: I was very glad to hear Gees denounciations of capitals flight between countires and the tendency of corporates to really give the consumer and producer a pounding because just as socialists in a terrifyingly irrational fashion (present company of enlightenment socialists excepted) justify and empathise with the actions of institutes and the institutionalism of "socialist" countries rather than people I've found that many, many capitalists empathise with corporates and rich business men who choose to become tax exiles.
I dont remember the first denouncement, can you remind me of the context? I agree that it is weak for a pro free marketer to defend it by hero worshipping a company or institution which is inimical to liberty just as its weak for a socialist to go on about 'the party' or some such.
: Where has this tendency to empathise with the most unscrupulous and ruthless individuals come from?
Is there a different interpretation of the same individual action here? or do you mean the midguided support of a 'businessman' who does his version of business not be offering value for value with consumers, but over lunch with the senator? Beware of creating a group under the title 'the modern rich' for general damnation - be sure of whom is included, for instance Hillary Clinton and her legislation attorney junkies are all pretty rich.
: 1) their bastards interested only in profits happy to trample over people, nations and freedom aspiring to a meaness and ruthless competition championed by facists everywhere, although whether they are actually fullblown facists (facism incorporating not just these competitive notions but racism, statism and nationalism too) is definitely a different matter.
They may well be 'bastards' interested in wealth growth (profits) and moving away from Europe may well result in greater wealth growth. In what way is it in the interests of freedom to stop the movement of people between these nations?
Regardless - wherever a company and government collude, or indeed and group collude to oppress and attack the liberty of individuals we can point angrily. So you have some options - decrease company size by destroying capital growth or just damn well force them (ie make it pointless) and hope that governments shrink as they flail around looking for new cattle to feed off - starving down with corresponding general wealth reductions, or reduce government size and power and remove the thing which protects these particular companies from competent competitors and which legitimises via state their authoritarian activities (which could otherwise attract rebellion)
: If Libertarian capitalists like Gee are to be true to the enlightenment dream they claim they must forsake the sanctifying propertarianism they now espouse and unite with the anti-totalitarian socialists of such as myself who wouldnt mind small unexploitative markets operating alongside socialism in a manner that can be regulated by the consumer as the liberals intended.
Whats a small unexploitative market then? what regulation by consumers? Do you mean by virtue of demand or some authoritarian approach? You see its quite easy to be a "Libertarian capitalist" in one way, there is the principle that no person initiate force against another - its fairly explicit. "anti-totalitarian socialists " broaden that to all kinds of activities which may or may not effect some other people in some other way - its uncertain, ambiguous with cracks and loopholes for the powermongers to sneak in. I want to mow my garden with a noisy mower - must I ask my neighbours, the local council, grass experts, other who want to use the mower or the lawn? Who am I 'adversely affecting' under anti-totalitarian socialists?