I believe in a lot less regulation. But I think laws against fraud, murder, theft, rape, driving down a public street at 200 MPH are in our best interest.
And BTW the reason we have a lot of economic regulation is because it turns out the having the world run by unregulated monopolies is worse than government regulated monopolies. Perhaps you would like a return to the unregulated days of the Trusts before that great socialist reformer, our first Marxist president, Teddy Roosevelt. Me, I think he moved in a necessary direction.
I believe in free market capitalism with no government regulation. However of course I believe in some laws that protect individual rights, life, property, contracts, from other individuals and from government.
How can you say you are not a Marxist if you agree that the Marxist/"progressive" Roosevelt moved in the right direction. Yes I believe that the U.S. should return to the limited government of the 1800's.
Monopolies are created by government.
"The alleged purpose of the Antitrust laws was to protect competition; that purpose was based on the socialistic fallacy that a free, unregulated market will inevitably lead to the establishment of coercive monopolies. But, in fact, no coercive monopoly has ever been or ever can be established by means of free trade on a free market. Every coercive monopoly was created by government intervention into the economy: by special privileges, such as franchises or subsidies, which closed the entry of competitors into a given field, by legislative action. (For a full demonstration of this fact, I refer you to the works of the best economists.)"
"The necessary precondition of a coercive monopoly is closed entry—the barring of all competing producers from a given field. This can be accomplished only by an act of government intervention, in the form of special regulations, subsidies, or franchises. Without government assistance, it is impossible for a would-be monopolist to set and maintain his prices and production policies independent of the rest of the economy. For if he attempted to set his prices and production at a level that would yield profits to new entrants significantly above those available in other fields, competitors would be sure to invade his industry."