What Individualism Is Not • Frank Chodorov

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

why is out sourcing bad? Everyone buying at the lowest price is a good thing.

Because it leads to less employment in our own country.

Only higher productivity makes for higher wages. Typically, capital goods enable a worker to make more stuff per hour and that is the reason for higher wages.

Higher wages (in this comparison) are the result of laws forbidding them to hire children to work 16 hours a day for fifty cents an hour.

it makes for more competition for less jobs. My sister is mentally retarded. She cannot compete.

We would have something like 20 times more wealth in our possession without the collectivist apocalypse of the 20th Century.

I am not aware of any collectivist apocalypse having transpired (?), but my question is WHO is this "we" exactly?

The milk producers should have raised their prices as needed. Any producer raising his price too high would have lost business to producers who kept their prices lower.

No, not within this particular moral/ethic code. Like I explained earlier- higher prices are indicative of higher quality, so when you raise prices, people start buying it. (again- quality over quantity is the value, and I have learned this through direct experience as a business owner in commerce).

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
Politics uses the government. Depending on how you define politics, AC is outside of politics, because there is no government.

Also depends on how you define government.

No proof that AC has never worked either. I have heard that AC failed, a lot.

Well, that argument might work for things like creation and god but this is a rather finite subject matter. If it existed and didn't fail, where is it?

Communist and criminal anarchists are not Anarcho-Capitalists.

No, even some "anarcho-capitalists" are not anarcho-capitalists.

Some truth in it then.

See, added text.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Bluesma
How do you know it was a good design? The Soviet Union had the smartest people alive and they couldn't make their system work.

Jeezus, I posted information twice, and you never read once??
This system is reknown for being one of the most effective and enduring we've seen yet - through real life example! It is not just theory- it is a reality that has been in effect for a relatively long time, in many countries.

Clearly, we will see in then future if it can withstand the exploding bubbles of the US capitalist-individualist system.

originally posted by: daskakik
originally posted by: Semicollegiate

Also depends on how you define government.

Government is people who rule over other people. That is, people who produce nothing take what they want or need from people who do produce.

To govern is to have authority over something. A government is people with authority over other people.

Well, that argument might work for things like creation and god but this is a rather finite subject matter. If it existed and didn't fail, where is it?

In your keyboard and in your bones, the Industrial Revolution is an AC phenomenon.

No, even some "anarcho-capitalists" are not anarcho-capitalists.

As you wrote, they are not if they are not.

See, added text.

Your argument is that AC is not perfect or that language can be misinterpreted.

What is better than Anarcho-Capitalism?

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Bluesma
How do you know it was a good design? The Soviet Union had the smartest people alive and they couldn't make their system work.

Jeezus, I posted information twice, and you never read once??
This system is reknown for being one of the most effective and enduring we've seen yet - through real life example! It is not just theory- it is a reality that has been in effect for a relatively long time, in many countries.

Clearly, we will see in then future if it can withstand the exploding bubbles of the US capitalist-individualist system.

The "business cycle" (consisting of booms and busts) of which you speak is actually part of the austrian business cycle theory.

The Austrian business cycle theory (ABCT) is an economic theory developed by the Austrian School of economics about how business cycles occur. The theory views business cycles as the consequence of excessive growth in bank credit, due to artificially low interest rates set by a central bank or fractional reserve banks.[1] The Austrian business cycle theory originated in the work of Austrian School economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. Hayek won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1974 (shared with Gunnar Myrdal) in part for his work on this theory.[2][3]

Proponents believe that a sustained period of low interest rates and excessive credit creation result in a volatile and unstable imbalance between saving and investment.[4] According to the theory, the business cycle unfolds in the following way: Low interest rates tend to stimulate borrowing from the banking system. It is argued that this leads to an increase in capital spending funded by newly issued bank credit. Proponents hold that a credit-sourced boom results in widespread malinvestment. In the theory, a correction or "credit crunch" – commonly called a "recession" or "bust" – occurs when the credit creation has run its course. Then the money supply contracts, causing resources to be reallocated back towards their former uses.

Austrian business cycle theory states that distortions in the availability of credit are the cause of business cycles. A modern presentation of this theory can be found in the book "Time and Money" by Roger Garrison, which presents a graphical framework for capital-based macroeconomics and offers a critique of Keynesian graphical analysis.

The Austrian explanation of the business cycle differs significantly from the mainstream understanding of business cycles and is generally rejected by mainstream economists.

a reply to: greencmp

Its all the stuff Ponzi didn't know.

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Bluesma
How do you know it was a good design? The Soviet Union had the smartest people alive and they couldn't make their system work.

Jeezus, I posted information twice, and you never read once??
This system is reknown for being one of the most effective and enduring we've seen yet - through real life example! It is not just theory- it is a reality that has been in effect for a relatively long time, in many countries.

Clearly, we will see in then future if it can withstand the exploding bubbles of the US capitalist-individualist system.

Two world wars and a debt larger than all of the material goods and labor in the world is not effective. Borrowing increasingly larger amounts to balance the books and then inflating everyone's savings away to lessen the debt arguably shows some endurance. Our offspring must be really stupid to agree to paying their whole live's earnings to debt service.

The bubbles are from the central bank, which is a third way necessity. Bubbles would not form or pop nation wide in an individualist economy. Companies would form or crash one at a time, no bubbles.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
Government is people who rule over other people. That is, people who produce nothing take what they want or need from people who do produce.

To govern is to have authority over something. A government is people with authority over other people.

Good, then we agree that any instance of one person ruling over or coercing another is government. I don't know how you can not see that that is synonymous with governance.

In your keyboard and in your bones, the Industrial Revolution is an AC phenomenon.

No it isn't. I'm pretty sure there were governments involved.

As you wrote, they are not if they are not.

And since we have established that government is people ruling over people that applies to the gang that controls the prison, the bully that controls the playground and the common court law that decides if one person is liable and must pay restitution.

Your argument is that AC is not perfect or that language can be misinterpreted.

What is better than Anarcho-Capitalism?

No, my argument is that the AC theory usually breaks down in real world application.

a reply to: daskakik

Well at least the little guy paying his taxes can claim some investment and standing in government. lol Its hard to see where AC doesn't end up being Gold Rule little surf just keep that head down and surf.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Bluesma
How do you know it was a good design? The Soviet Union had the smartest people alive and they couldn't make their system work.

Jeezus, I posted information twice, and you never read once??
This system is reknown for being one of the most effective and enduring we've seen yet - through real life example! It is not just theory- it is a reality that has been in effect for a relatively long time, in many countries.

Clearly, we will see in then future if it can withstand the exploding bubbles of the US capitalist-individualist system.

Two world wars and a debt larger than all of the material goods and labor in the world is not effective. Borrowing increasingly larger amounts to balance the books and then inflating everyone's savings away to lessen the debt arguably shows some endurance. Our offspring must be really stupid to agree to paying their whole live's earnings to debt service.

Its really a sort of Feudalism. And why wouldn't the PTB expect the little guy to pay for it, or I should say expect that he would, considering it was His blood that secured the victories. A mans son goes off to war and then he complains about paying off the debt service. Like wow man.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
originally posted by: daskakik
originally posted by: Semicollegiate



What is better than Anarcho-Capitalism?

Profit is everything in the end for them. They morph into Fascists? Service to the monopoly and corporation is their primary consideration above all else. We are talking about people that whine about profits being down 100mil over last years record profit of 500mil while they still realized a growth of 50% over the year prior and so will have to lay off 25% of its work force to compensate. LOL

originally posted by: Logarock
Well at least the little guy paying his taxes can claim some investment and standing in government. lol Its hard to see where AC doesn't end up being Gold Rule little surf just keep that head down and surf.

[Eddie Izzard voice if you may] That is exactly what would end up happening. Then someone takes control and we are back to bitching about the tyrant. That tyrant wants to force me to do this or that or "THAT".

Yeah, we can't have "THAT" being forced onto the little guy. He's little for god's sake. "THAT" is in capitals.

We would then form groups that would represent the little guys interests and then that would get all corrupted, like unions and what not.

But, before that, the tyrants, there's more now because one tyrant couldn't hold it down, scramble to defend their position because those unions/syndicates/mobs, they mean business.

They have a meeting, in a grove, some Bohemian type grove, so that they can relax and have the ideas flow, Bohemian like.

After a couple weeks of nothing someone sobers up a little and says "What! Are we out of wine!". The staff hears him and promptly, as well trained staff are supposed to, hand the gentleman a drink, but another drunk guest didn't quite get it right and he heard "Let's give them the illusion of freedom".

I know! How the hell did he end up hearing that, but that's what happened and...here we are.

originally posted by: daskakik


Good, then we agree that any instance of one person ruling over or coercing another is government. I don't know how you can not see that that is synonymous with governance.

I already answered that

originally posted by: Semicollegiate


Governance refers to "all processes of governing, whether undertaken by a government, market or network , whether over a family, tribe, formal or informal organization or territory and whether through laws, norms, power or language."[1] It relates to "the processes of interaction and decision-making among the actors involved in a collective problem that lead to the creation, reinforcement, or reproduction of social norms and institutions."[2]
en.wikipedia.org...

No it isn't. I'm pretty sure there were governments involved.

Everything on the planet was involved, but the individuals that made the Industrial Revolution had the ethos of Anarcho-Capitailsm. Government involvement was to take as much to itself as could be voted in through a one party congress.

And since we have established that government is people ruling over people that applies to the gang that controls the prison, the bully that controls the playground and the common court law that decides if one person is liable and must pay restitution.

You are saying that the free market makes the gang and the bully. Actually the captivity gives the gang and bully most of their opportunity. And the gang and bully are beside the point that a free market happens without command, by free will alone.

No, my argument is that the AC theory usually breaks down in real world application.

How can that be, when as you have asserted many times, the free market has never been proven to exist?

Consider this, all of the anti-trust legislation was passed on the presumption of wide spread over pricing. During that period of history, the price of everything was going down, usually by 50% or more. The winners of the anti-trust laws were the inefficient producers who used the law so as to charge higher prices and still remain in business.

Anarcho - Capitalism has always been legislated into state supported cartelism. AC has never failed.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Bluesma
How do you know it was a good design? The Soviet Union had the smartest people alive and they couldn't make their system work.

Jeezus, I posted information twice, and you never read once??
This system is reknown for being one of the most effective and enduring we've seen yet - through real life example! It is not just theory- it is a reality that has been in effect for a relatively long time, in many countries.

Clearly, we will see in then future if it can withstand the exploding bubbles of the US capitalist-individualist system.

Two world wars and a debt larger than all of the material goods and labor in the world is not effective. Borrowing increasingly larger amounts to balance the books and then inflating everyone's savings away to lessen the debt arguably shows some endurance. Our offspring must be really stupid to agree to paying their whole live's earnings to debt service.

Its really a sort of Feudalism. And why wouldn't the PTB expect the little guy to pay for it, or I should say expect that he would, considering it was His blood that secured the victories. A mans son goes off to war and then he complains about paying off the debt service. Like wow man.

This whole 'powers that be' euphemism must be clarified.

I believe it is the state and it is staffed by humans who are corruptible and choose to direct prosperity to their friends by using the instrument of regulatory control to prevent meaningful competition in the industries of interest to their
political allies.

What do you think the 'powers that be' are?

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
I already answered that

But then you went on to champiom th OP's prison exmple which seems so contradict this.

Everything on the planet was involved, but the individuals that made the Industrial Revolution had the ethos of Anarcho-Capitailsm. Government involvement was to take as much to itself as could be voted in through a one party congress.

BS, the individuals involved knew someone in government that could...."

Congress? The industrial revolution started in Britain.

You are saying that the free market makes the gang and the bully.

No, I'm saying the gang and bully kill the free market because it ceases to be free

How can that be, when as you have asserted many times, the free market has never been proven to exist?

Duh, never seemed any clearer.

a reply to: daskakik

Then someone takes control

There is nothing that can be taken control of in Anarcho-Capitalism. That is an explicit and intended strength of anarchy.

To take control of anything in AC, one would need a world wide monopoly.

In any monopoly situation, if the monopoly tries to sell too high, some new company will enter the market because of the certain profits to be gained by charging a lower price.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
There is nothing that can be taken control of in Anarcho-Capitalism. That is an explicit and intended strength of anarchy.

You really don't see it?

originally posted by: Bluesma
originally posted by: Semicollegiate

Sorry, my apology, I didn't see this post the other day.

Because it leads to less employment in our own country.

Is employment the goal, or the means to an end?

Constantly decreasing prices eventually leads to more time for self fulfillment.

Higher wages (in this comparison) are the result of laws forbidding them to hire children to work 16 hours a day for fifty cents an hour.

Higher wages are only possible with increased productivity. Otherwise the money to keep workers here instead of there does not exist. Always.

I am not aware of any collectivist apocalypse having transpired (?), but my question is WHO is this "we" exactly?

We is everyone alive. The collectivist apocalypse started at bloodiest wars in human history (1861 to 1945), followed by the destruction of the free economy worldwide (1919 to 1945), and culminating in the assimilation of all thought and property (1861 to present). Collectivism is the norm since 1945 or so. You,,, might call it progress.

No, not within this particular moral/ethic code. Like I explained earlier- higher prices are indicative of higher quality, so when you raise prices, people start buying it. (again- quality over quantity is the value, and I have learned this through direct experience as a business owner in commerce).

Higher quality is one reason for higher prices. One that I would like to pay as often as possible. Higher prices also result from inflation and scarcity. Most price increases since fiat money became universal are from inflation. The dairy farmer's money lost in between the perception of a need to raise prices and the permission to do so is a hidden tax collected by inflation and regulation. People pay the higher prices for the same good because milk will become scarce otherwise.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
There is nothing that can be taken control of in Anarcho-Capitalism. That is an explicit and intended strength of anarchy.

You really don't see it?

You were responding, but not answering, to the point that the free market is naturally and spontaneously created by human behavior.

You submitted one effect from the combination of free market forces and the status quo, and attributed all evil to the free market alone, but did not address the point.

Do you agree or disagree that a free market forms spontaneously from human nature.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
Do you agree or disagree that a free market forms spontaneously from human nature.

I agree that markets form spontaneously from human nature.

Are they free?

In all the examples of society doesn't someone, or a group of people, take over?

AC is just a pipedream. There is nothing in it that will keep people from doing what they have always done. Form groups and conspire.