Stretching My Mind

What made the experience of listening to Defending the Undefendable the most enjoyable?

Mr. Block stretched my mind in new directions. I was introduced to new perspectives on topics that I thought I knew, and I was surprised when I changed someone of my longest-held opinions. Who knew that discrimination and regulation affects so many facets of our lives!?

6 people found this helpful

A must-read for any open minded person

What made the experience of listening to Defending the Undefendable the most enjoyable?

Even though english is not my native language the book is well written so I understood almost everything. The pronounciation and intonation by Jeff Riggenbach is just great. Regarding the content of the book I knew what to expect and it simply confirmed and deepened my beliefs in personal liberty and the fact that the state should stay out of other peoples business.

What was one of the most memorable moments of Defending the Undefendable?

The whole book is one huge memorable moment. And I hope to remember the facts and the logic presented by Walter Block here the next time I have to debate someone on personal liberty and statelessness.

Have you listened to any of Jeff Riggenbach’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

Jeff Riggenbach does a great job. I really like his deep voice and superb pronounciation. I have listened to many of his performances for the Ludwig van Mises Institute and he is just perfect for this kind of literature.

4 people found this helpful

Open Your Eyes to Not Being Free

What made the experience of listening to Defending the Undefendable the most enjoyable?

Custom, Law and/or Religion have constrained individuals through history. As you read Defending the Undependable your eyes and mind will be opened to realize how little freedom you have. You will learn that any non forced agreement allows the agreed upon action to occur: you are free to do it. In contrast, custom and religion have constrained and forced us to "behave" which is a form of violence: we did not freely agree to...

What was one of the most memorable moments of Defending the Undefendable?

Violence is any imposed [via strong persuasion] mode of behavior and thinking.

What about Jeff Riggenbach’s performance did you like?

Prof. Riggenbach's voice and tempo made listening and understanding a new concept easy to grasp.

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

Those who have the capability to comprehend concepts, constraints and freedom of agreement, continue to be raised, trained and indoctrinated to be "good citizens/Christians/Jews/soldiers/students/...?". That is we are trained as "dumb" animals.

Any additional comments?

See what you have been missing; and may Professor Riggenbach receive his just reward for an insightful analysis.

2 people found this helpful

Good for the new libertarian

What made the experience of listening to Defending the Undefendable the most enjoyable?

The arguments and sides of the debate the author takes are sometimes humorous but legitimate at the same time.

What was the most compelling aspect of this narrative?

it's about logic and why some of our current outlooks on what is morally and legally wrong is laughable when you really break it down, look at it from the law breaker's point of view.

What did you like about the performance? What did you dislike?

it is old.

What’s the most interesting tidbit you’ve picked up from this book?

the author's argument for why the slumlord is a positive part of the community and economy.

2 people found this helpful

Amazing eye opener!

One of the best books on issues many should reconsider. It was incrediblyy eye opening book.
Walter Block is the beast!:)

Great book that holds up but shows its age

First off, this book was originally written in the 1970s, there's nothing wrong with this fact but keep it in mind when considering and/or listening to it.

With the aforementioned in mind, the points and analysis still hold up very well, mostly. Statements about various -isms of discrimination, that I assume were very progressive and libertarian at the time, don't hold up well at all in an era where these statements are more often used as clubs by the new authoritarians to keep those who disagree with politically correct ideology in line. For example, Dr. Block casually asserts widespread discrimination against African-Americans without any supporting data or analysis. This might've been true at the time, but times have changed. Since the time the book was written, prestigious economists, such as Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell, have blown this myth wide open.

The book indulges in a bit of hyperbole in places that one can tell is likely out of a sense of cheek and eagerness to tweak the noses of the politically correct. The biggest example of this is Dr. Block terming those he defends in this book as "heroes". In some cases this is merited, such as when describing how gypsy cab drivers who risk fines and other penalties for providing a service where government has picked some favorites and allowed those favorites free reign as long as they get a cut of the profits. However, this becomes hyperbolic in some chapters such as when describing blackmailers. Dr. Block lays out a good case as to why blackmail shouldn't be illegal but doesn't make any attempt to support the title of hero for this book.

All in all, a great read especially if you're looking for a no BS reconsideration of some of those whom society has benighted but the age the book was written in should be considered.

Main idea needs to be defended, not assumed

Any additional comments?

The underlining idea of the book is the nonaggression principle. I happen to agree with the principle. However, I do not believe the book will convince anyone who does not already accept it. Dr. Block simply assumes it and makes his arguments from there.

Needs better narrator.

the story seems interesting enough, but I was unable to finish the book. the narrator's voice was just one I could not get through.

The End of Good/Bad snap judgements

This book wasn’t for you, but who do you think might enjoy it more?

Moralizing people may be too judgemental and close-minded....Libertarians like myself would enjoy the rational thinking, but the case is made early on and beaten to death in my opinion....

True, drug dealers, users, prostitutes are humans doing private actions that have always been in demand.

What was most disappointing about Walter Block’s story?

Not moving on to talk about opportunity costs from making a "War on ...." You can fill in the blank....Drugs...Drunk driving....cancer...poverty....homelessness..." In the end, it's always a WAR ON OUR FELLOW CITIZENS....

What didn’t you like about Jeff Riggenbach’s performance?

It was fine.

What character would you cut from Defending the Undefendable?

It's a narration about social stigmas....no characters....

Any additional comments?

It would be a lot of work to do causal analysis and statistical analysis combined with societal costs, but that would be a great book, combined with the 1st half of this one.

So much potential, so little delivery

The authors showed fundamental misunderstandings of Libertarian and Austrian philosophies. This is a great pity, as the foundational precept (finding people villified by society for performing useful, even vital, functions, and showing why society is wrong) is desperately needed, and offers huge scope for productive writing. By aiming for shock value rather than sound reasoning, this book will put people off these parallel philosophies just when the world needs them most..

The lack of intellectual rigor here doesn't leave much hope for future books by these authors.

2 people found this helpful