Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

decisions unjustly favoring one of its clients over
an 0 the r, i t wo u I d los e a pa r t 0 fit sown eli en tel e • In
this way the Smith Company would be forced to render
just decisions or go out of business.
It is important to realize that this position is
not predicated on the naive belief that all, or even
most, are good or desire justice.(48) It is based,
rather, on the proposition that no one desires to be
s win die d • Ami g h t wi s h to s i g n a con t rae t to buy a
piece of land from B which would include an agreement
to take any future dispute concerning the land to an
agency A knew would favor him. B would desire to have
an y dis pu t e taken to a company tha t would be favorable
to him. Since, 'Obviously, neither would agree to the
other's terms, the transact ion could be consummated
on 1 y i f A and Bag r eedt 0 s u bm itan y dis put e to a
neutral agency. This means, the anarchist believes,
that the greater a judge's reputation for honesty the
more cases he will receive. "An arbiter who sells his
services in a free market," comment the Tannehills,
"knows that he must be as scrupulously honest, fair,
and i m pa r t i a 1 a s pos sibleor no pa i r 0 f dis putant s wi I 1
bUy his services to arbitrate their dispute."(49)
Similarly Rothbard says that
What k e e p s A& P h 0 n est i s the c ompetit ion,
actual and potent.ial, of Safeway, Pioneer,
and countless other grocery stores. What
keeps them honest is the abi I i ty of consumers
to cut off their patronage. What would keep
the free-market judges and courts honest is
the lively possibility of heading down the
block or down the road to another judge or
c 0 u r t i f sus pic ion s h 0 u I d des cend upon any
particUlar one. • These are the real,
active checks and balances of the free market
economy and the free society.
Consequently, he concludes, "in a totally free
society, any suspicion of a judge or court will cause
their customers to melt away and their 'decisions' to
be i g nor e d • T his i s a far m0 r e e f f i c i en t s ystem 0 f
keeping judges honest than the mechanism of
government."(SO)
But how would a dispute be handled when agencies
did arrive at different decisions? If, argue the anarchi
s t s, 0 negran t s sue h fir ms even a mod i cum 0 f Comm 0 n
sensea n d for e s i ght, itse ern s proba b 1e t hat toprot e C t
344