Free market proven disastrous. In Iraq.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
Libertarianism has now arrived at an interesting juncture. The moment for its grandest ambitions seems to have passed. President Bush is no longer talking about privatizing Social Security, and his free-market approach to rebuilding Iraq has proven disastrous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/books/...amp;oref=slogin


[/ QUOTE ]



I'm really starting to question this idea that people acting peacefully and voluntary is a good thing. I mean, we've now seen so many examples of people trading goods and services voluntarily leading to complete and utter chaos and mayhem.

First it was the Industrial Revolution, then the Great Depression, Somalia, Katrina and now Iraq.

[Case Closed]

Free market solution to Iraq?

Does he mean giving Haliburton(sp) no bid contracts and expense plus one contracts? This is not an example of free markets.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Free market solution to Iraq?

Does he mean giving Haliburton(sp) no bid contracts and expense plus one contracts? This is not an example of free markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, its not. Why any Anarcho-capitalist or libertarian voted for Bush is beyond me.

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Free market solution to Iraq?

Does he mean giving Haliburton(sp) no bid contracts and expense plus one contracts? This is not an example of free markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, its not. Why any Anarcho-capitalist or libertarian voted for Bush is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope you did not get the wrong idea from my post, I was a little confusa-raged. I know the money that is being pumped over there is not going to competitive companies. It's a smack in the face to anyone who knows what a free market is. Sadly it may turn into a talking point for my liberal brethren when they speak of the horrors of free market economies.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Free market solution to Iraq?

Does he mean giving Haliburton(sp) no bid contracts and expense plus one contracts? This is not an example of free markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, its not. Why any Anarcho-capitalist or libertarian voted for Bush is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope you did not get the wrong idea from my post, I was a little confusa-raged. I know the money that is being pumped over there is not going to competitive companies. It's a smack in the face to anyone who knows what a free market is. Sadly it may turn into a talking point for my liberal brethren when they speak of the horrors of free market economies.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I think its a talking point of your liberal brethren about how corrupt the bush administration is.

[Phil153]

Nielso,

While I appreciate the joke, I'll say what I've said before: anarchism only works with an intelligent, racially homogeneous, religiously homogeneous population, in affluent, isolated countries. If any of those things are untrue, people's irrational lust for power, natural tendencies to violence, and religious insanities will bring the whole thing crashing down.

Here's an anarchist idea for you: What if you live in a country where 40% of the population wants Sharia law implemented, including stonings for unmarried sex, requirement to wear burkas, etc. A country without an established government will devolve into exactly that: a place where Sharia is implemented, and the rights of people who don't want it are abused. The sheer size, devotion and coordination of the zealots will allow them to build an army/vigilante gangs that can monopolize force - and the market cannot provide a solution against something so powerful.

[cpk]

A society with 40% in favor of sharia has even bigger problems if there's a government.

An intersesting aside:

It's not a problem for AC if people want to criminalize adultery and stone adulterers. They will simply belong to DROs that operate that way.

Gary North is a contributor to LewRockwell.com and is often described as an anarchocapitalist. Gary North has also written tons of stuff (NOT on LewRockwell.com, mind you) about how theocracy would be great and how people should be stoned for adultery and sodomy. How do these two seemingly incompatible viewpoints line up? Simple....North doesn't believe in statism. He doesn't seek a theocratic United States of America. He seeks an anarchocapitalist society where the prevailing libertarian law code is based on Old Testament law.

How do you like them apples?