[Agamemnon]

Who fills the _massive_ power vaccuum that 'big' governments (by this thread's definition) currently occupy?

No one, because the massive power governments has is illegitimate. From the free society point of view any monopoly on coercive authority is illegitimate.

Thats all fine and good. But as soon as the absence of government authority becomes a reality, people will organize themselves into smaller political/economic units. Its what people do. Whether they be a community association, company, or commune, there will be organizations that will replace government types of service (security, health, welfare,). Also, once the government is gone (and its municipal security structure), why can't I just take a gun and rob you of all you've got? I'm using monopolistic coercive authority (if I have a gun and you don't) on you, isn't that illegitimate in the New Order? Who helps you out? You?

By removing government oversight in many industries/institutions, those bodies are left wide open to 'private' (corporate) exploitation.

Corporate exploitation is a marxist term. How can a private corporation exploit anyone on a free market? Give me one example where free market capitalism exploits anyone.

This is definitely one I bet we'll agree to disagree on. First off, there is no 'free market capitalism', every market in the world lives under massive regulation and subsidization. Secondly, a semi-example would be something as simple as child-labour in East Asia. American companies legally employ millions of very under-paid and impovershed workers to do dangerous, and often unsanitary work that American counterparts would charge much, much more. Shifting some of these societies to dependence on subsistance US (West) corporate handouts is 'exploitation' in my books. If you'd like to go further into your theory that the free market has never exploited anyone, I'd love to hear more, it sounds very interesting.

As much as I hate to have to do it, I'll trust a Government long before I'll trust a Corporation for my overall welfare. Both have shabby records, but at least one claims to have my best interest at heart, regardless of how good a job they do at fulfilling it.

Why not trust yourself for your overall welfare?

Mainly because of my above example. Fine enough that I should take care of myself, but what if I get hurt? What if I get cancer? What if I'm a computer programmer, who doesn't have the skills required to 'trust myself with my overall welfare'? You seem to think some kind of natural order will just create itself in the absence of government authority. I'd call it anarchy, and suggest that people would act a little differently than the utopian image I'm getting from you.

A corporation cannot force its will upon you, the government can. On a free market you have a freedom of choice now you dont (or its severely limited). It is not about having your best interest at heart. Bakers dont have your best interest at heart when they sell you bread. They want to make money. The more the better. And on a free market, the only way to make money is to satisfy your need - ie the baker HAS TO give you what you want. And to survice long term, he has to satisfy your needs again and again.

Sure, but thats how it works now. And corporations often inflict their will on US citizens and individuals around the world. You've identified the most important aspect of this thought, that companies want to make money. If they secretly dump mercury into the water to save a few bucks, thats all good, they're doing what they can to make money. Shoot a couple dissident workers? Of course! Remember, they don't care about us, they care about making money. Regardless of human considerations. If you're not a customer of theirs, what do they care if you live or rot in an alley? They don't, under your system, no one does. I don't see that as some sort of peaceful or productive institution. Removing any social conscience, (barely forced on them by govt's currently) corporations are going to care _less_ about the individual, not more.

The government has to do no such thing. No one cares if you dont want their `products` and `services.` You are forced to pay for them anyway, without any real chance to change anything. All the goverement has to do is to look for its best short term interest - because they may not hold the power after the next election. Therefore its only understandable they want to milk you NOW regardless of what happens next.

So, exactly what would you suggest in place of organization? Disorganization? Survival of the fittest? Natural Selection and all that? I'd suggest that organizing into nation-states was probably one of the most significant institutions in history.

Basically, I'm on the exact opposite side of you. I see the (potential for) responsible power of the nation-state being steadily and quickly eroded in the face of Neo-Corporate domination. Tools like the IMF, WorldBank, and (above all) WTO are working hard to ensure a 'free-market' accross the entire world, where all human, environmental, and social/cultural issues are trumped by the almighty dollar.

I guess you see a world run by corporations, I see one run by government. If you think that somehow no one will step into the 'artificial void' of power that the government has created for itself, I'd suggest your dead wrong. A matter of opinion at this point, I'm sure.