you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

What is "it"?

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

But you can't pretend like this doesn't happen in Capitalism.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

This = force and violence.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Private ownership, the price system, free trade, property rights, voluntary exchange and freedom of choice etc; is based on force and violence.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Yes. You cannot have anything without enforcing it through violence.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Then it's not Capitalism!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Then Capitalism doesn't exist.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

We have government intervention/distortions.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Even without the government, you need to enforce the system through violence. It's not the non-violence principle, it's the non-aggression principle. Anarcho-Capitalism (which I believe you support?) allows violence so long as it's in self-defense or in defense of one's property. You just can't be the aggressor.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So what if one uses violence in defence against aggressors?