Objectivist Criticisms of Anarcho-Capitalism
See full discussionLog in or sign up to participate in this discussion.
With an account, you can revise, criticize, and comment on ideas.Ask yourself what it means to have a "competition" in governmental services. It's a "competition" in wielding force, a "competition" in subjugating others, a "competition" in making people obey commands. That's not "competition," it's violent conflict. On a large scale, it's war.
Governments already compete on a global scale. So why isn’t the world in a perpetual state of war?
See #17.
Could conflict among "competing governments" be taken care of by treaties? Treaties?--enforced by whom? I once asked Ayn Rand about the feasibility of such treaties between sovereign "competing governments." She looked at me grimly and said, "You mean like at the U.N.?"
The part “enforced by whom?” is telling. There isn’t just ‘who’ but also ‘what’. For example, David Friedman refers to the discipline of constant dealings as an enforcement mechanism.
She looked at me grimly and said, "You mean like at the U.N.?"
Consider, instead, NATO – the ‘North Atlantic Treaty Organization’ – another supranational collaboration. It has been stable for decades and war amongst its members would be unthinkable.
Why does Rand choose a bad example that conveniently supports her case while ignoring a good one that doesn’t?