Liberties and Markets argues both that libertarianism based on consequentialist moral reasoning is internally inconsistent and that alternative “deontological libertarianisms” face different problems than those emphasized by Jonathan Wolff. Libertarians, I claim, can respond convincingly to most of the arguments advanced against them by Wolff. But these responses are not adequate to defend the libertarian position; for any arguments that could demonstrate the existence of moral rights that would be sufficient to underpin libertarian economic ideals would also imply the existence of rights inconsistent with those ideals.
Issue 7
Libertarianism, Utility and Economic Competition
Libertarianism is defined both by its foundations and by the institutions to which it typically is said to give rise. In this paper it is argued that while a system of economic competition can be defended on consequentialist grounds, such arguments are not available to deontological libertarians. Thus it is concluded that deontological libertarians cannot provide a foundation for the type of economic system they favour.
Contract Theory On and Off the Grid
In The Role of Formal Contract Law and Enforcement in Economic Development, Michael Trebilcock and Jing Leng examine the importance of a formal institution of contract law to economic growth. Trebilcock and Leng find the evidence in support of the hypothesis that a formal contract institution promotes economic growth inconclusive, but they do not reject the hypothesis. Although the role of formal contract law in economic growth can be considered as a purely academic matter, the significance of the topic comes from its connection to the question whether developing countries should adopt or strengthen formal contract institutions to enhance growth.
Even if formal contract law does play an important role in development, however, that might not be sufficient to justify state enforcement of private agreements. The legitimacy of an institution of contract belongs to the domain of contract theory. This Essay considers whether contemporary theories of contract are relevant to legal systems without an established tradition of Western legal institutions. The Essay reviews contract theories of Peter Benson, Melvin Eisenberg, Charles Fried, James Gordley, Thomas Scanlon and Michael Trebilcock. The Essay concludes that even if a formal institution of contract does have the potential to promote growth, these contemporary theories tell us very little about the proper content, desirability, or legitimacy of contract law in societies other than those in which Western private law institutions are already well established.