Drug Cartels = Anarcho Capitalism?

[Abc]

I have a question for Anarcho-capitalists, according to your theory whats to keep businesses in a Anarcho-capitalist society from from turning into mini "drug cartels" i mean by that using violence to eliminate competition. lets says there is a store that sells pants but there is another store down the street thats is stealing his businesses, whats to keep the first store from gunning down the guy who runs the other store.

[Plagueround]

They'll deny it all day, but I have yet to see a difference between that and the "privatized defense agencies" they speak of.

[1billion]

I have a question for Anarcho-capitalists, according to your theory whats to keep businesses in a Anarcho-capitalist society from from turning into mini "drug cartels" i mean by that using violence to eliminate competition. lets says there is a store that sells pants but there is another store down the street thats is stealing his businesses, whats to keep the first store from gunning down the guy who runs the other store.

ask this on mises, lol, but an caps would probablet argue that Cartels are the result of government intervention, and that violence would not only be cost ineffcient but customers who buy products would not but products from a violent shop owner, there are many other answers but thats the short version.:)

[9]

I have a question for Anarcho-capitalists, according to your theory whats to keep businesses in a Anarcho-capitalist society from from turning into mini "drug cartels" i mean by that using violence to eliminate competition. lets says there is a store that sells pants but there is another store down the street thats is stealing his businesses, whats to keep the first store from gunning down the guy who runs the other store.

In all likelihood, the "pants-sellers" seeking to eliminate competition will not, themselves, go gun down their competitors. Instead, I'd imagine they'd hire some mercenary combat firm to do all their dirty work (kill competitors, critics, and anyone else they felt was acting in a way which could be 'unfavorable' to their maximization of profit) for them. But the premise of the question is absolutely valid and it demonstrates just one of an infinite number of flaws with the anarcho-capitalist philosophy. Basically that the wealthy will hire out all the available "mercenary combat firms" to protect their profit and their status, and thus, the wealthy will be in a position in which they themselves will constitute a government over the rest of society by default (similar to regular capitalism but far more brutal, repressive, and tyrannical and, presumably, without even the pretense of 'public representation'), which goes to show that the whole notion that this brand of capitalism (or any 'brand' of capitalism, for that matter) is or can be somehow a form of 'anarchism' is absolute nonsense. Ancaps are no more anarchists than National Socialists are socialists.

[rebelmouse]

there is no anarcho-capitalism, anarchism is economic equality, so some crazy liberals can't just take name of others. you can't call all societies without state: anarcho. anarchism means abolishing of authority of man by man (even in society without state can exist hierarchy and authority, so we are against it), abolishing of economic inequality, etc.

[SavagePostModern]

Mexican drug cartels: The ultimate form of business management. ( Laughs.) :laugh:


http://m3report.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/zetas.jpg

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Mexican drug cartels: The ultimate form of business management. ( Laughs.) :laugh:

Yeah, I'm sure having a gun pointed at your head is a laugh-a-minute. :rolleyes:

[1billion]

Mexican drug cartels: The ultimate form of business management. ( Laughs.) :laugh:



this exists because the U.S. government bans drugs, and whatever government bans creates violence in that sector.

[danyboy27]

this exists because the U.S. government bans drugs, and whatever government bans creates violence in that sector.

even if the war on drug would be over it would still be the same.
you can be sure drug cartel will continue to force peasant to work for them and will corrupt official to have the proper permits or cheat the quota.

a thug is a thug.

[Havet]

this exists because the U.S. government bans drugs, and whatever government bans creates violence in that sector.

this

Postscript to dannyboy:

The reason the drug business is so profitable is because there is high demand and an artificially low supply. There was also another time in U.S history where one could see how violence spread on a non-violent market sector. The drug prohibited...was alcohol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States

Many social problems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_issues_of_the_1920s) have been attributed to the Prohibition era. Mafia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Mafia) groups limited their activities to gambling and thievery until 1920, when organized bootlegging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rum-running) manifested in response to the effect of Prohibition.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States#cite_note-11) A profitable, often violent, black market for alcohol flourished. Powerful gangs corrupted law enforcement agencies, leading to Racketeering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racket_%28crime%29). Stronger liquor surged in popularity because its potency made it more profitable to smuggle.

The cost of enforcing Prohibition was high, and the lack of tax revenues on alcohol (some $500 million annually nationwide) affected government coffers.

When repeal of Prohibition occurred in 1933, organized crime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organized_crime) lost nearly all of its black market (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market) alcohol profits in most states (states still had the right to enforce their own laws concerning alcohol consumption) because of competition with low-priced alcohol sales at legal liquor stores.

Prohibition had a notable effect on the alcohol brewing industry in the United States. When Prohibition ended, only half the breweries that had previously existed reopened. The post-Prohibition period saw the introduction of the American lager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_lager) style of beer, which dominates today. Wine historians also note that Prohibition destroyed what was a fledgling wine industry in the United States. Productive wine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine) quality grape (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grape) vines were replaced by lower quality vines growing thicker skinned grapes that could be more easily transported. Much of the institutional knowledge was also lost as winemakers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winemaker) either emigrated to other wine producing countries or left the business altogether.[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States#cite_note-12)

[danyboy27]

this

Postscript to dannyboy:

The reason the drug business is so profitable is because there is high demand and an artificially low supply. There was also another time in U.S history where one could see how violence spread on a non-violent market sector. The drug prohibited...was alcohol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States

Many social problems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_issues_of_the_1920s) have been attributed to the Prohibition era. Mafia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Mafia) groups limited their activities to gambling and thievery until 1920, when organized bootlegging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rum-running) manifested in response to the effect of Prohibition.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States#cite_note-11) A profitable, often violent, black market for alcohol flourished. Powerful gangs corrupted law enforcement agencies, leading to Racketeering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racket_%28crime%29). Stronger liquor surged in popularity because its potency made it more profitable to smuggle.

The cost of enforcing Prohibition was high, and the lack of tax revenues on alcohol (some $500 million annually nationwide) affected government coffers.

When repeal of Prohibition occurred in 1933, organized crime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organized_crime) lost nearly all of its black market (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market) alcohol profits in most states (states still had the right to enforce their own laws concerning alcohol consumption) because of competition with low-priced alcohol sales at legal liquor stores.

Prohibition had a notable effect on the alcohol brewing industry in the United States. When Prohibition ended, only half the breweries that had previously existed reopened. The post-Prohibition period saw the introduction of the American lager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_lager) style of beer, which dominates today. Wine historians also note that Prohibition destroyed what was a fledgling wine industry in the United States. Productive wine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine) quality grape (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grape) vines were replaced by lower quality vines growing thicker skinned grapes that could be more easily transported. Much of the institutional knowledge was also lost as winemakers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winemaker) either emigrated to other wine producing countries or left the business altogether.[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States#cite_note-12)

what is stopping the drug cartel to actually continue to be a cartel and keep the price artificially high even after its legalised?

what will stop the drug cartel to bribe and threaten the peasant to work for them for a piss por price?

exploitation wont magicly disapear by legalising drug

[Havet]

what is stopping the drug cartel to actually continue to be a cartel and keep the price artificially high even after its legalised?

what will stop the drug cartel to bribe and threaten the peasant to work for them for a piss por price?

exploitation wont magicly disapear by legalising drug

1) Nobody will buy from them

2) What is stoping any alcohol cartel to bribe and threaten the peasant to work for them at a poor price? For now, people have a (limited) choice, but a choice nonetheless. They can (with many limits) choose how to provide for themselves.

In any case, worker movement, alternative institutions like cooperatives or communes could handle such problems and drive the others out of business. At the most extreme, free association would create militias to free the enslaved people forced into working at those scenario exploitative businesses.

3) It won't, but it's a first step into stopping that particular exploitation taking place in that particular market sector.

[Lumpen Bourgeois]

Remember folks, the cause of all social ills and everything disagreeable is government intervention in the economy. Once the free market is able to flourish unhampered by the intrusive state, everyone will become remarkably cooperative (except for businesses, they'll be kept from cooperating at our expense by competitive market forces), crime rates will fall to an ebb and candy will rain down from the privatized sky.:)

But seriously, the free market utopia envisaged by anarcho-capitalists might diverge just slightly from reality.

[Havet]

But seriously, the free market utopia envisaged by anarcho-capitalists might diverge just slightly from reality.

Not just slightly :D

[danyboy27]

1) Nobody will buy from them

.

haha, go tell that to the OPEC members.



1)
2) What is stoping any alcohol cartel to bribe and threaten the peasant to work for them at a poor price? For now, people have a (limited) choice, but a choice nonetheless. They can (with many limits) choose how to provide for themselves.
.
hey, big industries who make alchool are exploiter too, using mexican style slave labor to reap grapes in the field to make wine.



1)
In any case, worker movement, alternative institutions like cooperatives or communes could handle such problems and drive the others out of business. At the most extreme, free association would create militias to free the enslaved people forced into working at those scenario exploitative businesses.
.
druglord kill their competition, that how it work man. you can try to resist with 2 or 3 folks in your neighborhood but you will at the end be outmatched by the druglord.

legality dosnt mean shit in third world countries rulled by a corrupt elite, dont youy know that?

[Havet]

haha, go tell that to the OPEC members.

Who are a GOVERNMENTAL CARTEL. Guess where they get the money to pay for their things.


hey, big industries who make alchool are exploiter too, using mexican style slave labor to reap grapes in the field to make wine.

Not all wine is big industry. In the iberian peninsula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_peninsula), for example, most wine production is by family farms or small producers, and while there is (some) exploitation (which is present in every country in every market sector), it does not compare to mexican style slave labor you are trying to generalize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_wine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_wine


druglord kill their competition, that how it work man. you can try to resist with 2 or 3 folks in your neighborhood but you will at the end be outmatched by the druglord.

Silly argument. So I suppose the workers of the world cannot work for their protection because they are only 2 or 3 folks in their neighborhood?

Seriously, people with common goals usually get together because its easier to achieve such goal through a collective. Are you telling me something like what exists in Switzerland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia#Switzerland) couldn't exist to protect a community?

Anyway, I've written a piece on how to "compete" with those extortionist black marketeers.

http://pensarismo.blogspot.com/2009/09/competing-with-extortionist-black.html

In any case, the best way to deal with this situation (forceful druglords) is organization:
- protection agencies (least likely option)
- worker organization
- Personal defense weapons (alarms, pistols, home rifles, etc)
- Community militias.


legality dosnt mean shit in third world countries rulled by a corrupt elite, dont youy know that?

I do, it seems its you who don't know that the only way to fight brute force is to use rational force and organization.

[Abc]

ask this on mises, lol, but an caps would probablet argue that Cartels are the result of government intervention, and that violence would not only be cost ineffcient but customers who buy products would not but products from a violent shop owner, there are many other answers but thats the short version.:)
the problem the ones who use violence would very quickly over-take the ones who don't use violence, and you will most liky end up with one group of people controling all trade in a certain area by force, so in essence you would have a state

[Dejavu]

lets says there is a store that sells pants but there is another store down the street thats is stealing his businesses, whats to keep the first store from gunning down the guy who runs the other store.

Nothing. ;)

Would you want to buy from a guy that murdered the other store owner across the street?

[Dejavu]

the problem the ones who use violence would very quickly over-take the ones who don't use violence,lolwut?

How do you know?
Don't you think those who don't prefer violence ( maybe the majority of society) would then want to take measures to curb violence?
So what about force then? Should it be monopolized?

[Plagueround]

Nothing. ;)

Would you want to buy from a guy that murdered the other store owner across the street?

We do that now, just on an international level. You see...hold on, I need to go grab an ice cold refreshing Coca Cola and then I'll continue...

[eyedrop]

Nothing. ;)

Would you want to buy from a guy that murdered the other store owner across the street?
If he has cheaper prices, yes.

Would you buy oil from a nation that wars on the neighbouring nations? Let's say Kuwait.

[revolution inaction]

Nothing. ;)

Would you want to buy from a guy that murdered the other store owner across the street?

it makes no difference if i want to or not if they have acquired a monopoly by murdering there rivals.

[spice756]

I have a question for Anarcho-capitalists, according to your theory whats to keep businesses in a Anarcho-capitalist society from from turning into mini "drug cartels" i mean by that using violence to eliminate competition. lets says there is a store that sells pants but there is another store down the street thats is stealing his businesses, whats to keep the first store from gunning down the guy who runs the other store.


I would hope no one here would allow violence in a anarchy or communist society.

Well drug cartels ,thugs ,robbers and hustlers must be cruched or anyone that does B&E ,robbery or stealing.People may debate all day how to deal with them send them to jail or send them to island.


But most crime is do to high cost for drugs or poverty .Get people out of proverty and lower the cost of drugs les crime.If people are too lazy to work or getting high all the times where by they cannot work:lol: I guess they will not have too much.

[JohannGE]

I would hope no one here would allow violence in a anarchy or communist society.

In a anarchist or communist society...only the sociopaths.

Of course in an anarcho-capitalist society the violence inherent in capitalism would continue without the imposition of authority to control/prevent it.

Back to the PDA's then. :(
-

[Dejavu]

We do that now, just on an international level. You see...hold on, I need to go grab an ice cold refreshing Coca Cola and then I'll continue...

So what other soda producers did Coke murder?

Without a state to keep everyone in 'check?', what do you think the chances are of coke and pepsi funding their own armies to wage war on the other?

[Dejavu]

If he has cheaper prices, yes.

Would you buy oil from a nation that wars on the neighbouring nations? Let's say Kuwait.

So the point of one store owner murdering the other is to lower prices?

Why then spend the resources to murder the other guy and risk your consumer base? Why not just lower prices?

Why would a complete monopoly with force want to cut their profit margin?

Why would OPEC lower the price oil exports if they have an enforced monopoly on a large share of the market? Do they, in fact , lower prices? I am unaware of this.

[Dejavu]

it makes no difference if i want to or not if they have acquired a monopoly by murdering there rivals.

Well that means something to you then , right? Do you think you are the only one with issues about murderous vendors?

[Dejavu]

Question:

How many people are aware that it takes a considerable amount of resources to sustain violence?

[Plagueround]

So what other soda producers did Coke murder?

Without a state to keep everyone in 'check?', what do you think the chances are of coke and pepsi funding their own armies to wage war on the other?

They didn't murder producers, just the people working for them. As for no state, I'd say little to none since they wouldn't have anyone to legitimize and control the use of their formulas and markets.

[Dejavu]

K, I am unaware of anyone Coke murdered. Perhaps you can clarify further?

[SavagePostModern]

Yeah, I'm sure having a gun pointed at your head is a laugh-a-minute. :rolleyes:

It is if your the one holding the gun.

[SavagePostModern]

this exists because the U.S. government bans drugs, and whatever government bans creates violence in that sector.

Drug cartels like any other gang exist because they are brutal opportunists.

Where they see opportunity they bring a gun.

[bruce]

K, I am unaware of anyone Coke murdered. Perhaps you can clarify further?

www.killercoke.org (http://www.killercoke.org)