(03-19-2017, 03:38 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:(03-18-2017, 09:26 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:(03-18-2017, 04:09 AM)Galen Wrote:(03-17-2017, 04:17 AM)Kinser79 Wrote:(03-17-2017, 02:50 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Which is what injunctions generally do; protect corporations, not the people.
Eric, (insult redacted), but you do realize that he just said that the statutory rules and Executive Department regulations were less (not more) strict than common law injunctions against corporations.
I find it ironic that Eric (insult redacted) is basically arguing the libertarian position on regulatory capture. It is a virtual certainty that the Obtuse One did not realize that he was arguing a libertarian position.
In a crony-capitalist world both government and Big Business are to be evaded if one isn't in on the scam and relishes freedom.
One can only have a crony capitalist world if the government is big enough for politicians to dish out favors for their friends in big business. Big business itself is relatively easy to evade. Government is not.
Not if Big Business has taken over the state, and not if Big Business has deputized Big Government to control the People. Feudalism, one of the old forms of tyranny, implies a weak state but one in which the manorial lord has all power over the serf. One might be safe from the caprice of the King who is simply the biggest landowner in the country only to be under the rule of some lord who has the power of life and death over one. If one is under the absolute power of such a lord one has no freedom. "Obey or die" is not freedom.
Libertarianism is a utopian dream. There is not and has never been a libertarian state; there is no convincing evidence that a libertarian society would not turn into a new form of feudalism.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.