: When such has the agreement of participants and doesnt destroy the liberty of those protested against (which 'no-buy' boycotts dont) then fine. You mustn't mix me up with statist status quo conservatives y'know!
: Ofcourse, the company could just ignore it all, ignore private lawsuits (in a stateless society) and then watch its revenue dwindle as the boycotts and bad reputation sets in - not as satisfying as righteously slamming the cell doors perhaps, but the same effect.
But of course, since both Mr. Gee and Mister Jacobson have accepted the theoretical posssibility of a functioning, market satisfying monopoly existing under Anarcho capitalism, one must therefore ask: 'In such circumstances, how could one organise a boycott, especially if they're prroduct is a necessary one, andf further, how can their trade diminish if their reputation is tarnished?'
(Also, one must raise the question of Public Relations departments that can mollify public disapproval, and also question the motivation for corporate customers to enter into the boycot- it soundeth to me as power still exists in this anrachy.)