Enterprise of Law

This book, especially the last 3 chapters, may just possibly be one of the most important non-fiction works every written. When claptrap like Marx's "Das Kapital" and Keyne's "The General Theory" eventually find their way into the dustbin of history, Benson's brilliant, understated work will give freedom-loving individuals much to dwell upon concerning the uselessness of the forced monopoly of force we euphemistically call "govern"ment. Goes way beyond even Murray Rothbard's outstanding "Power and Market."

Do we need the State to produce law?There are libertarians aplenty who believe we do. Some of them have actually thought carefully about the issue, and some of them are merely Objectivists who have accepted Ayn Rand's oracular dismissal of anarchocapitalism in her (thoroughly statist) essay on "The Nature of Government." Both of these groups will benefit from a reading of Bruce Benson's fine volume.Benson picks up the argument where Murray Rothbard and David Friedman left it, and carries it forward by several miles. Here he provides a short history of market-based law, from its rise to its near-demise at the hands of "authoritarian" law; a public-choice analysis of the political market for law; an overview of recent trends toward reliance on private sources of law and justice; rebuttals of common arguments for the necessity of State law; and a short summary of what a private, non-State system of law might look like.There are treats throughout. Some of my favorites are Benson's replies to Landes and Posner -- e.g. their argument that "private" law is parasitic on legal standards developed in the public sector, and their claim that such "private" law would be less efficient than public law. (In general I am of the opinion that Richard Posner is one of the most overrated legal thinkers of the past century or two.)Benson is also exceptional among libertarian writers in his familiarity with the relevant legal literature. One of the other exceptions -- the altogether brilliant Randy Barnett (whose book _The Structure of Liberty_ belongs on your shelf next to this one) -- is credited by Benson for drawing the latter's attention to such literature and making some specific recommendations. The result, however achieved, is something all but unheard of in the libertarian world: a volume on liberty that actually acknowledges the existence of such legal theorists as Lon Fuller.That's a nice feature in a book on law. I would like to see Benson's book (and its excellent sequel, _To Serve and Protect_) read by both libertarians and lawyers, and I'm happy he's written a book that the latter group won't toss away in disgust at the childish ignorance of the author. We have enough of those books already (and I think Rand wrote or influenced most of them).In general, the more people that read this book, the better. If nothing else, this book will shake an assumption that badly needs shaking: that there must be a State in order for there to be law.(By the way, you'll find Benson referring occasionally to George H. Smith's fine essay, "Justice Entrepreneurship in a Free Market." Originally published in the _Journal of Libertarian Studies_, that essay is reprinted in _Atheism, Ayn Rand, and Other Heresies_.)

At one stage in my education as a libertarian I had come to believe that most human needs (including for instance streets, education, and even fire protection) could be satisfied best by private companies. But I still thought that probably law must be provided by the government. It was hard for me to imagine how justice could be provided without the state.Then I read this book. With compelling historical evidence it shatters the myth that government must have a monopoly in administering law.Well written. Clear. Thorough.

Those puzzled or dissatisfied with verdicts in government courts (eg the Simpson case, or the Tucker execution) will find here a refreshing and mind-blowing alternative. Instead of tinkering with the system (more jury power or less, death penalty or not...) Benson goes to the root of the malfunctions and asks why government, which cannot even deliver the mail on time, should be authorized to administer the most critical aspect of a free society: justice. His answer is that it need not; that a far better, fairer, more JUST system would be delivered by the free market. And he visualizes in some detail how it would probably develop.