Okay here’s the thing: Calling policies that contribute to monopolies anti-capitalist makes no sense, because by this standard capitalism is anti-capitalist. It’s not like monopolies appear out of thin air; concentration of wealth into monopolies or oligopolies is the only possible equilibrium state under capitalism, so deflecting the effects of these monopolies as “anti-capitalist” is an appeal to fiction.
For patents and copyright this is exactly what happens. Adam Smith’s invisible hand of capitalism does not create these monpolistic protections naturally. They are an artificial construct of government. An enforced payment by society to creators and inventors.
Anti free market policies can exist within a capitalist structure.
Historical existence of patents doesn’t destroy capitalism, nor make patents less anti capitalist.
Okay here’s the thing: Calling policies that contribute to monopolies anti-capitalist makes no sense, because by this standard capitalism is anti-capitalist. It’s not like monopolies appear out of thin air; concentration of wealth into monopolies or oligopolies is the only possible equilibrium state under capitalism, so deflecting the effects of these monopolies as “anti-capitalist” is an appeal to fiction.
For patents and copyright this is exactly what happens. Adam Smith’s invisible hand of capitalism does not create these monpolistic protections naturally. They are an artificial construct of government. An enforced payment by society to creators and inventors.