We have a first libertarian to manipulate here. He even does not bother to read adn understand the basic idea exposed by the article. He thinks that we are children and keeps selling us the fraud.
I never said I was a libertarian. What I explained is rudimentary free market doctrine. My ability to explain Stalinism doesn't automatically make me a Communist, either.
The fact that you can explain a doctrine does not render the criticism of that doctrine incorrect. Indecent attack on critique means that you use all means to defend a flawed doctrine, which implies you is a proponent of that flawed doctrine. The author obviously knows the reality, which stands behind the marvelous "free-market" fiction. He attacks this fiction. He says that self-correcting free-market fails to optimize itself since it kills itself by converging to monopoly.
In the ideal free-market theory, you do not need the anti-monopoly law. But you have to use it in reality to mantain the free-market from collapse. It is clear what author says. He attacks this childish free-market fundamentalism. He makes a right point. You attack him without the reason and defend the flawed ideology, support spreading the wrong beliefs. How can I believe that you is not a libertarian?