Alienability: rejoinder to Kuflik

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of writing this paper is to defend the doctrine of commodification, or alienability: that there are no exceptions to the principle that all things that are owned may be legally sold.

Design/methodology/approach

The approach of this paper is to consider arguments to the contrary, mainly those, in this case, furnished by Kuflik, and then to refute these arguments.

Findings

The conclusion of this paper is that socialism, the view that purchases and sales, markets, free enterprise, is unjustified, is mistaken. Non‐alienability is part and parcel of the critique of markets. To the extent it is countered, markets are strengthened.

Research limitations/implications

Future research would probe more deeply into anti‐market arguments.

Practical implications

The practical implications is that the law should legalize markets in body parts, and, more radically, should recognize voluntary slave contracts.

Originality/value

This is virtually an entirely original paper, in that there are only a very few publications that defend complete alienability, such as does this one.

Citation

Block, W. (2007), "Alienability: rejoinder to Kuflik", Humanomics, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 117-136. https://doi.org/10.1108/08288660710779362