Free Markets on a roll in Colombia...
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Beefy
Worst gambler ever
Well, closer to what I was thinking. But it seems to me that there's a constant call for more of this benevolent government intervention all the time. The same government that invades and occupies foreign countries, spies on its own citizens and imprisons scores of victimless "criminals".
Trust them all you'd like Cypress, but don't expect me to.
Yeah, and I like bananas too. And not only because they're phallic. The good news is honeybells will be arriving soon.
I'm asserting that in a regulated, capitalist economy, with a strong and functioning public oversight and regulation of corporate and criminal activities, it is unlikely that corporations are going to hire terrorist armies to defend their interests.
This is what happens in non-functioning unregulated economies, economies based on crony capitalism, or gilded-age style economies that don't have a functioning and robust system of law and order and oversight.
I'm not claiming that some theoretical version of pure, guilded age libertariansim would prevent, or enable, these abuses. I don't think there are any examples on the planet of a functioning, largely unregulated libertarian economy, where morality is upheld, and abuses held in check by the magic hand of the free market and consumer choice.
Which is the beauty of being a libertarian. One can proudly point to some theoretical ideology of unregulated capitalism, without having any actual real world examples to point to to demonstrate its feasibility.
Last edited:
True. And it also demonstrates a need for a robust public oversight authority, to protect workers and unions, since Chiquita's terrorist army was also allegedly union busting, and intimidating workers.
Which unfortunately not only requires police and security forces, but also a functioning and robust legal and regulatory committment - including evil regulations and statutory authorities - to enforce labor laws and protect workers rights.
Free markets imply a criminal justice system. Your argument is silly.
True. And it also demonstrates a need for a robust public oversight authority, to protect workers and unions, since Chiquita's terrorist army was also allegedly union busting, and intimidating workers.
Which unfortunately not only requires police and security forces, but also a functioning and robust legal and regulatory committment - including evil regulations and statutory authorities - to enforce labor laws and protect workers rights.
Regulatory oversight? What sort of regulation is needed to outlaw murder and assault? The idea that those who argue against burdensome regulation are arguing against enforcement of basic laws protecting persons and property is an absurd distortion.
Let's take it out of the context of Colombian jurisprudence and sovereignty, and lets put an american perspective on it.
It is widely acknowledged that libertarians and other lassaize-faire free marketeers are not fans of FDR, or of Teddy Roosevelt. They are not fans of the modest regulatory economic reforms of those two great progressive presidents.
Yet, before the legal and labor reforms of Teddy, and particularly FDR, this Chiquita episode in colombia would be widely recognizable in pre-FDR america. Corporations hired their own goon squads to bust unions, intimidate workers, and enforce their will - all in the absence of any significant or enforceable labor laws, and regulations governing corporate conduct. American workers were abused, attacked, and in some cases murdered by the private goon squad armies hired by their corporate overlords.
I'd certainly welcome libertarian support for the legal and labor reforms of TR and FDR at this point, if you can see any tangible parallels between Chiquita's activities in colombia, and corporate abuses in the pre-FDR era.
It is widely acknowledged that libertarians and other lassaize-faire free marketeers are not fans of FDR, or of Teddy Roosevelt. They are not fans of the modest regulatory economic reforms of those two great progressive presidents.
Yet, before the legal and labor reforms of Teddy, and particularly FDR, this Chiquita episode in colombia would be widely recognizable in pre-FDR america. Corporations hired their own goon squads to bust unions, intimidate workers, and enforce their will - all in the absence of any significant or enforceable labor laws, and regulations governing corporate conduct. American workers were abused, attacked, and in some cases murdered by the private goon squad armies hired by their corporate overlords.
I'd certainly welcome libertarian support for the legal and labor reforms of TR and FDR at this point, if you can see any tangible parallels between Chiquita's activities in colombia, and corporate abuses in the pre-FDR era.
Let's take it out of the context of Colombian jurisprudence and sovereignty, and lets put an american perspective on it.
It is widely acknowledged that libertarians and other lassaize-faire free marketeers are not fans of FDR, or of Teddy Roosevelt. They are not fans of the modest regulatory economic reforms of those two great progressive presidents.
Yet, before the legal and labor reforms of Teddy, and particularly FDR, this Chiquita episode in colombia would be widely recognizable in pre-FDR america. Corporations hired their own goon squads to bust unions, intimidate workers, and enforce their will - all in the absence of any significant or enforceable labor laws, and regulations governing corporate conduct. American workers were abused, attacked, and in some cases murdered by the private goon squad armies hired by their corporate overlords.
I'd certainly welcome libertarian support for the legal and labor reforms of TR and FDR at this point, if you can see any tangible parallels between Chiquita's activities in colombia, and corporate abuses in the pre-FDR era.
What specific reforms addressed this? To a large degree this happened due to a failure and corruption of local police, i.e., government.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Sooo .. less regulation is the answer?
Would instances of this type of abuse not occur if the "free market" was allowed to police itself?
Have the controls now in place prevented even greater and widespread abuse?
You can't have it both ways.
There is a long and sordid history of this kind of abuse happening when corporations are beyond oversight .. and there is ZERO history of a fully free market society that is not laden with abuse.
Two words .. Robber Barons.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Truer words have never been spoken.
Where is the real world libertarian example that does not exist as a fantasy of an academic theory?
What specific reforms addressed this
Google is your friend. The pro-labor, anti-corporate abuse reforms of FDR's New Deal, and TR's Square Deal are well documented and published.
As for limiting this discussion to mere corruption in local police departments, which of these seems more likely to you?
-The the use of paid goon-squads by corporations in the guilded age, to abuse and intimidate workers and unions, suddenly and randomly ended in the 1930s and 40s? Corruption merely dissapeared as randomly as it came?
-Or, did the implementation of modest labor laws -- enforcemment authorities, oversight, rules, and regulations pertaining to Corporate misconduct towards workers as enacted in the 1930s -- end the large scale abuse and intimidation of workers by the Robber Barons?
which seems more likely to you?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Once again, myopic fantasy is tripped up by reality.
So... you don't know but supposedly something they did addressed the specific case of murder and assault? Apparently, these acts were legal before the Roosevelts.
As for limiting this discussion to mere corruption in local police departments, which of these seems more likely to you?
You gotta be kidding. Obvious fallacious reasoning.
Again, this line of argument is below kindergarten. Those arguing for less regulation are not arguing that laws against violence should be repealed. To pretend they are is stupid.