From: Paul Hughes (paul@planetp.cc)
Date: Mon Sep 04 2000 - 16:37:07 MDT
I've been chuckling through the entire thread of 'Bugs in
Free Markets' because the inherent problems with free
markets and anarchy are both obvious and essentially the
same. Despite the fact that I also wish for a true anarchy
where freedom is unlimited and tyranny is nonexistent, how
do we get there? Needless to say, I also find it humorous
how those in favor of free-markets in this particular thread
are cleverly cutting and pasting their response to dodge the
real issues. So I will present them again as saliently as
possible:
The biggest argument thrown at anarchism, is that if left to
its own guises you'll always get feudalism in the end. Such
a system favors the most ruthlessness and most armed person
to eventually rule over everyone else. So what you get
ironically is the exact opposite of a true anarchy, an
oppressive feudal system. I suspect that a portion of
people who call themselves anarchists, are in fact just
feudal tyrants eagerly awaiting the day when they can have
power over everyone else.
So we are left with Anarchism = Oppressive Feudalism.
The conception I see of many peoples' ideas of free-markets
is very simple - anarchy allowed to exist solely in economic
affairs. That's probably why many people of this ilk refer
to themselves as anarcho-capitalists. So would it be
premature to conclude using the above logic, the economic
anarchy = economic feudalism. Would I be out of line by
saying that some people who calls themselves free-marketeers
are also in fact just closet tyrants with a knack for making
money, just waiting to take over? Well, the burden of proof
is on them.
Some would say we don't currently have a true free-market,
and I agree. But I see no evidence to suggest that a true
free-market would be any better for human freedom and
justice than what we have now. At least now, we have the
pretense of a Constitution to protect the liberties of
individuals over tyranny. What are free-market advocates
alternatives? Are you suggesting a universal social
contract to safeguard freedom and justice in a free-market?
Wouldn't that be the re-creation of governmental
intervention all over again? If so, then you are no longer
left with a free-market again.
I challenge anyone on this list to demonstrate how
free-markets can exist without a feudalist tyranny
resulting. Demonstrate how such a system will not favor
the rich over poor when it comes to basic civil rights and
justice. If you can't, then you should stop complaining
when people call you fascists or at best platocracists.
Sure companies are there to meet the demands of the consumer
and stockholders, but that just goes to show you that he
with the most money - rich consumer, rich stockholder makes
all the rules. Who is there to protect the little guy? If
you don't give a damn about the little guy, then I rest my
case.
Paul Hughes
http://planetp.cc/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:30:45 MST