Well, I actually have a paper in draft arguing that socialism ina n advanced society requires more law than capitalism, so don't get me started. But capitalism without law is a contradiction in terms. I mean that literally, not figuratively. What's private property if not a legally enforceable relationship? (Mere control is not ownership (as Hobbes argued long ago.) What's a wage contract without contract law? How do you have a money economy without s standard, monopolistic, state-supported currency? So Cuch is right about anarochocapitalsim. He,a nd all the withering-away-of-the-state Marxists (obviously he's not one of them) are mistaken about socialsim being able to dispense with law and the state, but that is another story. jks
>
>mbs
>
>
>
>Chuck has a point. As Nozick realized, capitalism requires a regime of
>enforceable property rights and contract and tort law. Therefore it
>requires
>a state, so no anarchism. Right wing libertarians tend to be
>minimal-staters--jets and jails, as an old TA of mine who liked the view
>once put it. He might have added, judges.
>
>jks
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx