Tonya Harding Approach to Competition is Anti-American
Bill Gates — no less than the poorest citizen — has the right to his property and to the pursuit of his own happiness. He should not have to justify his profits by appealing to "the good of society" — in a nation of free individuals, no one exists as a servant of others. Gates has a right to make as much money as he can by offering a product others may choose to buy. Microsoft has the right to set the terms under which it offers these products on the market — products that would not exist if Microsoft had not created them.
The government assault on Microsoft is being pushed by many of Gates's envy-driven competitors. Their only moral alternative is to create their own products and try to persuade the public to buy them. Instead — unable to gain profits by voluntary means — they have resorted to the Tonya Harding approach: if you can't win fairly, then physically cripple your opponent.
Supporters of antitrust prosecution contend that Microsoft is "anti-competitive" and in "restraint of trade." The reverse is the case. It is the government, which — by interfering in the marketplace — is guilty of these charges. Competition includes the possibility of one company winning all the business, if customers buy its product exclusively. By trying to force Microsoft to promote the products of its competitors, such as including the Netscape Web browser in Windows, the government is interfering with the competitive process and is in restraint of trade ("trade" means voluntary exchange). Such a demand is akin to NBC being forced to run ads promoting CBS programs. Such demands on Microsoft are a violation of Bill Gates's rights, the rights of Microsoft's shareholders, and of the American ideals of justice, rights, and freedom.
Design copyright Scars Publications and Design. Copyright of individual pieces remain with the author. All rights reserved. No material may be reprinted without express permission from the author.
