[nikdaheratik]

>The Coasian revolution and public choice schools have since challenged this narrative quite significantly

And yet, Microsoft in the 90s and early 00s still happened. And there doesn't seem to be anything in what you've said that would demonstrate that we no longer need anti-trust laws (which are one form of regulation).

>The so-called "robber baron" era was not one of truly unconstrained capitalism at all. The "robber baron" era had the strict mercantilist and interventionist policies of Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List and the American School economists in full effect.

A "No True Scotsman" response at its finest. But it doesn't really respond to the point: removing regulation without putting some other constraints into the market is basically asking for a return to the 19th century market. And no one has come up with something that really works any better than regulation for many of these areas of the market.

>I can't give you a straight example of a "non-governmental regulation that doesn't ultimately derive authority from government," though in fairness this is ambiguous.

But, again, the entire point is that lassez faire supporters can't even give an "ideal" replacement for the government's role in regulation, consumer protection, anti-trust, or even dispute settlements that doesn't basically do exactly the same thing as government. Only being less transparent, and more costly to new players in a market (e.g. "binding arbitration").

[vezzy-fnord]

I never voiced a categorical opposition to all forms of regulation. I just have a general preference for endogenously emerging one over exogenous statute. Remember we are discussing theory, not the actually existing mixed economy. Of course a Microsoft can and has happened under the latter, though legal action also took place.

Nor was that a "No True Scotsman" reply. It's straightforward history. The Hamiltonian program prevailed over Jeffersonian democracy.

Granted, you're failing to draw a distinction between the state and government in the abstract sense of having governance. I would dispute alternate forms of governance being less transparent. If anything, the principle of subsidiarity by which issues of governance should be handled at the most localized and decentralized level would ensure greater transparency and a more effective participation.

"Consumer protection" has been handled by trade associations, private standards bodies and other institutions for centuries. Modern states have largely not devised any particularly new or innovative approaches, merely shifted the ownership thereof.