Left and Right
Offline Perhaps the main political division between free thinkers is economics. Almost all free thinkers are socially progressive, but some of them are economically liberal (liberals), others are economically conservative (libertarians), and some are anarcho-capitalists (Noor). I think this is a topic worth discussing. Left vs Right and corporate control.
If you read about the gilded age, that gives you an idea of America without any corporate rules. While it may seem that everyone is ecnomically free, it enables the corporation to form a system in which they can completely control the lives of their employees. Not to mention that they will be selling poisoned or unsafe products, and.... I'm a bit tired right now. I'm not in the mood to put together a real arguement. How about others? What do you guys thinkl?
Actually during the Gilded Age the government was corrupt and got into many scandals like the Whiskey Ring. I'd have to blame the problems on the government. Haven't read that much on this specific topic though.
(Btw, I've seen quite a bunch of anarchocapitalists here, but I seem to be the only anarchist posting presently.)
Gilded era had government interference in stuff... they (the Nat. Guard/military) Made people stop striking (as far as I know it was peaceful on some occasions until they showed up)
I believe in the freeist society, with an out or area set aside for anarchy... as far as corperations are concerned... if a corporation can be shown to have actually harmed someone, then they should be prosecuted (so until harm happens afther they have dumped crap into the rivers they should be left alone... however, I would also make our prison systems less hospitable (no tv, education, etc.) - socially liberal, economically conservative here
Same, for the most part, I've grown to believe in privatization of more and more things the more I learn aobut economics. Certain things I still see as better with some regulation, and I see social progressivism as requiring some interference. Other than that, and national defense, I'd rather government just butt out.
[quote=liberal agnostic]Not to mention that they will be selling poisoned or unsafe products, and.... [/quote]
If the companies are selling unsafe products why the fuck would the consumers buy them? They'd go out of business in a flash as soon as their customers found out. Not many people would buy from a corrupt corporation.
You're right, because nobody buys from chocolate companies that use child slave labor, or nobody bought from Earl Grey Tea back in the days of Indian oppression, and nobody ever bought cotton from slave-plantations.
Oh, btw, sucks to be the customer to uncover fatal mistakes.
For example, certain foods have recently been contaminated with things such as E. Coli, they still sell fine, much like the pet food scare.
Although to liberal agnostic, I doubt they'd poison their products...
If that happened in a free-market anarchy everyone would have to protect themselves. People would have some knowledge of how to handle weapons. Since everything is voluntary they wouldn't allow themselves to be exploited for labor.
And the government supported slavery or at least didn't do anything about it until Lincoln.
Even under a government corporations can still go corrupt and hide it. Plus there's nothing that protects you from the government itself, even if it protects the customer from corporations.
Critics of State Capitalism, like free-market advocates Frederic Bastiat and Adam Smith, as well as anti-capitalists like Marx, have been pointing out for centuries the way the government and big business interact. Government supports big business through privilege, and business supports bureaucrats through bribes. The products of "Mixed-Economy" State Capitalism do not resemble the products of a free market.
Corporations are a creation of the government. You'll notice any corporation is incorporated "in" (read as: by) a state or country. Limited liability companies are a way the people in charge were able to give special privilege to those wealthy enough to afford to incorporate. Tax laws are written so disproportionately in favor of big business corporate legal fictions that you're not seeing restrictions on business, you're seeing aggrandizement of business. The Corporation does not exist in the free market.
Supposedly progressive regulations did not limit big business, it drove the small businesses out and centralized capital and market share into the hands of a few big enough to take the burden for a while, creating an effective oligopoly and making a few businessmen wealthy in ways the poor can't afford to even make the initial investment toward.
Yeah. Looks like I've been using the term 'corporations' instead of 'private businesses' (the ones that would exist in a free market anarchy).