Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Libertarians always paint progressives as Utopians, but they don't even see the wishful thinking in their ideology.
You have a lot to learn about Anarchism.
Anarchists of all flavors (the Intellectually honest ones) will never claim that it is a panacea for all socio-economic ills. One thing that it DOES fix, however, is the inherent evils of the state. So yes, there are social problems...but they simply are not.compounded.
The inherent issue with property rights and anarchy is not property claims in itself because occupation becomes the sole mechanism by which property is deemed. The issue comes with absentee ownership. But absentee property ownership is more times than not a means to generate wealth...so that becomes the bigger focus.
Again....ALL ideology is wishful thinking. Pragmatism is as well..because there is no such thing as Pragmatism without Ideology. And in the sense of Pragmatism..."what works" after a while....stops working...
Anarchists of all flavors (the Intellectually honest ones)...
The intellectually honest ones are not right wing libertarians or ancaps, as those societies will lead to concentration of power, thus defying anarchist principles.
For example, say you have a dispute with property rights with a rich man who has 10,000 times your wealth and power in an ancap society. How do you validly solve that in an ancap society?
The intellectually honest ones are not right wing libertarians or ancaps, as those societies will lead to concentration of power, thus defying anarchist principles.
Which is precisely why "libertarian" everywhere else in the world means something entirely different than it means here.
The intellectually honest ones are not right wing libertarians or ancaps, as those societies will lead to concentration of power, thus defying anarchist principles.
For example, say you have a dispute with property rights with a rich man who has 10,000 times your wealth and power in an ancap society. How do you validly solve that in an ancap society?
You don't. It leads do disenfranchisement.
Well...you dont put the property paradigm before the wealth generation...
In a functional ancap society...with an unbound free market...it would be difficult to monopolize without the state to enforce any regulations. It would be pure competition.
Isn't it cute the way he tries to lump in Libertarians, who believe in government, with Anarchists, who don't, as though they were one and the same?
A typical diversion by those who hate what the Libertarians say but cannot refute them.
True. Libertarians as a group do not demand no state, and anarchists as a group do not favor private property, so the premise of the question is a bit askew.
Well...you dont put the property paradigm before the wealth generation...
In a functional ancap society...with an unbound free market...it would be difficult to monopolize without the state to enforce any regulations. It would be pure competition.
Except in those instances when concentration of power arose due to concentration of wealth and resource ownership.
Isn't that where the state becomes convenient? How is there private property if there's no state to declare one's assets? If a citizen can't afford to hire a private security firm, he/she is out of luck. Mobsters would only take advantage of her and confiscate what's left of what she owns.
Libertarians are not for anarchy. Because we advocate for more freedom, liberty and less government does not mean we want no government. Lets use your left logic...ready?
Saying libertarians are for anarchy is like saying left liberals want everyone to die of thirst because you want water conservation!
Except in those instances when concentration of power arose due to concentration of wealth and resource ownership.
It took a hundred years and several generations for that to happen in a system where there was ALWAYS bureaucracy. Even during the railroad and steel boom and The Gilded Age there were tariffs breaks and quasi-lobbyists.. suppose the figurative "reset button" was pressed on society...how fast do you think this inequality gap would rear its ugly head? .I suppose a better argument would be how do you prevent these phenomenons from breeding as opposed to the accumulation of wealth. Because in a market with no false barriers to entry....it's relatively difficult to corner a market.
It took a hundred years and several generations for that to happen in a system where there was ALWAYS bureaucracy. Even during the railroad and steel boom and The Gilded Age there were tariffs breaks and quasi-lobbyists.. suppose the figurative "reset button" was pressed on society...how fast do you think this inequality gap would rear its ugly head? .I suppose a better argument would be how do you prevent these phenomenons from breeding as opposed to the accumulation of wealth. Because in a market with no false barriers to entry....it's relatively difficult to corner a market.
When America was economically more liberal, between then end of WWII and up to Reagan, we were a more egalitarian society.
The American middle class did not evolve out of free market, ancap principles, but the opposite of those - Social Security, increases in the minimum wage, increases in labor standards and workplace safety, equal pay laws, strong support for unions, expanding unemployment benefits and health care.
One of the most egalitarian places that ever existed in modern day society occurred when American was an economically liberal place and Republicans were moderate (Eisenhower), in which right wing libertarians (Goldwater) and ancaps (Rothbard) vehemently opposed.
It gets tiring of refuting this right wing crap, but keep on believing in the nonsense that your political ideology leads to a more egalitarian and just society while lambasting liberalism.
In a functional ancap society...with an unbound free market...it would be difficult to monopolize without the state to enforce any regulations. It would be pure competition.
A perfect example of the naivete of libertarianism and anarcho-captialist.
In a perfect market model the most efficient provider of goods and service will have inherent price advantages. If lower cost are to result into higher demand at some point those who cannot provide same of similar products at the price of the most efficient will be driven from the market. As a result the market will should always lead to less competition over time unless other sellers of goods and services can find a way to operate with greater of equal efficiency. The problem is that as having achieved economies of scale, those companies that have previously driven others out of the market place makes it nearly impossible for others to enter the market.
Another thing problem unstated problem with the libertarian/anarcho-capitalist argument is that governments protect monopolies and monopolistic firms by protecting intellectual property rights. Aside from greater market efficiencies the second most important factor that accounts for the rise of monopolies is their ability to be the sole maker of a commodity through patents and copyrights. Clearly, many libertarians and anarcho-capitalist have no respect for such rights (see internet file sharing). Frankly next to nationalization I cannot think of a great disincentive for innovation than the inability to secure exclusivity over one's ideas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
