This article is a treasure trove of things to think about--and Respond. I commented previously on Say's Law." Here I want to take up praxeology and prescription.

As K. Marx said, 'the object is to change the world." That implies a vision/paradigm/proposal for a 'better' one: a prescription for making the world a better place.

No such thing is explicitly provided in this article. Still, a prescriptive impetus is implied: the individual as a sovereign entity who 'must' be allowed to act with all but absolute impunity.

That, however, is the entrance to the (rational) cul-de-sac of all such arguments: given an assertion of the sanctity of 'the individual', how can any constraints be placed upon one? Any claim to 'objectivity' that praxeology might make must run aground on the purely subjective nature of moral rules for governing the conduct of individuals. Once any subjective constraints are allowed, it is merely a mater of personal belief regarding any constraints anyone might propose.