effect on my rejection of the modern cult of the victim and of victimhood. To reduce people to their victimization, to their difficulties, is to do them a great disservice and is far from flattering to them. Blind Accordionist and Insight into Cruelty 3:47 When I was 11, I thought in common with most boys that sport, and in particular football and cricket, were important. There was what I thought was a very important cup match in which the team I favored was playing, and unusually for that time admission was by advanced ticket purchase only, and I joined a very long queue to buy the ticket. Along the queue walked an old blind man playing an accordion and singing. The song he sang I remember was “The Man Who Broke the Bank at Monte Carlo.” As he passed a group of young toughs ahead of me, they who had a portable radio with them turned up the volume of that radio and drowned out that man’s voice, and he was extremely confused by this. He was an old man and of course he could not see what they were doing, and I shall never forget the look of bewilderment on his face and the laughter of the toughs as they mocked him. Even at the age of 11 I was appalled by this. This was a very small incident, of course, of no historical importance, but it gave me a sudden insight into the potential for gratuitous cruelty that lurks, if not in every human heart, at least in many human hearts. I also learned from this experience the limits of my own courage. I did not intervene in any way. Of course, such intervention would probably have been useless in any case, but that was not the reason for my failure to intervene. It was fear and cowardice. Death of a Scholarly Friend 5:53 When I was about 15, I went to the house of a friend of mine who was 16, whom I had not seen for two weeks. He was a very clever boy destined for a life of scholarship to which I think he would have made a very valuable contribution, and he was also a very nice and a very good boy. In fact, he was a much nicer boy than was I. He suffered terribly from both asthma and eczema, which gave him a pigeon chest and a skin whose scaling I can still see in my mind’s eye. Bear in mind this is more than 60 years ago. His mother answered the door and I asked to see him. She told me that he had died and then described the manner of his death. He had had a very severe attack of asthma and told his mother to call an ambulance. As she did so, he wheezed that he was dying. The ambulance controller insisted on taking details in a highly bureaucratic manner and in contacting his own doctor and so forth. It took several minutes just this bureaucratic procedure. The ambulance arrived a minute after he died. It is possible that the bronchodilator that he used at that time, which again I can still see in my mind’s eye as he clutched it like a lifeline, which was called isoprenaline, played a part in his death. That was not appreciated at the time that it was slightly dangerous. But what his mother then said startled me. I think she was a single mother, which was unusual at the time. Certainly there had never been any talk of a father. He had an older brother who I think was actually a half-brother. In those days one did not inquire into such things. We were much more sophisticated. We understood the virtues of silence. He was a handsome and charming youth who was probably destined for finance or prison or possibly both. The mother said with unmistakable bitterness, “Why could it not have been the other one?” It was as if she believed that one of her two boys was destined to die. I fled from the house and never returned, though I feel that I perhaps should have done. Lessons from the Death: Complexity, Bureaucracy, and Unfairness 8:46 This death, now more than 60 years ago, affected me in more than one way and affects me still when I think about it. First, in the depth of her grief a

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 297. This talk is from the recently-concluded 19th annual PFS 2025 Annual Meeting (Sep. 18–23, 2025, Bodrum, Turkey). Stephan Kinsella (USA): “Where The Common Law Goes Wrong.” Also podcast at KOL474 | Where The Common Law Goes Wrong (PFS 2025), which contains the transcript and shownotes. See also Sebastian Wang, “Stephan Kinsella on the Common Law: Lessons from Bodrum 2025,” Libertarian Alliance [UK] Blog (Sep. 19, 2025). Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2025 Youtube Playlist.

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 296. This talk is from the recently-concluded 19th annual PFS 2025 Annual Meeting (Sep. 18–23, 2025, Bodrum, Turkey). Sean Gabb (England): Roman Law and Contractual Slavery [Sebastian Wang, “Roman Slavery: Horror and Paradox – Sean Gabb in Bodrum,” Libertarian Alliance [UK] Blog (Sep. 20, 2025)] Transcript and shownotes below. Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2025 Youtube Playlist. Grok shownotes Show Notes: “Ancient Slavery: A Very Peculiar Institution” Speaker: Unnamed (invited by Hans and Gulchin) Source: YouTube lecture (Nov 2025 transcript) TL;DR Ancient slavery was overwhelmingly brutal—most died young under the lash—but a significant minority repurposed the institution for social mobility: voluntary enslavement, manumission after 7 years, and instant Roman citizenship upon freedom. Evidence: thousands of 2nd–3rd century AD gravestones of ex-slaves who married their former owners or rose to elite status. Key Sections & Takeaways Intro & Framing [0:01] Thanks to hosts; title borrows from Jefferson’s “peculiar institution.” History = “nightmare” (Jefferson) or “catalog of vices” (Voltaire). Modern Lens [1:13] Since 1970s, slavery overshadows classical studies; some can’t enjoy Livy, Tacitus, or Roman architecture. Default Experience [2:12] Most slaves: chain-gang labor in fields/quarries → death by late 20s/early 30s. Universal but Uncomfortable [3:20] Slavery existed in every pre-modern society. Greeks & Romans knew it was “unnatural” yet justified it (“some are born for slavery”). Horror Highlights [4:51] Vedius Pollio (1st c. BC): fed slaves to lampreys; Augustus intervened. Galen (2nd c. AD): boasted never striking slaves with his hand—used rods/whips instead. Brothels, gladiators, casual violence. Counter-Image [8:50] Alma-Tadema painting: boredom & despair more typical than melodrama. Manumission as Control [9:56] Household slaves: promise freedom after 5–10 yrs → incentive for obedience. Roman twist: freed slave of a citizen → full citizen (minus Senate/office unless dispensation). Children 100 % free-born citizens. Social Mobility Evidence [12:39] Horace’s father: ex-slave. Multiple emperors had slave grandfathers. Gravestone Gallery (British Museum & others) [13:23] Dasumius (2nd c.): freed & married his slave; heartbroken when she died first. Pattern: hundreds–thousands of stones across Mediterranean: Master frees female slave → marriage. Often the master himself was ex-slave. Even humble sailors & priests did it. Where Did Peace-Time Greek Slaves Come From? [19:42] War captives explain 2nd–1st c. BC glut (Carthage 60 k, Marius 140 k, Pompey+Caesar >1 M). But 2nd–3rd c. AD Greek ex-slaves = no wars in Greece. Answer: contractual/voluntary slavery. Contractual Slavery = Ancient Student Loan [20:44] Certain lucrative jobs (vilicus, dispensator, accountant) legally restricted to slaves. Free poor sold themselves → master paid training/transport → 7-yr service → freedom + citizenship. Roman jurists confirm legality; concern was only fraud/coercion. Citizenship Hack [28:18] Pre-212 AD, citizenship rare. Sell yourself to a citizen → instant manumission → citizen. Cicero called it “disreputable” but common. Star Example: Antonius Felix [26:11] Greek slave → freed by Claudius → knight, senator, procurator of Judea, married Herod’s granddaughter. Family still elite 300 yrs later. Conclusion [29:42] Don’t blanket-judge the past. Slavery horrific for 90 %+, but a subset turned it into a ladder:  “Voluntary enslavement = vehicle of social advancement.”  Like winning the lottery for Felix. Slides / Visuals Mentioned 19th-c. French slave-market paintings (sensational). Alma-Tadema: mundane despair. British Museum gravestones (Dasumius + others). Statistics: war-captive numbers. Roman slave-market scene (voluntary bidders). Acts of the Apostles illustration (Paul before Felix). Speaker offers slides via email. Further Reading Galen, On the Passions and Errors of the Soul Roman law digests on self-sale into slavery British Museum / Louvre epitaph collections Moses Finley, Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology (1970s pivot) Final Quote “The past is a strange place and the more you look at it the stranger it is.” Grok/youtube transcript Introduction and Thanks [0:01] Good morning everybody and it’s good to look around the room and see so many old friends and new friends as well. But I’d like to begin by thanking Hans and Gulchin for their great goodness in having invited me back here again and again. Do we have a little feedback from the microphone? No. All well, very well. Title and Historical Views on Slavery [0:25] Today I’d like to talk about ancient slavery and I’ve called it a very peculiar institution. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said that history is a nightmare from which we are continually trying to wake up, or Voltaire who said that history is nothing more than a catalog of the vices, follies and crimes of mankind. There is some truth in those sayings. And if you look at the institution of ancient slavery, you do seem to see a very good example of those observations. Modern Perspectives on Ancient Slavery [1:13] We’ve always known about ancient slavery. Of course, for the past several hundred years, we have always deplored it. Since the 1970s, however, ancient slavery has moved to something like one of the center points of classical studies. So much so that I have spoken to people who’ve told me, “I cannot appreciate ancient literature anymore.” Because whenever I read Livy or Tacitus or Polybius or Herodotus, all I can think of is the slaves who made the lives of those writers comfortable, who made it possible for them to write their works. And I’ve seen people tell me that they’re unable to appreciate ancient architecture because it was almost universally constructed with slave labor. The Harsh Reality for Most Slaves [2:12] I don’t want to minimize the effects. I don’t want to minimize the nature and extent of ancient slavery, for in the overwhelming majority of cases it was a veil of tears. It was a terrible thing. If you were a slave in the ancient world, the overwhelming likelihood was that you would spend your life under the lash working in a chain gang in a field or in a quarry and you would die in your late 20s or early 30s from overwork and general maltreatment. Not All Human Behavior Is Cruel [2:53] However, having said that, we do need to bear in mind that although human beings can often behave very badly to each other, this is not a universal tendency. And it is possible to see ancient slavery sometimes in a more positive light than shown in that 19th-century French painting of a slave market. Please. Slavery as a Universal Institution [3:20] Now, slavery is or has been or was a universal institution until about 200 years ago. It is very difficult to find a society which did not to some extent rely on the compelled labor of the lower classes. Slavery was a universal institution in ancient civilization. It is very difficult to think of a single civilization which did not rely to some extent on the compelled labor of the lower classes. Greek and Roman Justifications for Slavery [3:51] What makes the institution of slavery among the Greeks and Romans different is that these people had both a highly rational view of life and a certain obligation to justify what they regarded as an unnatural institution. They always did so with a certain discomfort. They recognized that it was unnatural. They recognized that it was a violation of universal rights, but it existed. They couldn’t think of any alternative. And so they tried to justify it on various perhaps spurious grounds that some people were fitted for slavery and some people were not. Please. Horrific Examples of Slave Treatment [4:51] Now the treatment of slaves. It is possible to construct an entire volume showing the gross horrors of ancient slavery. Here is one. Oh, there was Vedius Pollio. He was a very wealthy Roman, a very wealthy Roman aristocrat, and he had a pond filled with flesh-eating fish. Any slave who displeased him got thrown into it and he’d stand watching the slave eaten alive. There is a story that one day Pollio was entertaining the emperor Augustus to dinner when a slave dropped one of his prized glass vessels. Pollio snapped his fingers, said, “Take him to the fish.” The slave grabbed hold of the emperor’s knees and said, “Please, please, sir, not the fish. Just kill me here. Cut my throat, crucify me, but not the fish.” And Augustus turned to Pollio and said, “You’re not serious about this. You’re not going to feed him to your fish, are you?” And Pollio said, “Oh, yes, I am. He’s my property, and I can do with him as I please.” The story then goes off in two directions. According to one, Augustus managed to stop the feeding. According to the other, he couldn’t. And Augustus could only put the word round: anyone who entertains this man to dinner again is not my friend. But although this didn’t happen very often because it is rather inventive to have a pond filled with fish, you could do whatever you wanted to your slaves. Galen’s Views on Disciplining Slaves [6:28] And there is a story from Galen. When I was a young man, I imposed upon myself an injunction which I have observed through my whole life. Namely, never to strike any slave of my household with my hand. And you think, “Oh yes, well, the greatest medical writer of the ancient world.” And the room does contain a number of medical personnel. Of course, you would expect a certain degree of humanity which is lacking among the other upper classes of the age. But you read on, “My father practiced the same restraint. Many were the friends he reproved when they had bruised a tendon while striking their slaves in the teeth. He told them that they deserved to have a stroke and to die in the fit of passion which had

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 295. These introductory remarks are from the recently-concluded 19th annual PFS 2025 Annual Meeting (Sep. 18–23, 2025, Bodrum, Turkey). Gülçin Imre Hoppe (Turkey) & Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey): Welcome and Introductions. Transcript and shownotes below. Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2025 Youtube Playlist. Grok shownotes Show Notes: PFS 20th Anniversary Opening Remarks Video: Property and Freedom Society 20th Anniversary – Opening Speakers: Gülçin Imre Hoppe & Hans-Hermann Hoppe Location: Bodrum, Turkey [0:00 – Introduction and Sound Check] Brief audio/video test before the session begins. Music plays as the audience settles. [0:22 – Welcoming the Audience] Gülçin Imre Hoppe warmly greets attendees: Acknowledges long-distance travelers from Thailand, Guatemala, Japan, and beyond. Apologizes in advance for any logistical mishaps (e.g., kitchen oversights). Jokes: “Be glad you’re not eating onions instead of aubergines.” Expresses gratitude for guests enduring travel challenges to attend the second stop on their journey. [1:44 – Celebrating 20 Years of PFS] Marks 20 years of the Property and Freedom Society (PFS). Playful comparison: Gülçin shows a photo of Hans-Hermann from the first conference. Grandkids’ reaction: “That’s not my opa!” Audience laughter and applause. [2:50 – PFS as a Labor of Love] Hans-Hermann Hoppe reflects: PFS has become an institution and a brand — but with no institute, no offices, no employees. Entirely a shoestring operation and labor of love. Organizers receive no compensation; supported only by a few volunteer helpers. [3:49 – Hotel Operations During the Conference] The venue normally functions as a small bed-and-breakfast. For PFS, extra staff are hired from outside — a rare annual event. Normal hotel service is far more modest than the conference experience. [4:37 – Practical Announcements] Enjoy your week in Bodrum. Boat Tour Sign-Up (Monday): Write your name + number of participants on the list ASAP. Needed to charter the correct number of boats. Delays in sign-up can cause complications. [5:25 – Reception Correction and First Speaker] Program error: Reception is tonight at the pool area, not Saturday. Introduces Sean Gabb as the first speaker. Session closes with applause. Key Takeaway: The Property and Freedom Society’s 20th conference is a grassroots, volunteer-driven tradition — sustained by passion, not profit — bringing together a global community in Bodrum for ideas, fellowship, and (hopefully) no onion-aubergine mix-ups. Next: Sean Gabb’s opening lecture. Grok transcript [0:00 – Introduction and Sound Check] Gülçin Imre Hoppe: Are you seeing us? Some more test, test. Gülçin Imre Hoppe: Can you look at us? Can you hear us? Gülçin Imre Hoppe: Quiet, please. [Music] [0:22 – Welcoming the Audience] Gülçin Imre Hoppe: So, who first? Gülçin Imre Hoppe: Oh, okay. So dear old friends, dear new friends, we have here people who come from very far places. They have to travel very long hours. We have you from Thailand. We have some very young couple from Guatemala. We have— Where are those? Okay, that kind of thing can happen. So you have to forgive me. I also have to overlook the kitchen and so on. So mistakes can happen. So be happy that you don’t eat onions instead of aubergines—it could also happen. So welcome. We are very happy to host you this year as well. And also some far traveler from Japan. I forgot you and everybody. It is always difficult to travel and here this is your second stop. So thank you for going through all the difficulties and arriving in Bodrum at our conference. [1:44 – Celebrating 20 Years of PFS] Gülçin Imre Hoppe: We are doing this since 20 years [Music] [Applause] and you can see I stayed beautiful and energetic and everything as usual. Women tend to stay always beautiful. But when we started, this was my husband. [Applause] [Music] [Applause] [2:27 – Handover and Grandkids’ Reaction] Gülçin Imre Hoppe: So I leave you with my— I should mention that when we showed that to my grandkids, they said, “That’s not my opa.” So you can continue. [2:50 – PFS as a Labor of Love] Hans-Hermann Hoppe: I wanted to mention that in these 20 years of course the PFS has become some sort of institution. And we have acquired a brand name I would think, but we have no institute behind us. We have no offices. We have no employees. This is not a money-making operation for us. We don’t get any compensation for this. This has been just a labor of love as far as we are concerned. We just had a few little helpers help out here and there, but as I said, this is a shoestring operation. [3:49 – Hotel Operations During the Conference] Hans-Hermann Hoppe: You should also be made aware of the fact, for instance, that the hotel operates normally more as a bed-and-breakfast hotel with a small kitchen staff. For a conference such as this, we have to hire a substantial number of people from outside who you see standing around helping you, serving you and all the rest of it. So this is for the hotel a very unusual time because things like this only happen once a year. The normal operations of the hotel are far more modest than what you will be offered here. [4:37 – Practical Announcements] Hans-Hermann Hoppe: In any case, I hope you enjoy this week here—close to a week—in Bodrum. And I should also make you aware, very importantly, that you have to enlist on the boat tour list. Write down your name and how many people participate on the boat trip in order for us to charter the right amount of boats for the boat trip on Monday. So please do that as soon as possible because that sometimes causes certain complications to hire the appropriate boat number. So, thank you very much. [5:25 – Reception Correction and First Speaker] Hans-Hermann Hoppe: And with that, I give the word to Sean Gabb as our first speaker. Huh. Oh, I should mention that on the program somehow a slight screw-up happened. The reception will be tonight, not on Saturday, but tonight we have a reception at the pool area. So thank you again and please, Sean. [Applause]

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 294. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Concluding Remarks, Tributes, and Announcements. This lecture is from the 2012 meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. PFS 2012 Playlist. It was not included previously in the podcast since the video had been lost and I had assumed the audio had also been lost. However, I recently discovered the audio files for two of the speeches as well as Professor Hoppe’s Introductory and Concluding remarks had been preserved, namely those listed below. They are podcast here for the first time. Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey), Welcome and Introductions Karl-Peter Schwarz (Austria), Between Restitution and Re-Expropriation: Desocialization in Eastern Europe Benjamin Marks (Australia), On H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Concluding Remarks, Tributes, and Announcements  

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 293. Benjamin Marks (Australia), On H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model. This lecture is from the 2012 meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. PFS 2012 Playlist. Text of article on which the speech was based is below; docx; pdf. Speech. Transcript also below. Grok summary of article: H.L. Mencken’s conservatism, as explored in Benjamin Marks’ essay, is a defining trait that sets him apart as a libertarian thinker who held low expectations for societal reform. Unlike typical conservatism, Mencken’s brand is rooted in a deep skepticism of government and religion, viewing them as historically optimistic overreaches that clash with true conservative doubt. He saw many societal problems as insoluble or unlikely to be addressed due to human folly, yet found entertainment in the pretentiousness of events and the futility of reform efforts. His libertarianism was not driven by a desire to convert others but by a commitment to truth, expressed through sharp, clear prose that prioritized self-expression over activism. Mencken’s approach was neither nihilistic nor despairing; he embraced the world’s flaws with a light-hearted cynicism, finding joy in critiquing its absurdities without expecting change. He believed people’s gullibility and resistance to reason made libertarian ideals unattainable in the near term, a view reinforced by his observations of failed revolutions and reforms that often worsened conditions. Marks argues that Mencken’s consistent, principled stance—free of moral indignation—offers libertarians a radical perspective: not as a competing utopianism, but as a clear-eyed rejection of romantic solutions. His influence, though significant in literature and culture, never popularized libertarianism, underscoring his realism about human nature and societal inertia. Grok summary of transcript: Two-Paragraph Summary for Show Notes 0:00–9:00: The speaker begins by expressing gratitude for being invited to the Property and Freedom Society conference, acknowledging the late Neville Kennard, a fervent supporter who passed away in June. Kennard, despite his frail condition, remained passionate about libertarianism, wearing a Rothbard “Enemy of the State” shirt during the speaker’s visit. The speaker introduces the topic, “H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model,” contrasting Mencken’s approach with Murray Rothbard’s. Mencken, unlike Rothbard, had no expectations of influencing society, viewing politics as entertainment and government as pathetic yet amusing. His pessimism, rooted in reason, led him to describe himself as a “specialist in human depravity,” focusing on diagnosing societal flaws rather than proposing solutions. This perspective, the speaker argues, is more realistic than Rothbard’s optimistic belief in a long-term libertarian revolution, as outlined in Rothbard’s 1965 essay, which the speaker dismisses as clichéd romanticism. 9:01–19:38: The speaker critiques libertarian optimism by addressing common arguments, such as the internet’s role in spreading libertarian ideas or the belief that economic crises will awaken people to libertarianism. Mencken’s responses, as interpreted by the speaker, highlight counterpoints: easy access to statist propaganda negates the internet’s benefits, and crises often lead to more government intervention. The speaker also challenges the romanticism of Albert J. Nock’s concept of the “remnant,” quoting Nock to show his own pessimism about societal change. Marcus Aurelius is cited to underscore the futility of expecting posthumous recognition. The speaker concludes by suggesting that libertarians can still find joy in critiquing government absurdities, as evidenced by the lively PFS speakers. For optimists, the speaker humorously recommends following Gina Rinehart, a wealthy Australian secessionist, as a potential catalyst for libertarian progress, while emphasizing Mencken’s view that libertarianism is about personal enjoyment, not necessarily societal change. It was not included previously in the podcast since the video had been lost and I had assumed the audio had also been lost. However, I recently discovered the audio files for two of the speeches as well as Professor Hoppe’s Introductory and Concluding remarks had been preserved, namely those listed below. They are podcast here for the first time. Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey), Welcome and Introductions Karl-Peter Schwarz (Austria), Between Restitution and Re-Expropriation: Desocialization in Eastern Europe Benjamin Marks (Australia), On H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Concluding Remarks, Tributes, and Announcements Grok summary of transcript: Detailed Segment-by-Segment Summary for Show Notes Segment 1: Introduction and Tribute to Neville Kennard (0:00–3:00) Description: The speaker opens with gratitude for speaking at the Property and Freedom Society conference, noting their unfamiliarity among the distinguished lineup. They pay tribute to Neville Kennard, a libertarian supporter who died in June, recalling his enthusiasm despite being bedbound, wearing a Rothbard “Enemy of the State” shirt. The speaker shares an anecdote about visiting Kennard to recount last year’s PFS events, highlighting his passion for the society. Summary: This segment sets a personal tone, honoring Kennard’s dedication to libertarianism and establishing the speaker’s connection to the PFS community. It foreshadows the talk’s focus on libertarian perspectives by referencing Rothbard early on. Segment 2: Mencken’s Libertarian Model vs. Rothbard’s Optimism (3:01–9:00) Description: The speaker introduces the talk’s theme, “H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model,” contrasting Mencken’s lack of ambition to influence with Rothbard’s optimistic vision of a libertarian revolution. Mencken’s quotes reveal his view of politics as entertainment and government as “pathetic, obscene, and criminal” but not intolerable, describing himself as a “specialist in human depravity.” The speaker critiques Rothbard’s 1965 essay advocating long-term optimism as romantic nonsense, arguing Mencken’s reasoned pessimism is more justified. Summary: This segment establishes Mencken’s unique libertarian approach—detached, observational, and pessimistic—against Rothbard’s hopeful activism. It frames the talk’s central argument that Mencken’s realism is a more grounded model for libertarians. Segment 3: Critiquing Romantic Libertarian Arguments (9:01–12:00) Description: The speaker addresses common libertarian arguments for optimism, such as the internet’s role in spreading ideas, economic crises leading to libertarian awakenings, and historical victories like slavery’s abolition. Mencken’s counterpoints, as voiced by the speaker, highlight flaws: statist propaganda overshadows libertarian outreach, crises increase state power, and slavery’s abolition doesn’t negate ongoing forms of coercion. Examples like the minimum wage’s global rise and Rand Paul’s less principled stance compared to Ron Paul underscore the difficulty of libertarian progress. Summary: This segment systematically dismantles optimistic libertarian narratives, using Mencken’s lens to argue that systemic barriers and human nature thwart significant change, reinforcing the speaker’s alignment with Mencken’s pessimism. Segment 4: Debunking Nock’s Remnant and Historical Perspectives (12:01–16:00) Description: The speaker challenges the romanticism of Albert J. Nock’s “remnant” concept, quoting Nock to reveal his own doubts about long-term influence. Marcus Aurelius is cited to critique the hope of posthumous recognition, and Mencken’s similar views question posterity’s judgment. Extensive Nock quotes emphasize his belief that societal improvement is nearly impossible due to human limitations and statism’s entrenched power, suggesting revolutions merely replace one form of oppression with another. Summary: This segment deepens the critique of libertarian optimism by showing that even Nock, a revered figure, shared Mencken’s pessimism. It underscores the futility of expecting systemic change, aligning with Mencken’s detached enjoyment of societal flaws. Segment 5: Enjoying Libertarianism Without Expectations (16:01–19:38) Description: The speaker argues that libertarians can find joy in critiquing government absurdities without needing to influence others, citing the lively PFS speakers like Jeffrey Tucker as evidence. Marcus Aurelius and Nock are referenced again to highlight the spectacle of human folly as inherently entertaining. For optimists, the speaker humorously suggests following Gina Rinehart, a wealthy secessionist, as a potential libertarian catalyst. The talk concludes with Mencken’s view that libertarianism is about personal enjoyment, not necessarily progress, encouraging attendees to revel in the PFS experience. Summary: This final segment ties the talk together, advocating for Mencken’s approach of finding amusement in libertarian critique without expecting societal change. It offers a lighthearted nod to optimists while reinforcing the core message of intellectual enjoyment over activism. Note: The segment lengths vary (3–7 minutes) to align with natural shifts in the talk’s content, ensuring each block covers a cohesive topic or argument. Mencken’s Conservatism by Benjamin Marks, Economics.org.au editor-in-chief I. Abstract Why did H.L. Mencken, the most eloquent and popular of libertarians, have the lowest of expectations for libertarian reform? One might think that grappling with this question would be a prerequisite of libertarian activism. One might also think that libertarians would show Mencken — whom they hold in high regard — the respect of dealing with his reasoning, just as they do to statists — whom they do not hold in high regard. Mencken found such situations amusing, predictable and inoperable. II. Introduction and Overview This essay emphasises Mencken’s conservatism above h

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 292. Karl-Peter Schwarz (Austria), Between Restitution and Re-Expropriation: Desocialization in Eastern Europe. This lecture is from the 2012 meeting of the Property and Freedom Society.  PFS 2012 Playlist. Transcript and Grok shownotes/summary below. Two-Paragraph Summary for Show Notes 0:01–15:00: The speaker, invited by Professor Hoppe to the Property and Freedom Society, opens with a reflection on speaking in a “temple of knowledge and liberty,” humorously referencing Roman customs of covering one’s head in temples, except for Kronos, the god of time, who reveals all truths. The talk focuses on historical crimes of expropriation and restitution in post-communist Eastern Europe, challenging the misconception that nationalization was exclusive to communism. The speaker outlines three forms of governmental theft—inflation, taxation, and mass expropriation—emphasizing the latter’s violence and prevalence across the 20th century, from the Balkan Wars to post-World War II population transfers. Specific examples include the expulsion of 3 million Germans from Czechoslovakia under President Beneš’s decrees, which nationalized 80% of the economy by 1948, and the broader displacement of millions across Europe, highlighting that democratic and totalitarian regimes alike engaged in these practices. 15:01–37:12: The speaker critiques the flawed restitution processes in post-communist states, particularly the Czech Republic and Slovenia, where arbitrary time limits (e.g., February 25, 1948, in Czechoslovakia) excluded many legitimate claims. Quoting Murray Rothbard’s Ethics of Liberty, the speaker argues that only restitution to original owners or their heirs upholds justice, yet privatization often benefited former communist elites, fostering oligarchic power structures. Cases like Elisa Fabriova and Prince Kinsky illustrate systemic barriers, with Czech courts and government manipulating legal processes to block aristocratic claims. In Slovenia, Luboš Šeš’s 20-year struggle for restitution yielded minimal recovery, hampered by retroactive laws and biased courts. The speaker concludes that these failures undermine the rule of law, perpetuate corruption, and pose security risks, urging moral clarity despite the unlikelihood of full redress, as time (Kronos) may not deliver justice. It was not included previously in the podcast since the video had been lost and I had assumed the audio had also been lost. However, I recently discovered the audio files for two of the speeches as well as Professor Hoppe’s Introductory and Concluding remarks had been preserved, namely those listed below. They are podcast here for the first time. Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey), Welcome and Introductions Karl-Peter Schwarz (Austria), Between Restitution and Re-Expropriation: Desocialization in Eastern Europe Benjamin Marks (Australia), On H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Concluding Remarks, Tributes, and Announcements Grok: Detailed Segment-by-Segment Summary for Show Notes Segment 1: Introduction and Context of Expropriation (0:01–6:00) Description: The speaker expresses honor and unease at speaking at the Property and Freedom Society, likening it to a “temple of knowledge.” They reference Roman customs of covering heads in temples, except for Kronos, symbolizing time’s revelation of truth. The talk’s theme is introduced: historical crimes of expropriation and their redress. The speaker, a journalist in post-communist countries since 1990, initially believed nationalization was communism’s hallmark but learned it was one of three governmental theft methods: inflation, taxation, and mass expropriation. The latter, often violent, occurred during revolutions or wars, not exclusively under communism. Summary: This opening sets a philosophical tone, framing expropriation as a timeless issue revealed by history. It broadens the scope beyond communism, preparing the audience for a critical examination of 20th-century property theft. Segment 2: Historical Examples of Expropriation and Population Transfers (6:01–12:00) Description: The speaker details 20th-century expropriations, starting with the Balkan Wars (1912–1913) and treaties like Neuilly and Lausanne, which displaced 3 million people. Post-World War I, 4–5 million lost property in new Wilsonian states. World War II and its aftermath saw 12 million Germans and others displaced, with 2 million deaths. In Czechoslovakia, President Beneš’s decrees expelled 3 million Germans, nationalizing 80% of the economy by 1948. The speaker emphasizes that democrats, not just communists, drove these policies, with confiscated lands redistributed or collectivized. Summary: This segment provides a historical overview, illustrating the scale and bipartisan nature of expropriations. It underscores the violent, systemic nature of property theft across regimes, setting up the restitution discussion. Segment 3: Flawed Restitution in Post-Communist States (12:01–20:00) Description: The speaker critiques post-communist restitution laws, particularly in Czechoslovakia, where the February 25, 1948, coup date arbitrarily limited claims. Quoting Rothbard’s Ethics of Liberty, they argue that privatization often enriched former communists, not original owners. The European Union ignored these injustices, and international law, like the Hull Formula, was disregarded. The Council of Europe’s 1996 resolution warned of oligarchic risks, advocating full restitution, but post-communist states favored privatization, perpetuating corruption. The speaker highlights ongoing communist influence, now as oligarchs controlling state institutions. Summary: This segment exposes the systemic failure of restitution, linking it to Rothbard’s principles and broader legal betrayals. It highlights how privatization entrenched former elites, undermining liberty and the rule of law. Segment 4: Case Studies of Restitution Failures (20:01–27:00) Description: Specific cases illustrate restitution barriers. In the Czech Republic, Elisa Fabriova’s claim was denied due to her father’s alleged German identity, despite his murder by Nazis. Prince Kinsky faced government obstruction, including falsified documents and wiretapping, with the “Kinsky Law” favoring public entities. In Slovenia, the speaker discusses the brutal communist era under Tito, where 200,000–300,000 were killed. The West’s leniency toward Tito, exemplified by Eleanor Roosevelt’s praise, ignored these crimes. These cases reflect broader patterns of legal manipulation and historical amnesia. Summary: This segment personalizes the restitution struggle through Fabriova and Kinsky, while Slovenia’s history under Tito highlights Western complicity. It reinforces the theme of systemic injustice in property redress. Segment 5: Luboš Šeš’s Struggle and Broader Implications (27:01–37:12) Description: The speaker details Luboš Šeš’s case in Slovenia, where he survived a death sentence and seven years’ imprisonment for anti-communist activities. After escaping, he sought restitution for his family’s textile factory, recovering only fragments after 20 years. Slovenia’s retroactive laws and biased courts, including judges tied to communism, blocked his claims. The European Court of Human Rights issued a minimal fine, ignoring deeper injustices. The speaker critiques utilitarian arguments against restitution (e.g., Tyler Cowen’s), arguing that verifiable claims deserve redress. They conclude that while justice may remain elusive, moral clarity is essential. Summary: Šeš’s story encapsulates the personal toll of restitution failures, with Slovenia’s legal system reflecting communist legacies. The segment calls for moral discernment, acknowledging time’s (Kronos’s) uncertain justice. Note: Segments range from 6–10 minutes, aligned with thematic shifts, ensuring each covers a distinct aspect of the talk, from historical context to specific case studies and broader implications. Transcript 0:01 by Professor Hoppe to speak here in this uh delicious 0:07 temple of knowledge and liberty of wisdom and 0:14 delight i was not only I didn’t only feel very honored but I also felt a 0:20 little bit uneasy because I considered various negative options not to be able 0:26 to uh come to your expectations but also I considered uh 0:33 marginal things for instance I thought whether it would be appropriate to cover my head talking 0:41 here because as you know the Romans when they went to the temples to worship the gods they covered the 0:48 head and they did it with every god and the meaning of this gesture was obvious 0:54 no so you you hide your weaknesses and you hide your sins from the gods but 1:01 there was one god a temple one temple in which they did not cover their heads and 1:07 this was the uh temple of Kronos the god of time and Blut in his fragments about 1:16 Roman customs explains why because he says time brings to light everything 1:23 sooner or later the truth comes out so it’s completely useless to cover your 1:29 head in the front of time uh time we need time to 1:35 understand and we know that developments uh occur in time and they show 1:43 themselves they reveal their real nature in time uh my argument touches time because it’s 1:51 about crimes historic crimes and uh the way how these crimes were redressed or 2:00 not redressed afterwards i came in 1990 a few weeks a few months 2:07 after the velvet revolution in Prague from Italy to uh to Czechoslovakia and 2:14 to work as a foreign correspondent in several uh postcommunist countries 2:19 when I came to Prague I still shared the common belief that nationalization 2:25 expropriation confiscation was a specific more or less 2:31 exclusive feature of communism it is not it is just one of 2:38 three possibilities of governmental theft the first one the easies

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 291. Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey), Welcome and Introductions. This lecture is from the 2012 meeting of the Property and Freedom Society.  PFS 2012 Playlist. It was not included previously in the podcast since the video had been lost and I had assumed the audio had also been lost. However, I recently discovered the audio files for two of the speeches as well as Professor Hoppe’s Introductory and Concluding remarks had been preserved, namely those listed below. They are podcast here for the first time. Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey), Welcome and Introductions Karl-Peter Schwarz (Austria), Between Restitution and Re-Expropriation: Desocialization in Eastern Europe Benjamin Marks (Australia), On H.L. Mencken as a Libertarian Model Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Concluding Remarks, Tributes, and Announcements

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 290. Bonus podcast episode: Professor Hoppe’s speech, The Ludwig von Mises Memorial Lecture presented at the Mises Institute’s Austrian Economics Research Conference (Fri., March 21, 2025; see Considerations and Reflections of a Veteran Reactionary Libertarian). The transcript is available at Hoppe, Considerations and Reflections of a Veteran Reactionary Libertarian (AERC 2025). In this speech, Professor Hoppe also talked a bit about what he was planning to do in in his PFS 2025 talk later in the year, “Democratic Peace and Re-Education: the German Experience,” 2025 Annual Meeting, Property and Freedom Society, Bodrum, Turkey (Sep. 20, 2025). Note Professor Hoppe extensively comments on the reaction to his previous criticism of Milei; see Hans-Hermann Hoppe, “Javier Milei” (PFS 2024); Hoppe, “What To Make of Milei,” LewRockwell.com (Oct. 3, 2024); and Kristoffer Mousten Hansen, “Hoppe versus Milei on Central Banking: Breaking Down the Differences,” Mises Wire (Feb. 6, 2025). He also discusses various other matters, such as the funding of the Frankfurt School by Felix Weil and its influence on Western Europe and on America (and its connection to “wokeism”); US worldwide hegemony since WWII and NATO provocations of Russia after the fall of the USSR, and its role in provoking the Russia-Ukraine conflict; the US role in the Israel-Hamas conflict and the influence of Israel over US policy and the dangerous alliance of the US and American “exceptionalism” paired with Israel’s “Chosen People” image.  

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 289. This panel discussion is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Ammous, Polleit, Hoppe, Kinsella, Hülsmann, Discussion, Q&A. See also Ammous, Polleit, Hoppe, Kinsella, Hülsmann, Discussion, Q&A. Other talks appear on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 288. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Germany/Turkey): “About Natural Order and its Destruction”. See also  “About Natural Order and its Destruction” Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 287. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Thorsten Polleit (Germany): “Immanuel Kant’s ‘Enlightenment’—One of the Sharpest Weapons for the Libertarian Fight”. See also “Immanuel Kant’s ‘Enlightenment’—One of the Sharpest Weapons for the Libertarian Fight”. Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 286. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Jörg Guido Hülsmann (Germany/France): “Coercive Democracy: A Critique”. See also Jörg Guido Hülsmann (Germany/France): “Coercive Democracy: A Critique”. Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 285. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Stephan Kinsella (USA): “Abortion: A Radically Decentralist Approach” See also Stephan Kinsella (USA): “Abortion: A Radically Decentralist Approach” Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist. Panel discussion:    

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 284. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Saifedean Ammous (Palestine/Jordan): “Can the Real Interest Rate Fall to Zero? What would that Imply?” See also Saifedean Ammous (Palestine/Jordan): “Can the Real Interest Rate Fall to Zero? What would that Imply?” Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.  

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 283. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Müller, Dürr, Deist, Gabb, Hoppe, Discussion, Q&A See also Müller, Dürr, Deist, Gabb, Hoppe, Discussion, Q&A Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.  

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 282. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Jeff Deist (USA): “A New Approach to Hoppe’s ‘Open Border Critics'” See also A New Approach to Hoppe’s ‘Open Border Critics’ Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.  

Property and Freedom Podcast, Episode 281. This talk is from the 18th annual 2024 Annual Meeting of the PFS (Sept. 19–24, 2024, Bodrum, Turkey). Alan Bickley (England): “What is Happening in Britain?” See also What is Happening in Britain? Other talks to follow in due course here on the Property and Freedom Podcast. Other videos may also be found at the PFS 2024 Youtube Playlist.