The Voluntary Life

Епизоде

• 
  Three Views of the Relationship Between Parents and Political Authority 13.09.2026 3мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Three Views of the Relationship Between Parents and Political Authority' by Jake Desyllas. Philosophy of the family looks like one of the least political subjects there is. This episode argues the opposite: that it is one of the most political, and that the philosophers who write about parents and children usually have an agenda they are not advertising. The perennial problem for rulers is that obedience has no good justification, and forcing an outnumbered majority is expensive — so it is far cheaper to persuade, and cheapest of all to persuade people while they are children. That raises a question the philosophical tradition has answered in three incompatible ways: are parents the State's allies in producing obedient subjects, an obstacle to be dismantled, or the last line of defence against political authority? This opening episode sets out all three positions and the interests behind them. First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/4/3/three-views-of-the-relationship-between-parents-and-political-authority on 3 April 2025.
• 
  What Is The Libertarian Theory of Parental Obligations? JLS Article With Footnotes 09.09.2026 1ч 2мин

  An AI narration of the article 'What Is The Libertarian Theory of Parental Obligations?' by Jake Desyllas. This article examines four competing philosophical theories of the parental role within a libertarian framework: parental ownership, parenting as charity, parenting as voluntary social contract, and causal parental responsibility. It critically analyzes each theory, evaluating its logical implications—particularly concerning the legitimacy of enforceable parental obligations—and its compatibility with libertarian principles. The article argues that the first three theories are unsound and incompatible with libertarianism. In contrast, it defends the theory of causal parental responsibility as the only sound framework consistent with libertarian philosophy, grounding enforceable parental obligations in the creation of peril. This analysis seeks to resolve long-standing debates and establish a coherent libertarian theory of parental obligation. Chapters: 0:00 Abstract 1:00 Introduction 3:22 The Theory of Parental Ownership 9:46 The Theory of Parenting as Charity 22:07 The Theory of Parenting as Voluntary Social Contract 30:07 The Theory of Causal Parental Responsibility 53:13 Parental Obligations in Contemporary Libertarian Thought 59:51 Conclusion First published at https://jls.mises.org/article/141458-what-is-the-libertarian-theory-of-parental-obligations on 1 July 2025.
• 
  When do Parental Obligations Not Apply? 06.09.2026 3мин

  An AI narration of the article 'When do Parental Obligations Not Apply?' by Jake Desyllas. The causal theory of parental responsibility grounds positive obligations in the fact that, by creating a child, parents place that child in a state of peril. But if obligations follow from action, what about the cases where a child comes into existence without the parent having acted in the relevant sense? In this short piece, Jake works through the principled exceptions: rape, gamete theft, paternity fraud, gestational surrogacy, and a pregnancy that endangers the mother's life. Each case is a test of the theory's internal logic — and a clarifier of where parental obligations begin and end. The piece also draws an implication for the abortion debate, distinguishing the consensual-sex case from the rape case on grounds that follow directly from the causal theory. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 0:29 Rape 1:31 Gamete Theft 2:28 Paternity Fraud 3:01 Gestational Surrogacy 3:20 Endangered Life Of The Mother During Pregnancy First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/7/13/when-do-parental-obligations-apply on 13 July 2024.
• 
  Objections Against The State-Of-Peril Argument For Parental Obligations 30.08.2026 22мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Objections Against The State-Of-Peril Argument For Parental Obligations' by Jake Desyllas. Critics of the state-of-peril argument for parental obligations have raised many objections — that creating a child is not aggression and so cannot generate duties, that unborn children are themselves the aggressors, that giving life is so great a gift it nullifies all further claims, that adoptive parents disprove any causal theory, that the chain of causation is impossibly tangled. In this post Jake works through ten such objections one by one, drawn from libertarian and analytic-philosophy critics including Brake, Block, Evers, Long, Dominiak, and Brighouse and Swift. A pattern emerges: when each objection is examined, the case for parental obligation only sharpens. Many of the standard counter-arguments turn out to be assertions rather than refutations, or to collapse into ad hominem. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 0:31 Objection 1: Creating A Child Is Not An Act of Aggression and Therefore Does Not Incur Obligations 1:48 Objection 2: Obligations Are Only Valid If Voluntarily Agreed To 3:27 Objection 3: Unborn Children Initiate Aggression Against Their Mothers 5:31 Objection 4: Giving Life Is A Net Benefit And Therefore Parents Are Not Obligated Further 9:51 Objection 5: Adoptive Parents Disprove The Causal Theory of Parental Obligation 12:16 Objection 6: It is Too Difficult to Determine Who Caused a Baby to Exist Therefore Parents Don't Have Obligations by Cause 14:45 Objection 7: Causal Action Leads To Insufficient Parental Obligations 16:49 Objection 8: Creation of Peril Only Occurs if Someone's Rights Have Already Been Violated but Creating a Child Does Not Violate Rights 18:30 Objection 9: The Non-Identity Problem Means There Is No Creation of Peril 19:48 Objection 10: The Concept of Parental Obligations Is Merely a Cover for Prejudice or Ulterior Motives First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/6/27/objections-against-the-state-of-peril-argument-for-parental-obligations on 27 June 2024.
• 
  Support for Abortion Has Corrupted Libertarian Theory 23.08.2026 9мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Support for Abortion Has Corrupted Libertarian Theory' by Jake Desyllas. Libertarian philosophy ought to offer a coherent and beautiful account of family life: parents bear responsibility for the children they create, parental authority and its limits flow from that responsibility, and children are recognised as individuals with inherent rights. Modern libertarianism does none of this. In this episode Jake argues that the corruption can be traced to a single assumption adopted in the mid-twentieth century: that libertarian theory must justify abortion. To accommodate that one position, libertarians have denied parental obligations, swapped a theory of inherent rights for one of acquired rights, abandoned the presumption of innocence, and written fathers out of the family entirely. Each distortion follows from the same root error — and each disappears once that error is corrected. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:49 The Denial of Parental Responsibility 2:58 The Distortion of Rights Theory 5:08 The Abandonment of The Presumption of Innocence 6:21 The Invisibility of Fathers in Libertarian Theory 8:21 Conclusion First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/8/20/support-for-abortion-has-corrupted-libertarian-theory on 20 August 2024.
• 
  Opponents of Parental Responsibility Cannot Help Conceding The Argument 16.08.2026 11мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Opponents of Parental Responsibility Cannot Help Conceding The Argument' by Jake Desyllas. The principle that parents have causal responsibility for the children they create is so undeniable that even its most prominent opponents end up making the argument for it themselves. In this article Jake works through four examples: Judith Jarvis Thomson, Murray Rothbard, Elizabeth Brake, and Roderick Long. Each is committed to denying causal parental obligation in defence of abortion, yet each in turn lays out the very case they are trying to refute — whether by conceding that "partial responsibility" can ground a right, by setting out the moral duty of parents to raise their children to independence, or by demonstrating how negative rights generate enforceable positive obligations through the creation of peril. Their motivated reasoning collapses under the weight of their own logic. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 0:27 Judith Jarvis Thomson 3:26 Murray Rothbard 4:52 Elizabeth Brake 7:44 Roderick Long First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/12/30/opponents-of-parental-responsibility-cannot-help-conceding-the-argument on 30 December 2024.
• 
  Abortion is Incompatible With Parental Obligations 09.08.2026 10мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Abortion is Incompatible With Parental Obligations' by Jake Desyllas. If parents are causally responsible for the peril they place a child in by bringing them into existence, what does that imply for abortion? Jake traces a striking line of argument first sketched by Richard Werner in 1974 and made explicit by Doris Gordon a few years later: causal parental obligations begin at conception, and abortion is therefore incompatible with them. Werner dismantles Judith Jarvis Thomson's famous burglar analogy and offers a strict-liability gun analogy in its place. Gordon, an Ayn Rand disciple who went on to found Libertarians for Life, shows why the standard Objectivist defence of abortion contradicts the Objectivist account of parental responsibility. Those who deny the incompatibility must abandon causal parental responsibility altogether and resort to a voluntary social-contract theory of parenting. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:04 Richard Werner's Argument 3:51 Doris Gordon and the Objectivist Origin 8:59 The Logical Argument First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/11/18/abortion-is-incompatible-with-parental-obligations on 18 November 2024.
• 
  The Only Ideal of Libertarianism is Peace 02.08.2026 3мин

  An AI narration of the article 'The Only Ideal of Libertarianism is Peace' by Jake Desyllas. Libertarianism is usually defended on the grounds of individual freedom, economic prosperity, or the rejection of hierarchy and tradition. In this article, Jake argues that all of these are downstream of a single, more fundamental ideal: peace. Ethics, correctly conceived, exists to resolve conflict over scarce resources peacefully — and the objective property rights that follow are the means, not the end. Freedom and prosperity are empirical consequences of implementing peace, not goals in themselves. The practical implication is that libertarians should focus first on whatever most threatens peace: war abroad, and aggression against property at home — whether by the State or by private criminals. First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/10/4/the-only-ideal-of-libertarianism-is-peace on 4 October 2024.
• 
  A Critique of George H. Smith's Theory of Parental Obligations 26.07.2026 7мин

  An AI narration of the article 'A Critique of George H. Smith's Theory of Parental Obligations' by Jake Desyllas. George H. Smith wrote more about children's rights than almost any other libertarian, yet when he came to set out his own theory of the parental role he advocated a version of parenting as a voluntary social contract between parents and society at large. In this episode, Jake examines the argument Smith made in his 2013 Cato Institute essay, shows why it cannot account for any enforceable duty that parents owe their children, and asks why Smith reached for this flawed theory in the first place, despite being aware of the rival causal theory of parental responsibility. The conjecture: Smith's prior commitment to defending abortion ruled out the one theory that would have served him best. Another case study in how support for abortion has corrupted libertarian theory. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:20 Smith's Theory 4:27 Smith's Motivation First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/9/3/a-critique-of-george-h-smiths-theory-of-parental-obligations on 3 September 2025.
• 
  The First Extreme Saver 19.07.2026 4мин

  An AI narration of the article 'The First Extreme Saver' by Jake Desyllas. Extreme saving — putting away fifty percent or more of your income to reach financial independence within a decade — feels like a recent invention, the work of FIRE bloggers and Joe Dominguez's *Your Money Or Your Life*. It isn't. In this episode Jake traces the idea back to the Victorian bestseller Samuel Smiles, whose 1875 book *Thrift* made the case to ordinary working people that saving was both a personal virtue and a social good, and casually recommended savings rates that today's audiences would find startling. The piece is a short reminder that frugality and long-horizon thinking used to be mainstream advice, not a fringe lifestyle — and an invitation to ask why that shifted. First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2016/11/4/the-first-extreme-saver on 14 November 2016.
• 
  A Critique of Roderick Long's Theory Of Parental Obligations 12.07.2026 13мин

  An AI narration of the article 'A Critique of Roderick Long's Theory Of Parental Obligations' by Jake Desyllas. Roderick Long sets out a clear version of the causal-peril principle: if your voluntary actions place another person in danger, you acquire an enforceable obligation to get them out of peril. But when Long applies this principle to parenthood, his arguments are inconsistent. Fathers, on Long's account, are bound by their causal actions. Mothers escape causal responsibility entirely, acquiring obligations only by the choice not to abort. This episode walks through the contradictions: the gender double standard Long openly acknowledges and refuses to resolve, the strange "reversal of responsibility" that treats unborn children as agents using their mothers' bodies, the matriarchal property-right framing in which fathers are obligated only if mothers permit it, and his ad-hominem dismissal of the causal obligations argument. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 3:33 Men Have Responsibility For Their Actions, But Women Don't 5:04 Pregnancy Creates Special Exemptions For Women Being Responsible For Their Actions 7:38 Reversal of Responsibility 8:57 A Matriarchal Theory Of Parental Ownership 10:19 Dismissing Parental Obligations As Mere Sexism 11:34 Conclusion First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/9/23/a-critique-of-roderick-longs-theory-of-parental-obligations on 23 September 2025.
• 
  What The Declaration of Independence Should Have Said 04.07.2026 2мин

  An AI narration of the article 'What The Declaration of Independence Should Have Said' by Jake Desyllas. The preamble of the US Declaration of Independence is among the most influential passages in the history of libertarian thought — but does it actually hold up to the way libertarians now think about rights? In this short piece, Jake Desyllas proposes a rewrite. He argues that "all men are created equal" claims more than is self-evident, that "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" obscures the underlying property-rights framework, and that the preamble's commitment to self-evident truths is better grounded in claims that cannot be denied without contradiction. The result is a tighter, more rigorous foundation for rights: self ownership, homesteading, and voluntary agreement, with universal law applying equally to all. First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/11/28/what-the-declaration-of-independence-should-have-said on 28 November 2024.
• 
  Children Do Not Have Obligations to Their Parents 28.06.2026 5мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Children Do Not Have Obligations to Their Parents' by Jake Desyllas. In a libertarian legal order, parents owe positive obligations to their children — to feed, shelter, and protect them — because the parents' own actions brought the child into existence. But does the relationship run the other way? Do grown children owe their parents care in old age? In this short piece Jake argues no: legitimate positive obligations arise only from one's own actions, and a child has not acted to create the relationship he is born into. He examines Andrew J. Peach's case for "unchosen" filial obligations and finds it unjustified, then turns to a different question — whether young children have a moral, though unenforceable, duty to obey their parents in cases where paternal protection is warranted. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:34 The Peach Counter-argument 4:16 Children's Obligations During Childhood First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/5/22/children-do-not-have-obligations-to-their-parents on 22 May 2025.
• 
  The Theory Of Acquired Rights Violates Hoppe's Specificity Principle 21.06.2026 9мин

  An AI narration of the article 'The Theory Of Acquired Rights Violates Hoppe's Specificity Principle' by Jake Desyllas. Do we have rights because of what we are, or because of some capacity we later acquire? Libertarians are split, and the stakes run straight through the hardest questions about children, abortion, and self-ownership. This episode tests the two rival theories against one of Hans-Hermann Hoppe's meta-ethical principles: that every property right must be specific about who holds it and when. Drawing on admissions from Tibor Machan, Judith Jarvis Thomson, and Stephan Kinsella, it argues that the theory of acquired rights cannot say when a child becomes a self-owner, and so fails the test on its own terms. The theory of inherent rights, which locates the start of rights at conception, does not. A short, sharp piece on a meta-ethical principle with large consequences. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 2:25 The theory of acquired rights is not specific about when a child becomes a self owner 7:29 The Theory of Inherent Rights Conforms To The Specificity Principle First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/1/21/the-theory-of-acquired-rights-violates-hoppes-specificity-principle on 21 January 2025.
• 
  Three Questions Philosophers Do Not Want To Answer About Parenting 14.06.2026 6мин

  An AI narration of the article 'Three Questions Philosophers Do Not Want To Answer About Parenting' by Jake Desyllas. Why are books on the ethics of parenting so consistently dull? In this episode, Jake Desyllas argues that the blandness is no accident — it is the product of strategic omission. Philosophers of the family routinely skirt around questioning the practices that most urgently deserve scrutiny: corporal punishment, circumcision, and abortion. These are widely accepted parental practices that are also ethically indefensible, and they constitute acts of aggression by parents that violate the rights of their children. Drawing on Patrick Lenta, Walter Block and Patrick Testa, and Brad Stetson, Jake explains how this silence functions as conformity to intellectual taboo — and why refusing to address such questions is an abdication of the basic responsibility of a philosopher. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 2:35 Corporal Punishment 3:38 Circumcision 4:24 Abortion 6:06 Recent Practices to Add to the List First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/2/5/three-questions-philosophers-do-not-want-to-answer-about-parenting on 5 February 2025.
• 
  The Cost of Bad Street Design 10.06.2026 28мин

  An AI narration of the article 'The Cost of Bad Street Design' by Jake Desyllas. In this article, Jake Desyllas examines the hidden costs of a design ideology that came to dominate twentieth-century traffic planning: the idea that pedestrians and vehicles must be physically segregated, with streets re-engineered as conduits for through traffic. Drawing on his work in a pedestrian movement consultancy, he traces the lineage from Herbert Alker Tripp's 1940s advocacy of "fencing off the perils" through the influential 1963 Buchanan report, and shows how the resulting guard-rails, underpasses and signalised crossings produce the opposite of what they promise. The casualties are not only the obvious ones — dislocated communities, dying high streets, declining walking, rising obesity — but the loss of streets themselves as places where everyday life happens. An invitation to question whether the segregated, single-use street is really the only way. Chapters: 0:00 Title 0:05 Introduction 3:03 The consequences of bad street design 4:31 Planning for traffic 8:29 Reshaping our cities 12:44 Dangerous streets 17:16 The death of walking 22:04 Alternative solutions 25:11 Conclusion First published in 2006 by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment.
• 
  A Critique of Nozick's Comments on Parental Obligations and Children's Rights 07.06.2026 13мин

  An AI narration of the article 'A Critique of Nozick's Comments on Parental Obligations and Children's Rights' by Jake Desyllas. Robert Nozick's commentary on Locke's theory of homesteading contains two genuinely sharp insights into the problem of children's rights: that Locke's God-as-creator argument conceded the principle that children are ownable rather than refuting it, and that Locke's same move undermined any causal grounding for parental responsibility. Yet having identified the problem so clearly, Nozick refused to do the work of solving it — leaving the homework for someone else and, in later writing, drifting into shallow speculations about children as extensions of their parents. This essay walks through Nozick's insights, his refusal to put forward his own theory, and what his stance reveals about a philosopher who preferred clever exploration to firm conclusions. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 3:36 Nozick's First Insight: Locke Conceded That Children Are Ownable 4:36 Nozick's Second Insight: Locke Denied Causal Parental Responsibility 5:56 What Did Nozick Argue About Parental Obligations? 7:13 What Did Nozick Argue About Children's Rights? 10:19 Maybe Nozick Just Didn't Care First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2025/2/26/a-critique-of-nozicks-comments-on-parental-obligations-and-childrens-rights on 26 February 2025.
• 
  What Is The Libertarian Theory of Parental Obligations? JLS Article 03.06.2026 43мин

  Article only version An AI narration of the article 'What Is The Libertarian Theory of Parental Obligations?' by Jake Desyllas. This article examines four competing philosophical theories of the parental role within a libertarian framework: parental ownership, parenting as charity, parenting as voluntary social contract, and causal parental responsibility. It critically analyzes each theory, evaluating its logical implications—particularly concerning the legitimacy of enforceable parental obligations—and its compatibility with libertarian principles. The article argues that the first three theories are unsound and incompatible with libertarianism. In contrast, it defends the theory of causal parental responsibility as the only sound framework consistent with libertarian philosophy, grounding enforceable parental obligations in the creation of peril. This analysis seeks to resolve long-standing debates and establish a coherent libertarian theory of parental obligation. Chapters: 0:00 Abstract 1:00 Introduction 3:06 The Theory of Parental Ownership 7:29 The Theory of Parenting as Charity 17:33 The Theory of Parenting as Voluntary Social Contract 24:19 The Theory of Causal Parental Responsibility 36:30 Parental Obligations in Contemporary Libertarian Thought 41:06 Conclusion First published at https://jls.mises.org/article/141458-what-is-the-libertarian-theory-of-parental-obligations on 1 July 2025.
• 
  You Cannot Give Up Parental Obligations 31.05.2026 13мин

  An AI narration of the article 'You Cannot Give Up Parental Obligations' by Jake Desyllas. Parental obligations exist because creating a child places that child in a state of peril, and the parents are the ones causally responsible for that peril. From this foundation, Jake draws an unsettling conclusion: those obligations cannot be legitimately given up. Through carefully constructed thought experiments — a bonfire that endangers a neighbour's house, a swimmer pushed into a lake — he shows that delegating the task to someone else does not erase the original obligation. The argument cuts across unintended parenthood, adoption, and gamete donation, with implications many will find uncomfortable. If parents cannot legitimately absolve themselves of their obligations, what does that mean for the practices and institutions we have built around the idea that they can? Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 3:33 Unintended Parenthood 5:45 Parents Who Give Up Their Child For Adoption 10:04 Gamete Donors/Sellers 11:47 Conclusion First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/10/8/you-cannot-give-up-parental-obligations on 8 October 2024.
• 
  A Critique of Rothbard's Theory Of Parental Ownership 24.05.2026 16мин

  An AI narration of the article 'A Critique of Rothbard's Theory Of Parental Ownership' by Jake Desyllas. Self-ownership is a foundational principle of libertarian philosophy — but does it extend to children? Murray Rothbard rejected outright ownership of children, yet defended a "limited" parental ownership on homesteading grounds. This essay traces the contradiction in Rothbard's position and argues the correct framing: parents hold obligations to their children, not ownership rights, and children are self-owners from the moment they are created. Chapters: 0:00 Introduction 1:35 Rothbard's Conflicting Arguments on Parental Ownership 4:47 Individuals Cannot Be Homesteaded 7:33 Rothbard's Two Models Of Limited Parental Ownership 9:57 What Was Rothbard Trying To Achieve? 13:30 Parental Ownership Rights Are Merely Asserted 14:45 The Core Premise At Fault 15:34 The Correct Formulation Of The Parental Role First published at https://www.jakedesyllas.com/blog/2024/12/29/a-critique-of-rothbards-theory-of-parental-ownership on 29 December 2024.