Quote from: FatherMcGruder on March 08, 2011, 07:30:50 PM

Quote from: myrkul on March 08, 2011, 04:21:24 PM

All your arguments are shot down here: http://agorism.info/docs/AgoristClassTheory.pdf

How are all capitalists not red-marketeers?

Red marketeers ply their trade by violent means, and resolve their disputes with violence. Anarcho-capitalism upholds the Non-aggression principle, and proposes arbitration/mediation as the preferred dispute resolution method. Violence is only supported in defense against violence.

Quote

Quote from: myrkul on March 08, 2011, 07:18:27 PM

Well, I wouldn't put mere survival in the "Good" bin... mediocre, more like. to be good, it must thrive, in the face of competition. Which is why I will welcome enclaves of mutualism, when a prevailing market anarchy is achieved. What good is any system, if it doesn't have competition to keep it on its toes?

If any enclave refused to honor your property and thereby threatened your profits, as a capitalist, you would not tolerate it. Besides, why would a cooperative society compete?

If an individual from an enclave decided that they wanted to use my property and refused to recognize my rights to it, I would treat it as any theft. That does not mean I would enter the enclave seeking to convert or extort the residents.

A cooperative society is in competition with the market society simply by existing. It offers an alternative to the market society. If the market society cannot keep the standard of living above that of the cooperative society, people will seek to join the cooperative society, and the market society will lose people. The same goes for the cooperative society, of course, either it will be growing, dying, or in a perilous equilibrium.