Can somebody explain how an anarchocapitalist society would even function? Without antitrust laws, what prevents Wal-Mart, Monsanto, Google, Colt and Lockheed-Martin from merging, forming a totalitarian pseudogovernment?
Can somebody explain how an anarchocapitalist society would even function? Without antitrust laws...
Alexander Jenkins
Other urls found in this thread:
Austin Turner
That would violate the Non-Aggression Principle
Dominic Cook
>anarco-anything
>society
Nice oxymoron :^)
Jacob Peterson
Because of dis-economies of scale and competition will beat them out.
Caleb Bennett
sooner or later it would be divided into privately owned areas managed independently by a warlod.
So... Eventually would be like a goverment, every warlod the warlod is the emperor on his zone and fight against the others
Luis Sanders
none of those companies are even close to 100% market share. anti-trust laws are fucking stupid
Andrew Scott
simple, this ideology is bullshit and cannot work
Luke Myers
Ok so explain how monopolizing violated the NAP
Kayden Miller
>competition
Without antitrust laws, monopolization becomes inevitable.
Landon Thomas
It doesn't. Anarcho-anything is utopian bullshit
Elijah Perry
This is precisely why ancap societies fail. In trying to make a community with the most freedoms, they will inevitably end up with no freedoms whatsoever.
Jordan Green
>antitrust laws are fucking stupid
I am personally glad AT&T was broken up in the 90s. If they weren't separated, America would be stuck with 1 ISP in most regions.
Kayden Perez
It's purposefully making lives harder for people, this give the people the power and authority to kill them for doing so
Jonathan Wood
An anarcho capitalistic society is a place where enough of the population follow the NAP-rules to depress anyone not following them. If that is not the case then they arent an ancap society.
Lincoln Jackson
Anarchism in general has problems with maintaining an absence of government. That said, most forms of societies have trouble guaranteeing that they won't turn into something drastically different over time. The kind of totalitarian societies that do the most to try and ensure their permanence actually seem even lesss stable in a lot of cases.
Josiah King
>he thinks antitrust laws are working
>doesn't know anything about vertical integration
Jose Price
>this makes lives harder for people
This is an incredibly loose definition of an NAP. It's almost as if the very nature of an NAP is open to interpretation unless there is some sort of regulatory body. This of course implies Colt will actually sell firearms to their serfs, which would be against their interests.
Charles Bailey
Monopolization is inevitable. Once a majority of major corporations form a strong enough bond, your illusions of freedom will vanish.
Hudson Hughes
Great question.
Colton Gomez
Your answer made me cringe.
Hudson Wright
>he thinks vertical integration will magically fix itself if no regulation existed
The problem of monopolization would increase tenfold under an anarchocapitalism society. You would be a slave.
Jason Hill
This problem couldn't happen in an ancap society in the first place op
>alleyway
that would imply roads
Leo Allen
B-but muh voluntary slave
Cameron Carter
...
Tyler Sanchez
Kek, true
Jeremiah Clark
>voluntary slave
Only in an ancap society
Logan Davis
now that's some A-faggot SJW tier answer.
How is it making their lives "harder"?
Why would that give power to people?
Why couldn't a new business open and succeed even if a monopoly is established?
Joshua Cooper
Nah, they would get blown away once they violated the NAP in an ancap society.
Forming an ancap society would only be possible as a space fleet in the far future though.
Henry Myers
No outside forces would prevent that. But at the same time many new firms could start competing with those companies as they a tremenndous amount of power from the government, plus some firms actually being to breakdown if they grow too large, such as when the red solo cup companie merged with the dixie cup company, now both are out of buisness. actually those firms you listed already run our government, so why would worry about a problem happening in a hypotheitcal sinario, when that is what is happening right now.
Brody Murphy
Ian Ward
Who decides whether an act violates the NAP or not? It seems to me that decision lies with the individual. If I shoot a man, who decides whether or not the killing was justified? What if one group thinks I violated the NAP, so they lynch me, but another group thinks I was justified and hanged unjustly?
Liam Powell
>start competing with Lockheed-Martin
How could anyone feasibly do this?