Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
The Bushmen and that is why I pointed you in the direction of that movie, but their society was disrupted by a coke bottle.
Societies way to manage "these People" has been government and control of markets.
Who are you referring to by "these people," the Bushmen or the people who made the coke bottle, or the people who dropped it?
But, then, various degrees of authoritarian society manages all those people by various kinds of government control.
As I understand what you propose, no controls are needed, the market will work as it works and life will be free of interference in any form. Is that correct?
|
No, that is not correct. This is why I said you don't understand what I propose.
In order to have intelligent, fruitful, discussions, key words have to be defined, or, at least, correctly understood by all parties in the discussion. I have defined what I mean by free market and by freedom in various past posts. Perhaps you missed those posts. Perhaps you disagreed with them--but never rebutted them.
I'll try again. My concept of being "free" in relation to other people is that a free person does not coerce, or is not coerced by, other people. Many would consider that coercing others would be a mark of "freedom." But coercion of another results from needing something from whom you coerce. Ergo you are not free. Your coercion bonds you to those you coerce. Is Kim Jung Un free because he has near total power over his populace? No, he is trapped into depending on those who submit to his coercion.
What do I mean by a free market? A market in which neither party to a transaction coerces the other. If your objection to the viability of such a proposition is that there are always people who want power over others, therefor their will always be those who make the market unfree unless there is something to control them from doing so, I have on more than one occasion said that, concerning a free market, government control is not of the market, but of those who impose on market freedom. The role of government in a society based on freedom, is the protection of freedom. It is not the role of government to regulate "free" people, but to regulate (punish, etc.) those who coerce. It is not the role of government to regulate free behavior (that would be a contradiction), but to protect free behavior.