>"Anarcho-capitalism" has more in common with fascism and post-industrial
>feudalism than any real ideal of freedom and life without coercion.
>For a fair idea of how it might play out, just look back 150 years
>to the gilded age - the government was a fuck of a lot smaller, the
>masses were dirt fucking poor, and they were kept that way by private
>squads of pinkertoon goons hired by the bosses. This is
>"anarcho-capitalism"
It is dangerous and misleading to compare that era with today. The Interstate Highway System didn't begin until the early 1950's. Except in cities, America didn't have what we would recognize as "roads" until the 1920's. In 1900, half of the population lived on farms. Most people didn't have telephones until the 1920's. The idea that the large majority of goods would travel at least 1000 miles to the consumer was preposterous.
Did people live "well" by today's standards? Certainly not. Was most of the deficiency due to oppression by the evil capitalists? Not at all.
It is virtually impossible to conceive of a modern, national economy without roads, trucks, airplanes, etc.
So, when you say, "the masses were dirt fucking poor", by today's standards that was true. But not by some conspiracy.
Jim Bell