Jump to content

Anarcho-Capitalism


SVTContour98

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply
cliff notes?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

 

wiki summary quote:

 

Anarcho-capitalism (also referred to as "libertarian anarchy"[1] and "private-property anarchism"[2] or "market anarchism' date='"[3'] and "free market anarchism"[4]) is a libertarian political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.[5][6] In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by privately funded competitors rather than through taxation, and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market. Therefore, personal and economic activities under anarcho-capitalism would be regulated by privately run law rather than through politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

 

wiki summary quote:

 

Anarcho-capitalism (also referred to as "libertarian anarchy"[1] and "private-property anarchism"[2] or "market anarchism' date='"[3'] and "free market anarchism"[4]) is a libertarian political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.[5][6] In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by privately funded competitors rather than through taxation, and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market. Therefore, personal and economic activities under anarcho-capitalism would be regulated by privately run law rather than through politics.

 

VERY interesting but wonder how that could exactly work if everything was privatized

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VERY interesting but wonder how that could exactly work if everything was privatized

 

me too...that's why I'm reading about it...guys like Walter Block, Lew Rockwell, Murray Rothbard (now deceased) are AnCap guys...I enjoy a lot of stuff I hear/read from them so I figured I would give this AnCap deal a real shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wiki summary on Rothbard:

 

Murray Newton Rothbard (March 2, 1926 – January 7, 1995) was an American economist, historian, and political theorist. He was a prominent exponent of the Austrian School of economics and fundamentally influenced the American libertarian movement and contemporary libertarian and classical liberal thought, by theorizing a form of free-market anarchism which he termed "anarcho-capitalism".[2][3][4][5] Rothbard wrote over twenty books and is considered a centrally important figure in the American libertarian movement.[6]

 

Building on the Austrian School's concept of spontaneous order, support for a free market in money production, and condemnation of central planning Rothbard advocated abolition of coercive government control of society and the economy.[7] He considered the monopoly force of government the greatest danger to liberty and the long-term well-being of the populace, labeling the state as "the organization of robbery systematized and writ large" and the locus of the most immoral, grasping and unscrupulous individuals in any society.[8][9][10][11]

 

Rothbard concluded that all services provided by monopoly governments could be provided more efficiently by the private sector. He viewed many regulations and laws ostensibly promulgated for the "public interest" as self-interested power grabs by scheming government bureaucrats engaging in dangerously unfettered self-aggrandizement, as they were not subject to market disciplines. Rothbard held that there were inefficiencies involved with government services and asserted that market disciplines would eliminate them, if the services could be provided by competition in the private sector.[12][13][14]

 

Rothbard was equally condemning of state corporatism, criticizing many instances where business elites co-opted government's monopoly power so as to influence laws and regulatory policy in a manner benefiting them at the expense of their competitive rivals.[15]

 

He argued that taxation represents coercive theft on a grand scale, and "a compulsory monopoly of force" prohibiting the more efficient voluntary procurement of defense and judicial services from competing suppliers.[9][16] He also considered central banking and fractional reserve banking under a monopoly fiat money system a form of state-sponsored, legalized financial fraud, antithetical to libertarian principles and ethics.[17][18][19][20] Rothbard opposed military, political, and economic interventionism in the affairs of other nations.[21][22]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's some interesting and thought provoking material you've posted there SVT.

 

Thanks for posting' date=' i'm looking forward to reading up on this further.[/quote']

 

nice!

 

I'll post more things as I read them...here is the first thing I will read: http://lionsofliberty.com/2012/08/22/intro-to-ancap-private-law-pt-1-the-case-against-monopoly/

 

I plan on reading this free Rothbard book as well!: http://library.mises.org/books/Murray%20N%20Rothbard/For%20a%20New%20Liberty%20The%20Libertarian%20Manifesto.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote from an article I just read:

 

"States are criminal organizations. All states, not just the obviously totalitarian or repressive ones.... I intend this statement to be understood literally and not as some form of rhetorical exaggeration. The argument is simple. Theft, robbery, kidnapping and murder are all crimes. Those who engage in such activities, whether on their own behalf or on behalf of others are, by definition, criminals. In taxing the people of a country, the state engages in an activity that is morally equivalent to theft or robbery; in putting some people in prison, especially those who are convicted of so-called victimless crimes or when it drafts people into the armed services, the state is guilty of kidnapping or false imprisonment; in engaging in wars that are other than purely defensive, or, even if defensive, when the means of defence employed are disproportionate and indiscriminate, the state is guilty of manslaughter or murder."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

 

wiki summary quote:

 

Anarcho-capitalism (also referred to as "libertarian anarchy"[1] and "private-property anarchism"[2] or "market anarchism' date='"[3'] and "free market anarchism"[4]) is a libertarian political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.[5][6] In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by privately funded competitors rather than through taxation, and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market. Therefore, personal and economic activities under anarcho-capitalism would be regulated by privately run law rather than through politics.

 

Although individual liberties and market freedom are great ideologies, privately funded law enforement and courts would not be a good idea. Last time I checked, that was pretty much the system that the old west went on and corruption was rampant. Imagine someone like Trump dictating the justice department through private investment. Nothing could possibly go wrong there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although individual liberties and market freedom are great ideologies' date=' privately funded law enforement and courts would not be a good idea. Last time I checked, that was pretty much the system that the old west went on and corruption was rampant. Imagine someone like Trump dictating the justice department through private investment. Nothing could possibly go wrong there...[/quote']

 

that's what I was thinking too so I cant wait to here the rationale behind it...but lets not pretend that their isn't corruption now ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol' date=' of course there is! It's just not as out in the open like it would be under a system like you cited.[/quote']

 

which imho is much worse b/c at least in a free market system when corruption is known, it can be dealt with by other options arising...whereas now the gov't has a monopoly all the while staying corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those interested:

 

What are some major anarcho-capitalist writings?

 

David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, Classic utilitarian defense of anarchism

Murray Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, Moral justification of a free society

Davidson & Rees-Mogg, The Sovereign Individual, Historians look at technology & implications

Walter Block, Defending the Undefendable, Defends victimless "crimes" and controversial economic practices

Auberon Herbert, The Right and Wrong of Compulsion by the State

Franz Oppenheimer, The State, Analysis of State; political means vs. economic means

Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy the State, Oppenheimer's thesis applied to early US history

Murray Rothbard, Man, Economy, and State, The ultimate Austrian economics book

Murray Rothbard, Power and Market, Classification of State economic interventions

Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Academic philosopher on libertarianism

Frederic Bastiat, The Law, Radical anti-state classical liberalism

Herbert Spencer, Social Statics, Includes the essay "The Right to Ignore the State"

Morris & Linda Tannahill, The Market for Liberty, Classic on PDAs (private defense agencies)

Hans-Hermann Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism: Economics, Politics, and Ethics (PDF)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

which imho is much worse b/c at least in a free market system when corruption is known' date=' it can be dealt with by other options arising...whereas now the gov't has a monopoly all the while staying corrupt.[/quote']

 

True, but by and large, in an "anarcho-capitalist" system, he who controls the biggest piece of the pie would essentially control the whole pie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im been leaning Anarcho myself. Me and DL touched on it in a previous post.

 

I have an argument for private prisons that will butt **** kevbo. But I got class I havent got the time.

 

Ill be back though to post it.

 

SVT, Murray could be one of the most brilliant logical writers you will ever read. Take it in slowly my friend lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have time to read through all 21 pages right now' date=' but briefly skimming the first 4 has piqued my interest. I'll return with comments after I read it through.[/quote']

 

i haven't read it yet either

 

True' date=' but by and large, in an "anarcho-capitalist" system, he who controls the biggest piece of the pie would essentially control the whole pie.[/quote']

 

I don't think I agree.

 

Im been leaning Anarcho myself. Me and DL touched on it in a previous post.

 

I have an argument for private prisons that will butt **** kevbo. But I got class I havent got the time.

 

Ill be back though to post it.

 

SVT' date=' Murray could be one of the most brilliant logical writers you will ever read. Take it in slowly my friend lol.[/quote']

 

lol ok thx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im been leaning Anarcho myself. Me and DL touched on it in a previous post.

 

I have an argument for private prisons that will butt **** kevbo. But I got class I havent got the time.

 

Ill be back though to post it.

 

SVT' date=' Murray could be one of the most brilliant logical writers you will ever read. Take it in slowly my friend lol.[/quote']

 

Why are you assuming I would be butthurt about private prisons? The federal government shouldn't be paying to house criminals anyway. Especially since the US outspends the next 4 countries combined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you assuming I would be butthurt about private prisons? The federal government shouldn't be paying to house criminals anyway. Especially since the US outspends the next 4 countries combined.

 

I'm butthurt about private prisons and proud to admit it. Prisons for profit are a disgrace, corruption abounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont really have any inherent preference with govt vs private, so long as whichever path is both accountable and effective to the degree intended. For me, its less about intentions and more about keeping principles while getting results.

 

That being said, much of any political theory is largely based on subjective interpretations of concepts of what qualifies as good, effective, best, acceptable...etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevbo is because Ive noticed all logical free market arguments make you butt hurt.

 

Private Prisons. Not authored by me, but another brilliant mind on the internet.

 

Its a critical thinking piece. One sentence could be loaded with information and ideas. Dont rush it.

 

Imagine a world in which streets, residential neighbourhoods, commercial districts, schools, etc. are all privately owned. Private owners are allowed to decide whom they do and whom they do not allow on their property. Naturally, people likely to pose criminal threat are going to be excluded, though different areas may adopt different criteria.

 

I envision a near-universal insurance scheme whereby virtually all law-abiding citizens carry "crime insurance", akin to today's auto insurance. Such insurance (again, like auto insurance today) combines two types of coverage. First, a victim of a crime is immediately compensated for his loss. Second, the insurance company of a person convicted of a crime compensates the victim (or his insurance company) for the damage.

 

Landlords may then rationally restrict entrance to only those carried a valid crime insurance, if only because it makes their own crime insurance policy much less expensive. The problem of deciding who does and who doesn't pose criminal risk is thus outsourced to the insurance industry.

 

Next, let's turn to crime and punishment. Force may only be used to recover restitution for the crime victim from the criminal (or his insurance company). In many cases, the criminal will not have sufficient property to fully compensate the victim. In those cases, the victim (or his representatives, e.g. his insurance company) would have the right to incarcerate the criminal and extract compensation from him by garnishing a fraction of his earnings.

 

It may well be in everybody's interest to allow non-violent criminals to return to society, so as to maximise their earning potential. Violent criminals (or those posing flight risk) may legitimately be held in secure facilities. Private companies will compete in providing such secure facilities.

 

The arrangement would have to be acceptable to all involved - the private facility ("prison"), victim and criminal. The victim's interest is to allow the criminal to earn money (so as to get compensated), while minimizing flight risk. The criminal's interests are also to be able to work and earn money (so as to shorten his "sentence") while enjoying reasonable quality of life (and, in particular, safety from other prisoners).

 

Private prisons will thus compete with each other for satisfying the interests of both victim and criminal. To the victim, they will present a financial guarantee that the criminal is held securely - they will have to pay a penalty for escaped prisoners. Criminals, in turn, will get to choose amongst whichever private prisoners accept them (and are acceptable to the victim). That choice will ensure that conditions within the prison are adequate.

 

This system will align everybody's incentives. The victim (or his insurance company) will get compensated. The criminal will find employment and training, preparing him for post-criminal life. Secure facilities will compete for the business while retaining humane and safe holding conditions.

 

Once restitution has been paid, the prisoner would still have to persuade an insurance company to cover him before he can return to society. That requirement will greatly deter people from re-offending - a career criminal may well find his options severely curtailed. In extreme cases, people may voluntarily choose to reside in whichever facilities will accept them and allow them to engage in gainful employment.

 

While not directly related to the question of prisons, I would like to address one of the most common concerns with this system of crime and punishment - that of the millionaire criminal. The scenario that worries many people is that a spoilt heir will engage in criminal activity while using his trust fund to pay off victims.

 

To understand why this isn't a fatal problem, keep in mind that the use of force through the criminal-justice system is only one tool available to society. An even more important tool is that of boycott or ostracisism. Specifically, habitual criminals are likely to be excluded from most lands even if they have "paid their debt". To persuade yourself, just consider which school you'd rather send your children to - one that allowsanybody on its premises or one that requires background check (either directly or, as mentioned above, through credible insurance companies). In which shopping mall would you rather shop, in which residential area would you rather live - one that allows free entry or one that screens away repeat offenders?

 

You will see that repeat offenders, regardless of wealth, are likely to be excluded due to the demands of either the landlords directly, or their customers. This potential exclusion would act as a very powerful deterrent even for the wealthiest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BJJ, the article is rather convincing, the big problem is, as stated in the first word is that we have to "imagine", such a system. The current reality of private prisons are something quite different...

 

 

Private Prisons Lobby for Harsher Sentences http://seattlefreepress.org/2012/05/16/private-prisons-lobby-for-harsher-sentences/

If you?re looking for one of the reasons why the United States imprisons more people ? by miles ? than any other nation, you can look to the development of private prisons as a means of making some people rich. Those people spend millions of dollars to lobby elected officials to do two things: Convert government-run prisons to private prisons, and lock up more people for longer periods of time. Because that makes them even richer.

 

A new study by the Justice Policy Institute reaches exactly that conclusion and documents it thoroughly.

 

Over the past 15 years, the number of people held in all prisons in the United States has increased by 49.6 percent, while private prison populations have increased by 353.7 percent, according to recent federal statistics. Meanwhile, in 2010 alone, the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) and the GEO Group, the two largest private prison companies, had combined revenues of $2.9 billion. According to a report released today by the Justice Policy Institute (JPI), not only have private prison companies benefitted from this increased incarceration, but they have helped fuel it. Gaming the System: How the Political Strategies of Private Prison Companies Promote Ineffective Incarceration Policies, examines how private prison companies are able to wield influence over legislators and criminal justice policy, ultimately resulting in harsher criminal justice policies and the incarceration of more people. The report notes a ?triangle of influence? built on campaign contributions, lobbying and relationships with current and former elected and appointed officials. Through this strategy, private prison companies have gained access to local, state, and federal policymakers and have back-channel influence to pass legislation that puts more people behind bars, adds to private prison populations and generates tremendous profits at U.S. taxpayers? expense.

 

?For-profit companies exercise their political influence to protect their market share, which in the case of corporations like GEO Group and CCA primarily means the number of people locked up behind bars,? said Tracy Vel?zquez, executive director of JPI. ?We need to take a hard look at what the cost of this influence is, both to taxpayers and to the community as a whole, in terms of the policies being lobbied for and the outcomes for people put in private prisons. That their lobbying and political contributions is funded by taxpayers, through their profits on government contracts, makes it all the more important that people understand the role of private prisons in our political system.?

 

America?s obsession with locking up more and more people, while simultaneously ignoring the numerous ways that innocent people are railroaded by a corrupt and inept justice system, is not only destroying important constitutional principles, it?s also bankrupting state and local governments. It needs to be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ug' date=' thats because their current client is the state not us. Its not exactly private then. Its essentially subsidized by the government. To compare the Anarcho-Capitalist systems of privatization to anything from today is a mistake.[/quote']

 

Duly noted. I have to say that I highly favor the system described in your article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just seem like a big govt guy to me. I literally expected to have a back forth. But Im totally down with agreeing. Its much better on the heart rate lol. :D

 

I'm honestly not very political, though every political test I've taken says I'm libertarian. FWIW. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Third paragraph answers your question. No where does it say you are forced to purchase insurance.

 

" Landlords may then rationally restrict entrance to only those carried a valid crime insurance' date=' if only because it makes their own crime insurance policy much less expensive. The problem of deciding who does and who doesn't pose criminal risk is thus outsourced to the insurance industry."

 

Not really but I'm guessing you'll try to explain your rationale.

 

 

You are older than me and act younger. That's cool.

 

 

Internets r serious bizness. Stay angry buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" Landlords may then rationally restrict entrance to only those carried a valid crime insurance' date=' if only because it makes their own crime insurance policy much less expensive. The problem of deciding who does and who doesn't pose criminal risk is thus outsourced to the insurance industry."

 

Not really but I'm guessing you'll try to explain your rationale.

 

 

 

 

 

Internets r serious bizness. Stay angry buddy.[/quote']

 

You really dont get it?

 

Clearly it becomes in your interest to carry "crime insurance."

 

Stay mature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really dont get it?

 

Clearly it becomes in your interest to carry "crime insurance."

 

Stay mature.

 

Just like its "in your interest" to carry auto insurance. You're advocating a system that can be exploited by lawyers and insurance companies.(read: just like the US healthcare system) Decent idea, poor explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free Market = Correctible

Government = not correctible

 

GM goes out a business and someone else will come along and fill in the gap. There is money in cars so someone has to sell cars so someone will sell cars. Because thats the ****ing goal. To sell cars.

 

Govt bails out GM and now what you have is a failing business being propped up by tax payers and its a never ending ****ing money suck on all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voluntary trade

 

Capitalism is not about winners and losers

 

Capitalism is about free markets

 

And Free Markets are about voluntary trade. I just bought a Razer Black Widow keyboard for 120 bucks. I wanted Razers keyboard more than I wanted my 120 bucks and they wanted my 120 more than their keyboard. WIN WIN ladies and gents. Sorry about that.

 

I work at a restaurant for a wage. The company wants my time more than their money and I want their money more than my time. Again win win.

 

Unions, regulations, govt involvement, all destory the equilibrium that is the free market and the invisible hand. Thus creating more unemployment, higher prices on goods and services, and less incentive to produce and earn more.

 

BOOM! Time to hit the gym!

 

Man DS Craze has got to be a ****ed up stimulant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist

 

Libertarian opponents of anarchy are attacking a straw man. Their arguments are usually utilitarian in nature and amount to "but anarchy won't work" or "we need the (things provided by the) state." But these attacks are confused at best' date=' if not disingenuous. To be an anarchist does not mean you think anarchy will "work" (whatever that means); nor that you predict it will or "can" be achieved. It is possible to be a pessimistic anarchist, after all. To be an anarchist only means that you believe that aggression is not justified, and that states necessarily employ aggression. And, therefore, that states, and the aggression they necessarily employ, are unjustified. It's quite simple, really. It's an ethical view, so no surprise it confuses utilitarians.

 

Accordingly, anyone who is not an anarchist must maintain either: (a) aggression is justified; or (B) states (in particular, minimal states) do not necessarily employ aggression.[/quote']

 

Read the rest at: http://www.lewrockwell.com/kinsella/kinsella15.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a briliant paragraph

 

ha yea me too...you should really read the following (in the order I've posted them):

 

The Case Against Monopoly: http://lionsofliberty.com/2012/08/22/intro-to-ancap-private-law-pt-1-the-case-against-monopoly/

 

How Can it Work: http://lionsofliberty.com/2012/08/29/intro-to-ancap-private-law-pt-2-how-can-it-work/

 

Police Protection: http://lionsofliberty.com/2012/09/12/intro-to-ancap-private-defense-pt-1-police-protection/

 

Military Defense: http://lionsofliberty.com/2012/10/10/intro-to-ancap-private-defense-pt-2-military-defense/

 

So far i've only read the first link...starting link 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Will do. Good lookin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...