“[The] property right in one's own body must be said to be justified a priori, for anyone who would try to justify any norm whatsoever would already have to presuppose the exclusive right to control over his body as a valid norm simply in order to say "I propose such in such."”

— Hans-Hermann Hoppe, book The Economics and Ethics of Private Property

The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (2nd edition, Ludwig von Mises Institute: 2006): 335.
The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (1993)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update Feb. 9, 2026. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "[The] property right in one's own body must be said to be justified a priori, for anyone who would try to justify any n…" by Hans-Hermann Hoppe?

Hans-Hermann Hoppe21

Austrian school economist and libertarian anarcho-capitalis… 1949

Auberon Herbert (1838–1906) British politician

The Principles of Voluntaryism and Free Life

“[O]ur existence is due to the fact that we do not, indeed cannot accept a norm outlawing property in other scarce resources next to and in addition to that of one's physical body. Hence, the right to acquire such goods must be assumed to exist.”

Hans-Hermann Hoppe book The Economics and Ethics of Private Property

The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy (Kluwer: 1993): 185.
The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (1993)

“You say they have the right of property in their slaves. Suppose they have, how sacred is this right of property? I want to argue the moral question of it. How sacred is this right of property in the living bodies and souls of men? Just as sacred as it is in a horse? Just as sacred as the tenure of property in a mule? Suppose it is, you own them. As you own a horse or mule. Is the right of property in a horse more sacred than my life? Is the right of property in a mule more sacred than my right to free speech? I tell them, and I tell the people all over the country, if they have a system of an institution that will not allow me to live or speak or read my papers, or worship my God as I please, then I say in God's name that thing must die. My rights I will have!”

Owen Lovejoy (1811–1864) American politician

As quoted in His Brother's Blood: Speeches and Writings, 1838&ndash;64 https://web.archive.org/web/20160319081405/https://books.google.com/books?id=qMEv8DNXVbIC&pg=PA238#v=onepage&q&f=false (2004), edited by William Frederick Moore and Jane Ann Moore, p. 238 <br class="br">1860s, Speech (October 1860)

“Any minority’s right to be different must be respected, but the right of the majority must not be questioned.
..
Without the values at the core of Christianity and other world religions, without moral norms that have been shaped over millennia, people will inevitably lose their human dignity.”

Vladimir Putin (1952) President of Russia, former Prime Minister

19 September 2013 during his speech at the Valdai forum
2013

“Ronald Dworkin… argues that our law includes not only norms found in treaties, customs, constitutions, statutes, and cases, but also moral principles that provide the best justification for the norms found there.5 On his account, the things justified by moral.”

H. L. A. Hart book The Concept of Law

H.L.A. Hart, The Concept of Law, 1961. p. Xviii; introduction.

“If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify revolution — certainly would if such a right were a vital one.”

Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) 16th President of the United States

1860s, First Inaugural Address (1861)
Context: If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify revolution — certainly would if such a right were a vital one. But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, guarantees and prohibitions, in the Constitution, that controversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable to every question which may occur in practical administration. No foresight can anticipate, nor any document of reasonable length contain, express provisions for all possible questions.

“I will point out a curious, inveterate, and widespread illusion — the illusion that our earthly bodies are a kind of norm of humanity, so that ethereal bodies, if such there be, must correspond to them in shape and size.”

William Crookes (1832–1919) British chemist and physicist

Address to the Society for Psychical Research (1897)
Context: I will point out a curious, inveterate, and widespread illusion — the illusion that our earthly bodies are a kind of norm of humanity, so that ethereal bodies, if such there be, must correspond to them in shape and size.
When we take a physical view of a human being in his highest form of development, he is seen to consist essentially of a thinking brain, the brain itself, among its manifold functions, being a transformer whereby intelligent will power is enabled to react on matter. To communicate with the external world, the brain requires organs by which it can be transported from place to place, and other organs by means of which energy is supplied to replace that expended in the exercise of its own special functions.