I disagree. It's true that "absolute freedom" and "no freedom" are polar opposites. It's a non-sequiter that their oppositeness prevents either of them from b

I disagree. It's true that "absolute freedom" and "no freedom" are polar opposites. It's a non-sequiter that their oppositeness prevents either of them from being true, somehow forcing us to find some utilitarian compromise. There are well-written defenses of both lasseiz-faire and marxist economics (although I think the former is vastly more defendable than the latter). I've yet to read a thorough, consistent defense of some "middle way".