Austin Liberty Coalition Message Board › Flawed: Anarcho–Capitalism

Flawed: Anarcho–Capitalism

Vincent C.
user 4673685
Austin, TX
Post #: 250
Since I’ve been involved in the Liberty movement I have ran across people who believe that the answer to all of our problems is to privatize everything.

Although that statement may seem attractive to many LIBERTY lovers it is actually a deception. Hearing the word privatization may sound good because it is a direction toward less government however, what we as LIBERTY people must understand is that privatization means that corporations will rule and own everything. It’s bad enough that corporations put GMOs in the foods some of us eat, or provide arms to the military in the name of profit, or how about dumping pollution in the water we drink or on a person’s private property.

There are many examples of what can happen when corporations take ownership of infrastructure like, the city of Atlanta privatizing the water which lead to an uproar by the people of Atlanta because the corporations had a monopoly on the water supply, or the same situation in South America when many of the countries there privatize there water which resulted in the people rising up to resist because many of the people in these countries could not afford the water, of which caused many to die of dehydration. Privatizing everything is exactly what Alexander Hamilton dream of. He wanted a society where there was a ruling class of people which managed corporate entities along with the help of a Central Bank (a private corporate entity).

So even though Anarcho-Capitalist may not realizes it, what they advocate is pure 100% HAMILTONISM Compared to the Free-Market Common Law society that was envisioned by Thomas Jefferson.

So now I will explain how Anarcho-Capitalism is a deception. The first thing we must understand about the market is the three different types of businesses. The first is a sole-proprietorship, the second a partnership, and the third a corporation. A sole-proprietor is a business with one owner which has 100% liability on his property and business. A partnership is the same but with more than one owner. A corporation is a business which has LIMITED LIABILITY which separates the liability of the natural person (human being) and an artificial person (corporate entity). So now the question that arises is, where does Limited Liability come from? You guessed it the government.

So this is why Anarcho-Capitalism is flawed as well as being deceptive because when Anarhco-Capitalist say that everything should be privatize what they are really saying is that government created entities (corporations) should own everything. It just does not make sense.

So inclosing if there is one statement to why Anarcho-capitalism does not work, it’s because the ideology disregards LIMITED LIABILITY.


Ryan
user 14281597
Austin, TX
Post #: 2
I've never met an Anarcho-Capitalist who advocated keeping corporations. Amongst libertarians they are usually the most anti-corporation.

Also you missed some types of business structures: gov registered non-profit corporations; loose knit non-registered non-profits; and partnership-corporate hybrids which are common in some countries and unheard of in others - limited liability partnerships for example. Not that this paragraph is relevant to your post.
Ryan
user 14281597
Austin, TX
Post #: 3
Also what you are advocating sounds similar to Geoism - the idea that natural resources are owned by the community. There are Geolibertarians just as there are Geostatists.

To some degree a pure ideology is impossible.
Vincent C.
user 4673685
Austin, TX
Post #: 251
To your first statement Murry Rothbard says that the state should not exist, at the same time he say's that LIMITED LIABILITY can exist. Again it does not make sense. How can limited liabilty exist when there is no government to create it or grant it.
Ryan
user 14281597
Austin, TX
Post #: 4
Well actually, liability itself is a government concept. Either a central government, local government, or a group of tough guys acting as a government in matters of debt has always enforced liability. You can't have anarchy AND debt courts / organizations.

The concept of community ownership of natural resources requires a government of sorts as well. Whether that form is in a traditional modern government or a small community with their own enforcement rules. Or you could have no enforcement, where you take what you want and if someone wants to try and stop you they better be prepared to fight. Some would argue gangs are a form of government.

So on many topics, puritanical anarchy is impossible. Life is filled with these damned if you do damned if you don't scenarios. No big deal though. It would be a miracle to even reduce govt spending to 15% of GDP so why waste time thinking about this anarchy stuff?
Vincent C.
user 4673685
Austin, TX
Post #: 252
The first thing that I want to say is that I never said anything about natural resources being owned by a government. I am a believer in the Free-Market, but I also recognize that there are things separate from the market of which the market cannot provide. Things like roads, bridges, and law enforcement (sheriff). There is no way a sole-proprietor or a partnership can create a bridge at the magnitude of connecting two states or two cities. Now I will say that a corporation can, but then what that means is that government has to give a privilege (limited liability) to a specific person to create and own the bridge which then, is an economic injustice.

Thought out history sole-proprietors and partnerships created things and products out of natural resources which then they sold in the market place. So no I do not think government should own natural resources. But what I will say is that there are things at the local level that can, and may be provided not by of government itself, but by a public entity like electric power or a waterworks. Now I will go one more step in-regards to LIBERTY. Where I live we have a public power district where the management is chosen by the people through an election at the same time, I have the free will to not participate in purchasing electricity by buying solar panels or whatever sort of renewable energy there is which would allow me to be independent from the power district. So as long as we have freedom of choice then we have LIBERTY even if there is a public power district.

I also want to say I agree to your last sentence however the problem is that there are anarchists in the liberty movement who chastise and ridicule people who believe in limited constitutional government. What they do not realize is that without government there is no LIBERTY, because then you have chaos. And the fact that I have heard many Anarchco capitalist talk about how its more efficient to have corporations provide for services like the military, utilities, roads, bridges, and law-enforcement.

So that is why I started the discussion.
Matt W.
user 26992822
Cedar Park, TX
Post #: 2
Why can't the free market provide a bridge? or roads? or law enforcement? The Military I agree with because of the international identity of a country's military. If by roads, you mean a unified interstate highway system, then I suppose I can agree in practice instead of in theory. As long as there is a tax payer supported major road network, it isn't going to be cost effective to build your own. Of course, if we implement toll roads everywhere we might get into a position where a private toll road could be cost effective. I don't see how a bridge would be out of the realm of being private. Law enforcement could absolutely be handled privately.

but lets go back to the first sentence. why couldn't a bridge be handled by non governmental entities (of whatever sort)?
Matt W.
user 26992822
Cedar Park, TX
Post #: 3
This also seems to have undertones of the state vs State issue. I am one of the people that thinks whoever is in charge is the government. whether that is THE government, a corporation, a gang or something else. The advantageous thing about a corporation running things with the government making the rules is the separation of roles. When you have one entity making the rules, implementing the rules and enforcing the rules, the voluntary nature of the system breaks down. Granted, there can (and is) collusion between the corporations and government, but corruption is not the topic of this thread.
Ryan
user 14281597
Austin, TX
Post #: 5
I'm not an anarchist, nor even a minarchist, but I still don't think corporations should exist. If we are going to enforce the concept of debt, which we do, a business should not get immunity based on the number of owners it has or a filing fee it pays the government. I think all businesses that have owners should be treated as partnerships. And all organizations that have no owners should be treated as non-profit casual organizations. Of course this position cannot be that of an anarchist (but can be minarchist) because you still have 'debt', a legal concept enforced by a governing organization.

As far as natural resources and geoism... that too cannot really have an anarchist position because at the end of the day some organization will be metting out the resources. First come first serve? That's fine until someone else tries to take it, or stop you from taking it. There will always be some baseline authority running your usage of natural resources.

That's really the concept behind minarchism, that some formal enforced rules will still need to exist in order to maximize liberty. Laws against theft, laws against some random group acting as a government, rules deciding how debts and vendettas should be handled, etc.

Whether you have full liability, no liability, or limited liability there is a society enforcing those concepts. In that sense there never ever is anarchy. In the past the present or the future.
Vincent C.
user 4673685
Austin, TX
Post #: 255
Here is a Quote from a friend of mine.

"One question that comes to my mind is this: If the only way a Corporation can come into existence is by Government sanction, how could a Corporation be sanctioned if "We the People" did away with Government?"
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy