Are the political ideals of liberty and equality compatible? This question is of central and continuing importance in political philosophy, moral philosophy, and welfare economics. In this book, two distinguished philosophers take up the debate. Jan Narveson, author of The Libertarian Idea, argues that a political ideal of negative liberty is incompatible with any substantive ideal of equality; while James P. Sterba, author of Justice for Here and Now, argues that Narveson’s own ideal of negative liberty is compatible with, and in fact leads to the requirements of, a substantive ideal of equality. Of course, they cannot both be right. Thus, the details of their arguments about the political ideal of negative liberty and its requirements will determine which of them is right. Their debate will be of value to all who are interested in the central issue of what are the practical requirements of a political ideal of liberty.
Featuring Holly Bell, Associate Professor (Business), University of Alaska Anchorage; and Hester Peirce, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center; moderated by Louise C. Bennetts, Associate Director, Financial Regulation Studies, Cato Institute.
- Legal Briefs
- Cato Handbook for Policymakers
- Cato Journal
- Cato's Letter
- Cato's Letters
- Cato Papers on Public Policy
- Cato Policy Report
- Cato State Legislative Guide
- Cracking the Books
- Economic Freedom of the States of India
- Economic Freedom of the World
- Public Comments
- Supreme Court Review
In this issue of Regulation, Jonathan H. Adler and Nathaniel Stewart make the case for property-based fishery management, utilizing territorial or catch-share allocation among fishery participants. Also in this issue, Michael L. Wachter explores the relationship between the much-maligned National Labor Relations Act and the decline in union membership.
Robert A. Levy discusses the Hobby Lobby case and the contraception insurance mandate on The Bob Harden Show
April 16, 2014
April 16, 2014
Latest CommentaryThe president is literally forcing taxpayers, without any legal authorization, to subsidize two out of every three Exchange enrollments.
Timothy Sandefur’s insightful new book documents a vital, forgotten truth: our Constitution was written to secure liberty, not to empower democracy.