Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:47:42.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Second Paradox of Blackmail

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Walter Block ,
N. Stephan Kinsella  and
Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

One so-called paradox of blackmail concerns the fact that “two legal whites together make a black.” That is, it is licit to threaten to reveal a person’s secret, and it is separately lawful to ask him for money; but when both are undertaken at once, together, this act is called blackmail and is prohibited. A second so-called paradox is that if the blackmailer initiates the act, this is seen by jurists as blackmail and illicit, while if the blackmailee (the person blackmailed) originates the contract, this is commonly interpreted as bribery and is not illicit.

But these are paradoxes only for legal theorists innocent of libertarian theory. The authors use that perspective to reject the claim that blackmail should be unlawful. If this act were legalized, then both paradoxes would disappear, precisely their contention.

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , July 2000 , pp. 593 - 622
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alldridge, Peter. 1993. “Attempted murder of the soul”: Blackmail, privacy and secrets. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 13: 368–387.Google Scholar
Altman, Scott. 1993. A patchwork theory of blackmail. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1639–1661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armentano, Dominick T. 1972. The myths of antitrust. New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House.Google Scholar
Armentano, Dominick T. 1982. Antitrust and monopoly: Anatomy of a policy failure. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Don. 1982. Competition vs. monopoly. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute.Google Scholar
Barnett, Randy E. 1998. The structure of liberty: Justice and the rule of law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary. 1985. The case against blackmail. Unpublished; manuscript on file with Dr. Block.Google Scholar
Benson, Bruce L. 1990. The enterprise of law: Justice without the state. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy.Google Scholar
Berman, Mitchell N. 1998. The evidentiary theory of blackmail: Taking motives seriously. University of Chicago Law Review 65: 795–878.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1976. Defending the undefendable. New York: Fox and Wilkes.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1977. Coase and Demsetz on private property rights. The Journal of Libertarian Studies: An Interdisciplinary Review 1: 111–115.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1986. Trading money for silence. University of Hawaii Law Review 8: 57–73.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1993. Drug prohibition: A legal and economic analysis. Journal of Business Ethics 12: 107–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, Walter. 1994. Total repeal of anti-trust legislation: A critique of Bork, Brozen and Posner. Review of Austrian Economics 8: 31–64.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1995. Ethics, efficiency, Coasian property rights and psychic income: A reply to Demsetz. Review of Austrian Economics 8: 61–125.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1996a. Drug prohibition, individual virtue and positive economics. Review of Political Economy 8: 433–436.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1996b. O. J.’s defense: A reductio ad absurdum of the economics of Ronald Coase and Richard Posner. European Journal of Law and Economics 3: 265–286.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1997. The case for de-criminalizing blackmail: A reply to Lindgren and Campbell. Western State University Law Review 24: 225–246.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1998. A libertarian theory of blackmail. The Irish Jurist 33: 280–310.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1999a. Blackmail and economic analysis. Thomas Jefferson Law Review 21: 165–192.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1999b. Blackmailing for mutual good: A reply to Russell Hardin. Vermont Law Review 24: 121–141.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1999c. The crime of blackmail: A libertarian critique. Criminal Justice Ethics 18: 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, Walter. 1999d. The gold standard: A critique of Friedman, Mundell, Hayek, Greenspan. Managerial Finance 25: 15–33.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. 1999e. Replies to Levin and Kipnis on blackmail. Criminal Justice Ethics 18: 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, Walter. 2000. Let’s legalize blackmail. Seton Hall Law Review 30: 1182–1223.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. Forthcoming A. Blackmail IS private justice. University of British Columbia Law Review.Google Scholar
Block, Walter. Forthcoming B. Toward a libertarian theory of blackmail. Journal of Libertarian Studies.Google Scholar
Block, Walter, and Gordon, David. 1985. Extortion and the exercise of free speech rights: A reply to Professors Posner, Epstein, Nozick and Lindgren. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 19: 37–54.Google Scholar
Block, Walter, and McGee, Robert. 1999a. Blackmail as a victimless crime. Bracton Law Journal 31: 24–28.Google Scholar
Block, Walter, and McGee, Robert. 1999b. Blackmail from A to Z. Mercer Law Review 50: 569–601.Google Scholar
Boaz, David, ed. 1990. The crisis in drug prohibition. Washington D.C.: The Cato Institute.Google Scholar
Boyle, James. 1992. A theory of law and information: Copyright, spleens, blackmail and insider trading. California Law Review 80: 1413–1540.Google Scholar
Brown, Jennifer Gerarda. 1993. Blackmail as private justice. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1935–1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, . 1939. The anomalies of blackmail. Legal Quarterly Review 55: 382.Google Scholar
Campbell, Debra J. 1988. Why blackmail should be criminalized: A reply to Walter Block and David Gordon. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 21: 883–892.Google Scholar
Coase, Ronald H. 1960. The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1–44.Google Scholar
Coase, Ronald H. 1988. The 1987 McCorkle lecture: Blackmail. Virginia Law Review, vol. 74.Google Scholar
Cordato, Roy E. 1989. Subjective value, time passage, and the economics of harmful effects. Hamline Law Review 12: 229–244.Google Scholar
Cordato, Roy E. 1992a. Knowledge problems and the problem of social cost. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, vol. 14.Google Scholar
Cordato, Roy E. 1992b. Welfare economics and externalities in an open-ended universe: A modern Austrian perspective. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Daly, George, and Giertz, J. Fred. 1975. Externalities, extortion, and efficiency: Reply. American Economic Review 68: 736.Google Scholar
DeLong, Sidney W. 1993. Blackmailers, bribe takers, and the second paradox. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1663–1693.Google Scholar
DiLorenzo, Thomas. 1996. The myth of natural monopoly. Review of Austrian Economics 9: 43–58.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. H. Jr. and Penney, David E. 1982. Calculus and analytic geometry. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Ellsberg, Daniel. 1975. The theory and practice of blackmail. In Bargaining: formal theories of negotiation, ed. Young, Oran R., p. 343. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Richard. 1983. Blackmail, inc. University of Chicago Law Review 50: 553.Google Scholar
Evans, Hugh. 1990. Why blackmail should be banned. Philosophy 65: 89–94.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel. 1988a. The moral limits of the criminal law: Harmless wrongdoing. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel. 1988b. The paradox of blackmail. Ratio Juris 1: 83.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel. 1990. Harmless wrongdoing. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fletcher, George P. 1985. Paradoxes in legal thought. Columbia Law Review 85: 1263.Google Scholar
Fletcher, George P. 1993. Blackmail: The paradigmatic case. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1617–1638.Google Scholar
Flew, Anthony. 1984. A dictionary of philosophy. 2d ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Fried, Charles. 1981. Contract as promise. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1960. A program for monetary stability. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Douglas H., and Shechtman, Paul. 1993. Blackmail: An economic analysis of the law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1849–1876.Google Scholar
Goodhart, Arthur L. 1928. Blackmail and consideration in contracts. Legal Quarterly Review 44: 436. Reprinted in Goodhart, Arthur L. 1931. Essays in jurisprudence and the common law, p. 175. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
GordonWendy, J. Wendy, J. 1993. Truth and consequences: The force of blackmail’s central case. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1741–1785.Google Scholar
Gorr, Michael. 1977. Nozick’s argument against blackmail. Personalist 58: 187, 190.Google Scholar
Gorr, Michael. 1992. Liberalism and the paradox of blackmail. Philosophy and Public Affairs 21: 43–66.Google Scholar
Haksar, Vinit. 1976. Coercive Proposals. Political Theory, February 1976, pp. 65–79.Google Scholar
Hale, Robert L. 1923. Coercion and distribution in a supposedly non-coercive state. Political Science Quarterly 38: 470.Google Scholar
Hale, Robert L. 1943. Bargaining, duress and economic liberty. Columbia Law Review 43: 603–628.Google Scholar
Hamowy, Ron, ed. 1987. Dealing with drugs: Consequences of government control. San Francisco: The Pacific Institute.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell. 1993. Blackmailing for mutual good. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1787–1815.Google Scholar
Hepworth, Michael. 1975. Blackmail: Publicity and secrecy in everyday life. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Herbener, Jeffrey M. 1997. The Pareto rule and welfare economics. Review of Austrian Economics 10: 79–106.Google Scholar
High, Jack. 1984–85. Bork’s paradox: Static vs. dynamic efficiency in antitrust analysis. Contemporary Policy Issues 3: 21–34.Google Scholar
Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 1989. A theory of socialism and capitalism. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 1993. The economics and ethics of private property: Studies in political economy and philosophy. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; Hülsmann, Jörg Guido; and Block, Walter. 1998. Against fiduciary media. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 1: 19–50.Google Scholar
Isenbergh, Joseph. 1993. Blackmail from A to C. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1905–1933.Google Scholar
Jandoo, R. S., and Harland, W. Arthur. 1984. Legally aided blackmail. New Law Journal, 27 April 1984, pp. 402–404.Google Scholar
Katz, Leo. 1993. Blackmail and other forms of arm-twisting. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1567–1615.Google Scholar
Katz, Leo, and Lindgren, James. 1993. Instead of a preface. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1565.Google Scholar
Kinsella, N. Stephan. 1996. New rationalist directions in libertarian rights theory. Journal of Libertarian Studies 12: 313–326.Google Scholar
Kinsella, N. Stephan. 1997. A libertarian theory of punishment and rights. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 30: 607–645.Google Scholar
Krecke, Elisabeth. 1992. Law and the market order: An Austrian critique of the economic analysis of law.” Paper presented at the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s Austrian Scholar’s Conference, New York City, October 9–11.Google Scholar
Landes, William, and Posner, Richard A. 1975. The private enforcement of law. Journal of Legal Studies 4: 1, 43.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1984a. More blackmail ink: A critique of “Blackmail, Inc.,” Epstein’s theory of blackmail. Connecticut Law Review 16: 909.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1984b. Unraveling the paradox of blackmail. Columbia Law Review 84: 670.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1986. In defense of keeping blackmail a crime: Responding to Block and Gordon. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 20: 35–44.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1989a. Blackmail: On waste, morals and Ronald Coase. UCLA Law Review 36: 597.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1989b. Kept in the dark: Owen’s view of blackmail. Connecticut Law Review 21: 749.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1989c. Secret rights: A comment on Campbell’s theory of blackmail. Connecticut Law Review 21: 407–410.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1993a. Blackmail: An afterword. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1975–1989.Google Scholar
Lindgren, James. 1993b. The theory, history and practice of the bribery-extortion distinction. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1695–1740.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1955. Second treatise of civil government. Chicago: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1960. An essay concerning the true origin, extent and end of civil government, V. 27–28. In Two treatises of government, ed. Laslett, P.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, Daniel. 1975. Welcome threats and coercive offers. Philosophy, October 1975, pp. 425–436.Google Scholar
Mack, Eric. 1982. In defense of blackmail. Philosophical Studies 41: 274.Google Scholar
McChesney, Fred. 1991. Antitrust and regulation: Chicago’s contradictory views. Cato Journal, vol. 10.Google Scholar
McChesney, Fred and Shugart, William. 1995. The causes and consequences of antitrust: The public choice perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mises, Ludwig von. 1966. Human action. 3d. ed. Chicago: H. Regnery.Google Scholar
Murphy, Jeffrie G. 1980. Blackmail: A preliminary inquiry. Monist 63: 156.Google Scholar
North, Gary. 1990. Tools of dominion: The case laws of exodus. Tyler, Tex.: Institute for Christian Economics.Google Scholar
North, Gary. 1992. The Coase theorem. Tyler, Tex: The Institute for Christian Economics.Google Scholar
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, state and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Owens, David. 1999. Should blackmail be banned? Philosophy 63: 501–514.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 1986. Economic analysis of law. 3d ed. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 1993. Blackmail, privacy and freedom of contract. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1817–1847.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N. 1970. Power and market: Government and the economy. Menlo Park, Calif.: Institute for Humane Studies.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N. 1978. For a new liberty. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N. 1989. The hermeneutical invasion of philosophy and economics. Review of Austrian Economics 3: 45–59.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N. 1993. Man, economy and state. Auburn. Al.: Mises Institute.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N. 1997. The logic of action I. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N. 1998 (1982). The ethics of liberty. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Shavell, Steven. 1993. An economic analysis of threats and their legality: Blackmail, extortion and robbery. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 141: 1877–1903.Google Scholar
Shugart II, William F. 1987. Don’t revise the Clayton act, scrap it! Cato Journal 6: 925.Google Scholar
Smith, Fred L. Jr. 1983. Why not abolish antitrust? Regulation, January–February 1983, p. 23.Google Scholar
Spooner, Lysander. 1966 (1870). No treason. Larkspur, Col.: Pine Tree Press.Google Scholar
Szasz, Thomas. 1985. Ceremonial chemistry: The ritual persecution of drugs, addicts and pushers. Rev. ed. Holmes Beach, Fla.: Learning Publications.Google Scholar
Thornton, Mark. 1991. The economics of prohibition. Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Tooher, L. G. 1978. Developments in the law of blackmail in England and Australia. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 27: 337.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 1992. Blackmail as complicity. Unpublished.Google Scholar
Williams, Glanville. 1954. Blackmail. The Criminal Law Review.Google Scholar
Winder, W. H. D. 1941. The development of blackmail. Modern Law Review 5: 21, 36–41.Google Scholar