So, on one hand, free market proponents need another term, because "capitalism" doesn't mean anything anymore, and it never meant a free market according to the Marxists. (You, me, Lewis Barton)

On the other hand, if we don't explain what capitalism really is and expose all these strawmen, then whatever term we agree upon for "real free markets," should that system ever become corrupted, then statists will say "that's the problem with 'free market [insert new term here]', we need more government," and we'll be back to square one. (LiquidZulu)

By the way, we need to have a similar discussion about libertarianism, because shit-pieces like this exist. I've already written a 2000-word response tearing it apart, I just haven't published it yet. Either tomorrow or next Thursday, that's the Varyag's schedule.

My reasoning is that, while I've only just started reading Четвертая политическая теория, I am already entertaining the idea that Rothbardians ("lib-right") such as ourselves should adopt the label of "fourth positionist" in order to distance ourselves from the Rousseauians ("lib-left") that conservatives (speaking of which, I'm having a real hard time determining if the Congenial Iconoclast is actually a conservative) like to prop up as strawmen as to "why liberty is bad." Just something to think about.