Re: A less theoretical, more practical method of resistance...
Anarcho-capitalism as a genuine way of "resistance"?? You must be kidding! BTW, talking of a less theoretical/more practical approach, here's a full-scale case study of real-life libertarianism: RUSSIA in the Roaring '90s
Corruption in Russia - a light is shined on the kleptocracy, which promptly fans chauvinism and starts an internal war
September 1999
As financial scandals erupt, bomb blasts rock Moscow. Some officials claim terrorists are doing it, but no terrorists claim credit --rather unusual for terrorists. Some analysts suggest that the bombings are an intentional part of Russia's own politicians' manipulations of public opinion. The fact that martial law was not declared immediately is put forward as evidence that the leadership is not the culprit, although the bulldozing of evidence in the bombings and the political use of them to get popular support for attacks on Chechnya and thus the current government suggest that the leadership still cannot be excluded.
Attacks on "Chechen bandits" appear to be a substitute for taking on the main bandits in Russia - the kleptocracy.
[snip]
amber.ucsf.edu
The political Utopia promoted by the von Mises, Rothbards, and other Anarcho-capitalists, if applied to the US or Europe, would drag us all in a "Russian dreamland".... I don't think that many of our fellow citizens will welcome such a backward outcome but, as I said, isn't the Mafia the highest stage of capitalism, anyway? Below is a good paper on anarcho-capitalism:
Is "anarcho" capitalism against the state?
by Iain MacSaorsa
"Anarcho"-capitalism implies a class division of society into bosses and workers, due to its support of private property. Any such division will require a state to maintain it. However, it need not be the same state as exists now. In so far as this goes, "anarcho" capitalism plainly states that "defence associations" would exist to protect property. For the "anarcho" capitalist, these companies are not states. According to Rothbard [Nomos XIX], a state must have one or both of the following characteristics :-
1) The ability to tax those who live within it.
2) It asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defence over a given area.
Instead of this, the "anarcho"-capitalist thinks that people should be able to select their own defense companies, which would provide police, courts, etc. These associations would "all... would have to abide by the basic law code" [op cit, p.206]. Thus a "general libertarian law code" would govern the actions of these companies. Like anything else under capitalism, this "law code" would reflect supply and demand, particularly if "judges... will prosper on the market in proportion to their reputation for efficiency and impartiality" [Rothbard, op cit, p. 204].
It does not take much imagination to think who's interests "prosperous" judges and defense companies would defend. Their own, as well as those who pay their wages, other members of the rich elite. If the system is based on $1, one vote, its easy to see whose values the "law" would defend. The terms of ``free agreements' under such a law system would be titled in favour of lenders over debtors, landlords over tenants, employers over employees, in a way which is identical to the current system. As would be expected in a system based on "absolute" property rights and the free market. How the laws would actually be selected is anyone's guess, although I would imagine most "anarcho"-capitalists support the myth of "natural law", the authoritarian implications of which are discussed in section X.X.X. In any event, it would not be based on one person, one vote and so the "general law" code would reflect invested interests and be very hard to change, and so would not develop as society develops.
In a free market, supply and demand would soon result in a legal system which favoured the rich over the poor. As rights would be like everything else, a commodity, they would soon reflect the interest of the rich.
However, some "anarcho" capitalists claim that just as cheaper cars were developed to meet demand, so would defense associations for the poor. This forgets a few key points, the general "libertarian" law code would be applicable to all associations, so they would have to operate within a system determined by the power of money. Secondly, in a race between a jaguar and a mini, who do you think will win? And lastly, as with any business, the free market would soon result in a few companies dominating the market as capital costs increase as the result of profit making and competition. With obvious implications for "justice". [...]
au.spunk.org |
