Yes. It is not dictatorial to apply reasonable regulations to business, for the protection of the public. Every government in the world does this. By your definition, every government in the world is fascist. In fact,since even libertarians insist that governments enforce contracts, which is certainly a control of business, libertarians are fascists.
By the way, once smoking in a bar is banned, it's not a legal activity, is it?
'Centralized control' does not refer strictly to the monetary aspects of a business. Control exerted over a private enterprise's ability to make its own decisions regarding a legal activity sure sounds like it fits the above definition.
How is a community setting its own standards 'centralized'?
You're playing with the meanings of words. That's charlatanry. Note that I am not calling you a charlatan.
This is sophistry. Libertarians hold that governments should enforce voluntarily entered contracts.
I know you'll say the business owner voluntarily entered into a contract when he applied for a license to do business in the community. This is where your theory departs from libertarianism, which holds that the business owner requires no license to do business on his own property. Requiring licenses for an activity that does not initiate force or fraud, under threat of force is most certainly not libertarianism. And enforcing such contracts isn't libertarianism either.
Did you really think we wouldn't take notice of that absurd claim?
fas•cism or Fas•cism noun dictatorial movement: any movement, tendency, or ideology that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism
Bears repeating to charlatans.
Cute. Although I could say the same thing about the whole 'By the way, once smoking in a bar is banned, it's not a legal activity, is it?' The law that we were discussing was passed by the federal government in Ireland. It was not a local government. However, can a law not be dictatorial even when passed by a democratically elected government? The whole fascism argument, though, is getting away from the central issue. I know, I know. I started it.
Let's look at this another way using a different analogy, other than your (Prof’s) poisoning analogy. The two of you go to a baseball game. At some point you begin discussing what a jerk tnlibertarian was for calling everybody a fascist and that he is probably suffering from a major munchie fit right now because all those libertarians do is smoke dope and are no-good punks. Prof gets going good on the loserdopians and their legalized prostitution and how they are just a bunch of anarchists, and he stops paying attention to the ball game. BONK! Right on the noggin with a foul ball. Now what is to be done? You went to the ball park with full knowledge of its inherent danger. You, however, want a ball park where you can go and not get your noodle whacked. (Whoops, still thinking about the prostitutes) In your society, the government, local, federal, whatever, would then make baseballs illegal at ball parks.