3 ms·
“Free market” usually excludes the use of violence. Land use restrictions are backed by the government, which has the monopoly on legal violence and will arrest
by rogerrogerr 2y ago
“Free market” usually excludes the use of violence. Land use restrictions are backed by the government, which has the monopoly on legal violence and will arrest you for violating land use restrictions.
An average free market supporter would say this isn’t the free market working.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Land use restrictions are backed by the government, which has the monopoly on legal violence No, free markets aren’t equivalent to anarchy and every state action isn’t tantamount to violence. This is an ambiguity in the concept of free markets, which is why we’re having a linguistic versus conceptual discussion.
- ConspiracyFact 2y agoProperty rights themselves are backed by the state’s monopoly on violence. So no, the free market doesn’t exclude violence, it requires it. (I’m not saying that capitalism uniquely requires violence in order to function, but libertarians like to pretend that it’s an exception.)
- sangnoir 2y ago> “Free market” usually excludes the use of violence How can contracts be enforced without coercive force if one party decides not to follow the agreement?