5 ms·

Surely these guys were perfect anarcho-capitalists. They bowed to no system of external rule, while making as much money as possible.

by ktizo 14y ago

mindcrime 14y ago
Surely these guys were perfect anarcho-capitalists. No, being an An-Cap does not necessarily mean a "profit at all costs mentality." Anarcho-Capitalism, as an ideology, embraces the idea of private property rights, enforcement of contracts, and rejects fraud as a mechanism for achieving one's ends. Some of these crooks may have chosen the An-Cap label for themselves, but I damn sure don't claim them, FWIW. And neither do most of the other An-Caps I know.
- sp332 14y ago
  How do you get private property and contract enforcement without laws and law enforcement?
  - willyt 14y ago
    Guns, pitchforks, lynch mobs, Wild West type shit, no? (I don't want that.)
    - mindcrime 14y ago
      Guns, pitchforks, lynch mobs, Wild West type shit, no? (I don't want that.) It sounds like you've already made up your mind that it could only be that way, but see my response above if you are actually interested in some more considered discussion of the topic. I'll just say that I have at least as much faith that people can voluntarily and peacefully reach a workable agreement without using a construct like "The State" as I am that they can do so by using such a construct. In either case, human nature is the ultimate limiting factor.. the State will never be more morally pure, or have more of conscience, etc., than the people who constitute it, IMO.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    I don't really have the time or space to right a book here, and - to be quite honest - there are people who are much better equipped to answer those questions than I am. If you're honestly curious, and not just asking that in a sarcastic fashion, I'd suggest a few resources to learn more about the AnCap / libertarian approach: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism http://www.mises.org http://www.mises.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard http://www.lewrockwell.com/ http://www.lewrockwell.com/ http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html http://www.anti-state.com/ http://www.anti-state.com/
    - flyinRyan 14y ago
      Do you have a very concise source that will answer the most immediate stumbling block to even considering this idea: how will you enforce contracts? Every time I ask I either get pointed to web sites that probably answer my question somewhere (but I'm not the one selling anything here so I don't feel the onus to do most of the work) or told about private contract enforcement agencies. Since the bulk of what government is is violent force or threat thereof, wouldn't this just be privatized rent-a-governments?
      - ebrenes 14y ago
        I think one of the links mindcrime provided attempts to answer that question briefly: http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html#part16 http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html#part16 However, I don't feel it does a very good job. It basically devolves into private security provided a la mafia protection money or what's been seen in Sao Paolo / Rio de Janeiro with the cops enforcing payments from the populace for keeping the riff-raff out, while running their own schemes. Likewise, I can very much see the whole law system being subverted to benefit those providing the most cases (thus helping the bottom line) or benefiting a certain plaintiff over another, like with the eastern district of Texas handling so many patent cases. Overall, the response seems incredibly wishy-washy with little thought paid to the ways the system can be significantly subverted.
breakall 14y ago
They took on immense risk in order to squeeze all the profit they could out of the system.... but faced no consequences as a result of losing on their bets. $45 billion in two installments kept them afloat. Wouldn't a anarcho-capitalist demand that a market loser like Citi pay the price?
dreamdu5t 14y ago
Citigroup was insolvent. They didn't survive in the market. It was the government that continued their existence.
- intended 14y ago
  This is completely without context. I mean I hate to be defending the govt. but at the time, they basically were told, "give us cash or the world burns." This by the same guys who helped slowly get all the checks and balances to prevent precisely their behavior, removed. It was the government that continued the existence of a terrible system because the most vulnerable were held hostage by the financial institutions. Which are now once again slowly fighting to get their rules re instated.

Surely these guys were perfect anarcho-capitalists. They bowed to no system of external rule, while making as much money as possible.

by ktizo 14y ago

Surely these guys were perfect anarcho-capitalists. They bowed to no system of external rule, while making as much money as possible.

mindcrime 14y ago

Surely these guys were perfect anarcho-capitalists. No, being an An-Cap does not necessarily mean a "profit at all costs mentality." Anarcho-Capitalism, as an ideology, embraces the idea of private property rights, enforcement of contracts, and rejects fraud as a mechanism for achieving one's ends. Some of these crooks may have chosen the An-Cap label for themselves, but I damn sure don't claim them, FWIW. And neither do most of the other An-Caps I know.

sp332 14y ago
How do you get private property and contract enforcement without laws and law enforcement?
- willyt 14y ago
  Guns, pitchforks, lynch mobs, Wild West type shit, no? (I don't want that.)
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    Guns, pitchforks, lynch mobs, Wild West type shit, no? (I don't want that.) It sounds like you've already made up your mind that it could only be that way, but see my response above if you are actually interested in some more considered discussion of the topic. I'll just say that I have at least as much faith that people can voluntarily and peacefully reach a workable agreement without using a construct like "The State" as I am that they can do so by using such a construct. In either case, human nature is the ultimate limiting factor.. the State will never be more morally pure, or have more of conscience, etc., than the people who constitute it, IMO.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  I don't really have the time or space to right a book here, and - to be quite honest - there are people who are much better equipped to answer those questions than I am. If you're honestly curious, and not just asking that in a sarcastic fashion, I'd suggest a few resources to learn more about the AnCap / libertarian approach: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism http://www.mises.org http://www.mises.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard http://www.lewrockwell.com/ http://www.lewrockwell.com/ http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html http://www.anti-state.com/ http://www.anti-state.com/
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    Do you have a very concise source that will answer the most immediate stumbling block to even considering this idea: how will you enforce contracts? Every time I ask I either get pointed to web sites that probably answer my question somewhere (but I'm not the one selling anything here so I don't feel the onus to do most of the work) or told about private contract enforcement agencies. Since the bulk of what government is is violent force or threat thereof, wouldn't this just be privatized rent-a-governments?
    - ebrenes 14y ago
      I think one of the links mindcrime provided attempts to answer that question briefly: http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html#part16 http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html#part16 However, I don't feel it does a very good job. It basically devolves into private security provided a la mafia protection money or what's been seen in Sao Paolo / Rio de Janeiro with the cops enforcing payments from the populace for keeping the riff-raff out, while running their own schemes. Likewise, I can very much see the whole law system being subverted to benefit those providing the most cases (thus helping the bottom line) or benefiting a certain plaintiff over another, like with the eastern district of Texas handling so many patent cases. Overall, the response seems incredibly wishy-washy with little thought paid to the ways the system can be significantly subverted.

breakall 14y ago

They took on immense risk in order to squeeze all the profit they could out of the system.... but faced no consequences as a result of losing on their bets. $45 billion in two installments kept them afloat. Wouldn't a anarcho-capitalist demand that a market loser like Citi pay the price?

dreamdu5t 14y ago

Citigroup was insolvent. They didn't survive in the market. It was the government that continued their existence.

intended 14y ago
This is completely without context. I mean I hate to be defending the govt. but at the time, they basically were told, "give us cash or the world burns." This by the same guys who helped slowly get all the checks and balances to prevent precisely their behavior, removed. It was the government that continued the existence of a terrible system because the most vulnerable were held hostage by the financial institutions. Which are now once again slowly fighting to get their rules re instated.