[rayiner]

What makes you think that? Free market capitalism is premised on the existence of a “market.” A “market” is not something that exists in the state of nature. In particular, you need some sort of property rights. If you can kill people and take their stuff, as in the state of nature, or use violence to coerce labor, then you don’t have “markets.”

You don’t need a government necessarily to enforce those rights, but free exchange of goods and labor cannot exist if violence is possible to coerce those exchanges.

[boomboomsubban]

So for free market capitalism you need these "markets" that eliminate the ability for money to be used for violence. Anytime violence is involved, it's automatically not free market capitalism, so any negative result does not reflect the ideology.

[amanaplanacanal]

There is still violence, it’s just centralized in the government instead of distributed in the gangs.

[boomboomsubban]

So if you pay the government for violence it's free market capitalism but if you pay a gang it's not?