That libertarian theory of the marketplace would be relevant if we were living in an open, free market. But we aren't.
The theory you are relying on also pre-supposes things like the ability to buy or sell any drug without government intervention, and the right to buy or sell firearms without any government intervention, and the right to operate money transfer and banking businesses without any government regulation.
That is not the world we live in. You are thinking about another world.
As one example, how would a private system of money transfers exist that would enable firearms dealers blocked from using banks to conduct business? It wouldn't because it is illegal to set up money transfer systems which don't meet a large set of federal and state laws and regulations.
In our current situation we have to use the law to shield society from being controlled by large corporations and groups of corporations working in concert with the government.
Following your argument, morals and principles are...well...not really morals or principles. Rather, they are conditional sets of guidance that rely upon the opposition or zeitgeist for definition.
Did we let the left define the morality of abortion for us? Did we let the left define the morality of firearms ownership for us? Did we let the left define the morality of free speech for us?
Years ago, divorce was a Bad Thing. Then, it wasn't. Now, alleged conservatives (including the religious ones) don't even talk about the immorality of tearing up a marriage, despite Biblical warnings of the warm temperatures awaiting divorces.
I totally understand the appeal of "well, if the left can ignore morals. I can do that, too." And I totally understand that many people HAVE surrendered their position. But the second a conservative gives a cheery two thumbs up to playing stupid leftist tricks, they cease to be a conservative.