Anarcho-Capitalism: An Objectivist's Critique

The debate between anarcho-capitalists and Objectivists on YouTube has been going on for a while now and I just thought I would put forward my own criticisms of anarcho-capitalism.

Music by DarkReaver13.

XOmniverse made a response in his blog at: http://rationalanimal.net/2008/04/22/response-to-d4rkreaver13s-anarcho-capita...
Which I responded to here:
http://www.darkreavers.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=243

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Objectivism
• anarchism
• anarcho-capitalism
• capitalism
• politics
• initiation
• force
• non-aggression

[prashantpawar]

@Darkademic I said you might use the freedom to make *yourself* unfree. Freedom to make others unfree isn't freedom. According to you people cannot have freedom to choose their courts or defense organizations because otherwise they might use it chose a court or defense organization which will take away your freedom. Am I right? This means you cannot be free because you might use the freedom to be unfree.

[Darkademic]

@prashantpawar No, it's that you might use the freedom to make *someone else* unfree. Force and law needs to be defined objectively and centrally, not democratically as in a so-called "market".

Anarcho-capitalists think objective law will just naturally arise from the void according to the demand of the people.. well.. we're still waiting.

In a society where force is undefined and open to interpretation, you get what we have now. A mess.

[Adeikov]

Also, weak minds fail to mount adquate criticism, and at times the philosophy will dominate weak minds.

[Adeikov]

I don't trust an ideology/political philosophy or anything, unless it undergoes rigorous criticism.

[prashantpawar]

According to Objectivists, you do not have the right to chose your court because you might chose a court which will not give you the right to chose your court.

Or in other words, you cannot be free because you might use the freedom to be unfree. Makes sense to me.

[JesseForgione]

"I don't want to be an Economic Dictator, not even long enough to issue that order for people to be free--which any rational human being would throw back in my face, because he'd know that his rights are not to be held, given or received by your permission or mine."

--John Galt

[JesseForgione]

I'm glad you made this video because it's an important topic, but I disagree.

A consistent Objectivist is a market-anarchist, and the market-anarchists who have the most philosophically sound defense of their position are also Objectivists.

It's one thing if you want to make the claim that some aggression is necessary (it's not of course), but you can't deny that what defines a "state" is aggression.

If it doesn't collect taxes, or stop customers from using its competitors, it's not a state.

[Frenchyification]

I'm an anarcho-capitalist and I'm still not convinced by this video. You say that competition might be a good thing in law enforcement, yet you refuse to allow it. Objectivists are, by definition, statists as they DESIRE the need of a legislative branch to protect such imaginary concepts as IP.

[plasticspine]

im an objectivist , can all you anarcaps get ur security teams to whipe out all the collectivists ? they are using force to steal my money, then we can debate the best way to police our selfs !! :)

[SlickExecutiveType]

Video is not a valid criticism.