A Libertarian Socialist society would be more free than an Anarcho Capitalist society.

The difference between a municipal government and a corporation should be obvious but I'm glad my opponent is willing to concede he is not in fact an anarchist, that he is not in fact opposed to the state, but rather that he wants to extend the state's domination from most areas of life to all areas. This is inherent in collectivism and it is bold indeed for my opponent to confess this obvious reality. If you do not like what a corporation is doing you are free not to interact with them. This is not true of a state, be it a "municipal government in the form of assemblies" or any other type of government. I am fully in favour of self government but what you want is not the governing of individuals over their own lives but the governing of some individuals over everyone else, aka the domination and exploitation that has forever been the mark of the state. Now what of this claim that private armies and police forces could oppress the masses. Of course where there is any sort of power structure there is the potential for abuse - this is precisely why we advocate for power to be decentralized and diffused across different groups instead of concentrated in the hands of one organization. How easy it is - and we have seen time and time again in virtually every country in the world - for one or two bad apples to seize control of the state apparatus and to inflict their insanity upon an entire nation. This is EXACTLY why we want competing courts and competing police forces, so that if one is tyrannical you can ignore it and go to the competition, so that there is an inherent check in the form of consumers, acting in their own self interest in the market place, to ensure that these abuses don't occur. Of course they could occur - anarcho capitalism is not utopia - but the potential for abuse is much lesser when you have decentralized power and multiple competing defense agencies, courts and police instead of when all the power is concentrated in one organization your "municipal government in the form of assemblies". Under capitalism people get paid roughly what they contribute to the production process. It is through the state that one can simply take, by force, what another has created and this is EXACTLY what my opponent plans to do. Every factory that was ever built, every rail road, every mill, these were all created by individuals who risked their capital and managed to triumph and create great prosperity. Now, instead of honouring all the jobs they created, all the wealth they produced and how they built the incredible society we see all around us, my opponent and his ragtag band of hippie supporters want to use violence to rob these men of their property. It's sickening. The reality is, that libertarian socialism, if enacted, would be an absolute hell hole, where people would toil for sixteen hours a day simply to scrounge a living out of the dirt. Without money, the division of labour society, without capitalism or private ownership of the means of production our society would decline dramatically and almost immediately. Within a generation all of the capital and wealth that was created by capitalism would be used up by the looters (those who are closest to the revolution consuming the bulk of that wealth) and we would be left to hopelessly scrounge for a meager subsistence. My opponent wants to do away with capitalism but neglects to realize that capitalism is the reason why we have computers, automobiles, air conditioning, big screen televisions, comfortable beds, even public transportation or ipods. It's incredible really, even something as simple as a ham sandwich requires the cooperation of people from virtually every country around the world, and the only way to coordinate the dizzyingly complex array of various factors of production is through the price system. My opponents ideal society would indeed be anarchy in the pejorative, a brutal, lawless decaying society in which might and political clout triumph and everyone is left to languish in abject poverty and misery.