1. Explain Nozick’s argument for how you the state can come about without actually intending to create the state. Explain why this argument does not violate anyone’s rights.
2. Explain Rothbard’s anarchist society and how it works. In what ways is Rothbard’s anarchism similar to or different from Nozick’s state of nature?
3. Is it possible to start with Rothbard’s anarchist society and then end up with a state without violating anyone’s rights (is it possible that something like Nozick’s explanation could lead to the state)? Why or why not? Justify your answer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *