RE: Free Society - I think I may have taken the red pill.
I agree with the idea of having an open mind and learning more and this is why I upvoted the article. As for the second part, I think you need to read more on the subject of free market/lessaiz-free capitalism vs crony capitalism/corporatism.
Capitalism and Corporatism are two separate things. Corporatism is the action of using the state as means to advance ones own interests. Corporatism breeds monopolies and corruption.
Free market capitalism eliminates momopolies and corruption, even cartels by allowing competition. The state is the tool that allows corporatism to exist because it concentrates the power to the top.
In reality there was never a pure form of capitalism since all economic activities are regulated from the goverment. This is where anarcho-capitalism comes as an answer. If you think about it the big guys on top are very much acting anarchic while the rest at the bottom follow them as rulers.
Free society and liberty is an important but complex topic very much worthy of discussion. When we talk politically about a free society, we should first of all be mindful of who would become freer. Is it those who least need to be freer or those who most need it?
There are many flavors of libertarianism but the general idea is to allow individuals the right to pursue their own goals without infringing on the equal rights of others. This is generally understood as a removal of restrictions, protections, and regulations. Creating these equal rights can involve two improvements to freedom.
On the one hand, society can remove environmental protections and regulations so that resources can be freely taken by those capable of exploiting them, generally the rich. Regardless of the negative consequences and the rights of others, these individuals should be allowed to do what they want without restriction in order to make their already comfortable lives even better.
On the other hand, society can remove individual protections and regulations so that the resources and wealth of the rich can be freely and legally taken by those that need them, generally the poor. This type of freedom assures equal rights for all. Regardless of the slightly negative consequences to the rich, the legal removal of property protections will allow the poor to have what they need to live the lives that they want.
The actual ideal of libertarianism, as an consistently applied political philosophy, should mean that everyone gets equal rights to freedom, not just the rich. Unfortunately, this is very far removed from how the majority proponents of libertarian philosophy regard its application.
Well said, upvoted.
This is a key distinction and making more distinctions allows conversations to be more nuanced and more likely to build alliances.
Collusion between industries, regulators and lawmakers who are able to keep themselves above the accountability of representative democracy is one key element of the Corruption eating away at societies across the globe.
@kyriacos, thank you very much for the valid comment and advice. I will definitely read up in detail on what you suggested. Like I said, I am not a specialist on the subject but love reading and researching.
Conflating free market capitalism with state capitalism (corporatism, fascism) is why Millennials have mistakenly fallen for Bernie's socialism, which is simply the other side of the statist coin. Thus did economist* Thomas DiLorenzo coin the term "fascialism" to describe this "New American System":
Incredibly, the two-party duopoly that has long ruled America has adopted both fascism and socialism as the defining characteristics of our economic system. Call it Fascialism. It is a recipe for national economic suicide.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2009/06/thomas-dilorenzo/fascialism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
https://mises.org/about-mises/what-austrian-economics
Np @jacor
We are all here to learn from each other. We are all students on this planet