Your gateway to a free society
Book
Who Stole Feminism?
Philosophy professor Christina Sommers has exposed a disturbing development: how a group of zealots, claiming to speak for all women, are promoting a dangerous new agenda that threatens our most cherished ideals and sets women against men in all spheres of life. In case after case, Sommers shows how these extremists have propped up their arguments with highly questionable but well-funded research, presenting inflammatory and often inaccurate information and stifling any semblance of free and open scrutiny. Trumpeted as orthodoxy, the resulting "findings" on everything from rape to domestic abuse to economic bias to the supposed crisis in girls' self-esteem perpetuate a view of women as victims of the "patriarchy". Moreover, these arguments and the supposed facts on which they are based have had enormous influence beyond the academy, where they have shaken the foundations of our educational, scientific, and legal institutions and have fostered resentment and alienation in our private lives. Despite its current dominance, Sommers maintains, such a breed of feminism is at odds with the real aspirations and values of most American women and undermines the cause of true equality. Who Stole Feminism? is a call to arms that will enrage or inspire, but cannot be ignored.
aboutLiberty Portal
Liberty Portal is your gateway for free markets and free thinking. We aggregate open-sourced content to promote and popularize important people and lessons within the liberty movement.
suggested
Hans Herman Hoppe
The Economics and Ethics of Private Property
"Do not steal" is an excellent principle of ethics; it is also the first principle of sound economic systems. In our time, no one has done more than Hans-Hermann Hoppe to elaborate on the sociological implications of this truth. And this is his great work on the topic.
Read more
FA Hayek
The Fatal Conceit: The Errors Of Socialism
Hayek gives the main arguments for the free-market case and presents his manifesto on the "errors of socialism." Hayek argues that socialism has, from its origins, been mistaken on factual, and even on logical, grounds and that its repeated failures in the many different practical applications of socialist ideas that this century has witnessed were the direct outcome of these errors. He labels as the "fatal conceit" the idea that "man is able to shape the world around him according to his wishes."
"The achievement of The Fatal Conceit is that it freshly shows why socialism must be refuted rather than merely dismissed—then refutes it again."—David R. Henderson, Fortune.
"Fascinating. . . . The energy and precision with which Mr. Hayek sweeps away his opposition is impressive."—Edward H. Crane, Wall Street Journal
F. A. Hayek is considered a pioneer in monetary theory, the preeminent proponent of the libertarian philosophy, and the ideological mentor of the Reagan and Thatcher "revolutions."
Read more"The achievement of The Fatal Conceit is that it freshly shows why socialism must be refuted rather than merely dismissed—then refutes it again."—David R. Henderson, Fortune.
"Fascinating. . . . The energy and precision with which Mr. Hayek sweeps away his opposition is impressive."—Edward H. Crane, Wall Street Journal
F. A. Hayek is considered a pioneer in monetary theory, the preeminent proponent of the libertarian philosophy, and the ideological mentor of the Reagan and Thatcher "revolutions."
Stefan Molyneux
Everyday Anarchy: The Freedom of Now
The word “anarchy” evokes images of dangerous mobs, spiky-haired youths hurling garbage cans through Starbucks windows, and the chaos of the war of all against all.
However, the word “anarchy” simply means “without rulers” - and this state of affairs is something we desperately desire and defend in so many areas of our own lives. If a political ruler were to tell us who to marry, what to learn, and which job to take, we would rebel against such tyrannical intrusions on our freedoms. If the government were to tell us what to read, want to watch and what to listen to, we would justifiably cry “censorship” and lead the charge against such mind control.
How can we reconcile this contradiction? Is being “without rulers” good, or bad? How can we fear something so terribly, while at the same time treasuring it so mightily?
“Everyday Anarchy” addresses this challenge head-on, arguing that being free of rulers is not something to fear - personally or politically - but rather a goal that we must constantly strive
Read moreHowever, the word “anarchy” simply means “without rulers” - and this state of affairs is something we desperately desire and defend in so many areas of our own lives. If a political ruler were to tell us who to marry, what to learn, and which job to take, we would rebel against such tyrannical intrusions on our freedoms. If the government were to tell us what to read, want to watch and what to listen to, we would justifiably cry “censorship” and lead the charge against such mind control.
How can we reconcile this contradiction? Is being “without rulers” good, or bad? How can we fear something so terribly, while at the same time treasuring it so mightily?
“Everyday Anarchy” addresses this challenge head-on, arguing that being free of rulers is not something to fear - personally or politically - but rather a goal that we must constantly strive
support
If you like what we do and want to support us, then you are a fine humanitarian. Click the link below to find out more.
Want to get in touch?