The Problem of Political Authority

The Problem of Political Authority

Cover of the first edition
Author	Michael Huemer
Country	United States
Language	English
Subject	Political philosophy
Published	January 2013 (Palgrave Macmillan)
Media type	Print
Pages	394
ISBN

The Problem of Political Authority: An Examination of the Right to Coerce and the Duty to Obey is a book by University of Colorado philosophy professor Michael Huemer released in January 2013. The first part of the book argues in detail for philosophical anarchism and refutes the legitimacy of political authority, while the second addresses political anarchism and the practical viability of anarcho-capitalism.

In April 2011, while he was still writing the book (then titled Freedom and Authority), Huemer was profiled by the Arts and Sciences Magazine of the University of Colorado, Boulder. The profile quoted Huemer as saying that political authority is "a moral illusion we’re suffering from."

In May 2012, a few months prior to the publication of the book, Huemer defended the argument of the book in a video.

In the months leading up to the release of the book, Huemer's UC Berkeley schoolmate and fellow anarcho-capitalist, economist Bryan Caplan, played an important role in evangelizing Huemer's book by way of his blog, EconLog, as noted by a number of reviewers of the book. Caplan used EconLog to solicit potential titles for the book, although none of the titles suggested in the comments was ultimately adopted. Caplan argued that what made Huemer's book special was that it started from reasonable and common-sense moral premises that many non-libertarians would agree with and applied them consistently to reach radical libertarian conclusions, setting the book apart from the writings of people like Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, and Robert Nozick. Caplan also used his blog to solicit reader questions on Huemer's book.

Ole Martin Moen of the University of Oslo, Norway, reviewed the book in Philosophical Quarterly. Moen concluded his review by writing: "In addition to being a solid scholarly work, Huemer’s book will work well as assigned reading in classes on political philosophy. It is bound to spark debate, and its inclusion would help remedy the sad fact that anarchism is often either ignored or put aside without serious engagement. This is a pity, for even if one rejects his conclusions, Huemer makes it clear that anarchism is a sophisticated theory that deserves careful consideration."