On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:19:20AM -0400, Mark J. Roberts wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Travis Bemann wrote:
>
> > > The Libertarians would abolish the income tax and the war on drugs. The
> > > government would be substantially weaker under Libertarian control.
> >
> > Under Libertarian control the government's sole purpose would be the
> > protection of the capitalists and their property and fighting those
> > people who wish to expropriate the bourgeoisie and breaking strikes
> > and other stuff of that sort. A Libertarian world would be quite
> > nightmarish. A world of corporate enforcers, right-wing vigilantes,
> > lethal pollution, extreme poverty, corporate-run towns and cities, and
> > just total unrestricted corporate power. You get the picture. It
> > would be similar to fascism, in many respects.
>
> I was assuming that criminal things like strike breaking, corporate
> enforcers, right-wing vigilantes, and polluting others' property would not
> be permitted. The Libertarian platform does not include the legalization
> of those crimes.
>
> [snip description of capitalist evils]
>
> In short, capitalists will:
>
> * Pollute my property severely.
> * Kill me if I strike or dissent.
> * Create dangerous working conditions for me.
>
> The first two are not possible without the corruption of the government.
> Why is government corruption more likely under a Libertarian regime, as
> opposed to a Democratic or Republican regime?
They can still happen under a Democratic or Republican regime, and
have happened under Democratic and Republican regimes in the past.
But this is more likely under a Libertarian regime because of the
no-holds-barred stance towards business and industry.
Also, all of this stuff is in retrospect. I didn't make up any of
this stuff; it all really happened back in the days of unrestricted,
unregulated business back in the late 1800s. One of the main lessons
of history is that unrestricted, unregulated business is NOT a good
idea. If given freedom, the capitalists will run with it and use the
opportunity to screw anyone that gets in the way of profit in any
way.
> I would propose simple, easy, legal ways to fix some of those problems,
> but they assume that the government is not corrupt. For example, dangerous
> working conditions can be fixed by striking. Extreme poverty can be fixed
> by starting new corporations and/or asking for charity. Corporate-run
> cities can be fixed by organizing new cities that are not corporate-run.
> But without a free market (freedom to strike, to choose a competitor's
> product, etc.) and sane laws (murder and destruction of others' property
> are illegal, etc.), there is no hope.
The problem with corporations is that they are inherently motivated by
profit and profit only.
As for freedom to strike and such, I thought that striking is theft
according to the views of at least some Libertarians and
"anarcho"capitalists? It might not be your idea, but I wouldn't be
surprised if the government viewed striking as such under a
Libertarian regime.
Starting new corporations: easier said than done. Where do you get
the capital? Where do you get the starting resources? And even if it
is originally run for everyone's benefit, how long do you think it
will be before people concerned with profit and screwing anyone and
everyone who gets in the way of profit gain control (unless it is a
collective, which in an otherwise capitalist society is technically a
corporation, but is rather different and usually behaves differently
from normal corporations because it is worker-owned and
worker-managed)?
And do you really think that you can rely on charity?! It is not in
the interests of the ruling class to provide charity for charity sake,
for poor people are a good source of cheap labor; the only sort of
corporate charity that I see today is stuff that is meant to result in
tax reductions and stuff that is really in the interests of the
corporation providing charity (such as giving schools a whole bunch of
computers with Micro$oft Windows, so all the kiddies grow up using
Micro$oft software).
As for corporate-run cities, do you know what a company town is? It
is a town that is run as a company, usually to supply workers for a
particular factory; if you work at that factory you must live in that
town. In many areas where there are a not many jobs, people often end
up needing to work in a company town, because of necessity.
Finally, back in the bad old days of the late 1800s, there were laws
against murder and such, but that did not stop vigilantes and police
and soldiers from killing strikers and such. Do Haymarket Square and
the Pullman Strike mean anything to you.
> I would like to live in a world where I can freely buy and sell things.
> Maybe it's just a stupid fantasy.
It is a stupid fantasy, for it is never going to happen without all
the nasty baggage, as long as it is "anarcho"capitalism that you
desire. On the other hand, you can shed all the nasty baggage by
switching what you want from "anarcho"capitalism to individualist
anarchist (which is market-based but replaces capitalist property with
possession/use rights and hierarchial management with collective
worker management).
--
Yes, I know my enemies.
They're the teachers who tell me to fight me.
Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance,
hypocrisy, brutality, the elite.
All of which are American dreams.
- Rage Against The Machine
PGP signature
