The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

An Interview with Walter Block 415
The antidote to land theft, and some land was indeed stolen
from the Indians, is reparations, or, better yet, return of the stolen
land. Yes, indeed, “we” the current owners of this land must give
it back when and where an heir to the original owners can be
found. But possession is properly 9/10ths of the law. The present
owner is always presumed to be the rightful owner. The burden
of proof to the contrary falls upon he who would overturn such
property titles. This applies to all claimants, throughout history,
without exception. There is no statute of limitation on justice for
the libertarian. However, the further back in time you go, especially
if there was no written language, the harder it is to meet
this burden of proof. In the case of the Indians, lacking a written
language, and the theft having taken place so many years ago,
there is little hope for much in the way of justified land reparations.
In Canada, the courts have allowed the testimony of tribal
elders to be determinative in such matters. But a proper court
would dismiss this as mere hearsay.
QUESTION: I have heard that you are working on a new book.
Can you tell us a little bit about it—and when it will be ready for
our consumption?
WALTER BLOCK: My new book, to be published by the Ludwig
von Mises Institute, will be on road privatization. It will be based
on my extant publications on this subject, plus lots of new material
not previously published. Possibly, material generated in this
present interview process will be used in it. Let me turn things
around a bit: I have got a question for you: what would be a good
title for the book? The working title is something like “Road Privatization,”
but, hopefully, we can do better.
QUESTION: I just wanted to ask what you think is the outlook
for the future of liberty currently, and also what projects or
(July–September): 53–73; Walter Block and Guillermo Yeatts, “The Economics
and Ethics of Land Reform: A Critique of the Pontifical Council for
Justice and Peace’s ‘Toward a Better Distribution of Land: The Challenge of
Agrarian Reform’,” Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Law 15,
no. 1 (1999–2000): 27–69.