Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In anarcho-capitalism unaccountable private tyrannies would impose on people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, cheesebugers would fall from the sky. Because I said so.

By "unaccountable private tyrannies" I assume you mean "big corporations" right?

Why do big corporations want more government, not less? Shouldnt' they be working to dismantle the beast that is keeping them from imposing upon you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, major corporations benefit from government protection in america. No, that doesn't prove that private organizations couldn't profitably employ violent and unscrupulous strategies to undermine workers and common people in a stateless society.

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, major corporations benefit from government protection in america. No, that doesn't prove that private organizations couldn't profitably employ violent and unscrupulous strategies to undermine workers and common people in a stateless society.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the point is that corporations couldn't employ violent/unscrupulous strategies to undermine workers w/o the state. But such exploitation is far less likely to occur without the State, since the State has only helped to increase the power of the elites. In any case, since statism is also exploitation and violence, it seems silly to enlist statism to help combat corporate exploitation. Libertarians need to be more aware of the possibility of exploitation w/o the State, and find non-statist methods of fighting such domination (and it seems that such a fight ought begin with radical labor unions, worker-controlled collectives, etc).

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, major corporations benefit from government protection in america. No, that doesn't prove that private organizations couldn't profitably employ violent and unscrupulous strategies to undermine workers and common people in a stateless society.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the point is that corporations couldn't employ violent/unscrupulous strategies to undermine workers w/o the state. But such exploitation is far less likely to occur without the State, since the State has only helped to increase the power of the elites.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. This is because the "elites" (or the "exploiters" or the "big bad corporations" or whatever boogeyman name you want to give them) can use government to externalize their costs.

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
But such exploitation is far less likely to occur without the State, since the State has only helped to increase the power of the elites.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there proof that one can confidently predict this (the first part)?

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is there proof that one can confidently predict this (the first part)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think history and economic theory bear this point out, but I'm not sure I could 'prove' this point. (pvn's point about externalizing costs is an excellent one, though--I'm not sure how providing corporations with a huge powerful entity known as the State could possibly help the workers and the poor).

In any case, shouldn't we be looking for non-violent and non-authoritarian methods of fighting domination and exploitation? WHy would we want to rely on an expolitative and authoritarian state to fight exploitative and authoritative corporations?

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]


After WW2 Studies show that the government went on a major propoganda campaign to promote capitalism.



[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


After WW2 Studies show that the government went on a major propoganda campaign to promote capitalism.



[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

[/ QUOTE ]

The studies are wrong? They were released a few years ago and showed what extent the government were releasing proaganda to promote the "capitalist way of life". Why is that hard to believe?

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


After WW2 Studies show that the government went on a major propoganda campaign to promote capitalism.



[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

[/ QUOTE ]

The studies are wrong? They were released a few years ago and showed what extent the government were releasing proaganda to promote the "capitalist way of life". Why is that hard to believe?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bringing in welfare socialising many industries in the UK and europe and massivly increasing tax rates = promoting the capitalist way of life?

Re: less government = socialism?
 

The study (and this post) regards the US; not the UK. Ironically, the UK was seen as an example of the "dangers of democracy" i.e. the majority would vote for agrarian reform. And not sure if you noticed but the socialism I was referring to was obviously not government control over industries or raising taxes.

Re: less government = socialism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The study (and this post) regards the US; not the UK. Ironically, the UK was seen as an example of the "dangers of democracy" i.e. the majority would vote for agrarian reform. And not sure if you noticed but the socialism I was referring to was obviously not government control over industries or raising taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

No but you said they were "promoting capitalism" which is blatently untrue for any reasonable definition of capitalism.