• "Well written, well researched, and the thesis put forth is well argued.... Woods has opened up an area of historical analysis that should invite further study."
    -Journal of American History

  • "During these times that challenge our freedoms there is no one more qualified to make U.S. history relevant to the fight against big government than Thomas Woods."
    -Barry Goldwater Jr.
    Former Member of Congress

  • "I strongly recommend Woods's work."
    -The Honorable Ron Paul,
    U.S. House of Representatives

  • "Written with great clarity and fluency, making the complex philosophical and theological concepts approachable."
    -Journal of American Studies

  • "A must-read."
    -Barron's

  • "An excellent reading source for anyone interested in financial markets, and much more so for anyone interested in learning about capitalism without all the misinterpretations being thrown about in the financial media."
    -Asia Times

  • "Provocative, well-written, and deserves to be read."
    -Catholic Historical Review

  • "An engaging and important contribution to scholarship on the history of American Catholicism."
    -Journal of the Historical Society

  • "Woods and [co-author Kevin] Gutzman appeal to both left and right in this constitutionalist jeremiad…. The authors' exegeses of the Constitution and court decisions, heavy on original intent arguments, are lucid and telling."
    -Publishers Weekly

  • "A marvelous read. Every chapter taught me something new and unexpected."
    -Tom Bethell, senior editor,
    The American Spectator

  • "The hottest book today is Meltdown, by my friend Tom Woods."
    -Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst,
    FOX News Channel

  • "Should be required reading."
    -Economic Affairs (London)

  • "Woods, one of the best classical liberal [libertarian] scholars of his generation, has once more placed us in his debt with this lucid and tightly argued book."
    -David Gordon, The Mises Review

  • "Tom Woods is one of my dearest allies in the struggle against wrong-headed and dangerous economic policy."
    -Peter Schiff

Progressives Should Support Nullification

So says Joel Poindexter over at the Tenth Amendment Center. He says it would have been worth it for them to try state-level resistance to odious measures of the Bush Administration, and that it can be used against various other federal outrages. In my experience with progressives (a term they don’t deserve, in general), a commitment to nationalism, or simply to conventional thinking, seems to trump everything else, and so decentralization hardly ever gains traction. At the same time, the other day Naomi Wolf’s Facebook page linked to a lecture I gave on nullification and the Principles of ’98. So I guess you never know.

Unlearn the Propaganda!

  • anon

    Wow – categorizing naomi in the category with obama and other so-called progressives is quite surprizing as naomi gaining traction would be one of their worst fears.

    Naomi Wolf’s beliefs/philosophies are infact in the libertarian category. And she is definately part of the anti-estabilshment and liberty movement, regardless of what labels others put on her. Correctly, she is quite intelligent and insightful in calling for coalitions to work together and working together to overturn establishment and hammering out differences in legislation. She has the right formula.

    Is it true that rp republicans adhering to the definition of ‘right’ and ‘left/progressives’ that mainstream media (incl fox and glennbeck/limbaugh) teaches. And are they against working in coalitions, and that it is their way or the highway though no real plans have been rolled out other than theory, especially one for foreign policy.

    Republicans are infact ‘progressives’ as well. They are indeed on the left, masquerading as the ‘right’. So to call one left and the other one right is a win for establishment. Conservatives/republicans, just like their other half and partners called ‘progressives’ by media, are equally against decentralization, conventional thinking, and even more ‘nationalists’ with their policy on having bases in all countries. Look at their policies and voting record and you will see they are virtually mirror images of each other that can’t live without each other.

  • http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

    I did not conflate Naomi Wolf and Obama.

  • Peter

    I wouldn’t be so quick to call her a libertarian. On civil liberties she seems pretty solid as you say, it’s hard to gather her views on economic liberties.

    For example, her views on climate change don’t seem very libertarian:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/08/america-drought-political-will-climate-change

    Clearly she is in the camp of the “government, please fix climate change by restricting our liberties” camp. Which is fine, it’s just not libertarian.

  • Franklin

    Rubbish. Naomi’s shallow “philosophies” and stances are statist to the end, so long as they are mandates to support her pet whines and so-called social injustices.
    “…coalitions to work together… ” Pffft. Stop the nonsense.
    However, your comment that Republicans are basically frauds is correct.

Find me on Google