Unintentionally, but not inappropriately, three out of the first nineteen Lucidicus editorials relate to Wal-Mart in some way. Such is the news. As an icon of capitalism, Wal-Mart simply tends to attract the most daffy and illogical attacks that anti-capitalist groups can devise.

From the Associated Press¹:

BOSTON -- Backed by abortion rights groups, three Massachusetts women sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, accusing the retail giant of violating a state regulation by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.

The lawsuit, filed in state court, seeks to force the company to carry the morning-after pill in its 44 Wal-Marts and four Sam Club stores in Massachusetts.

The plaintiffs argued that state policy requires pharmacies to provide all "commonly prescribed medicines."

Wal-Mart carries the morning-after pill in Illinois only, where it is required under state law, said Dan Fogleman, a spokesman for Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart.

Fogleman said the company "chooses not to carry many products for business reasons." He would not elaborate. But in a letter to a lawyer for the plaintiffs, a Wal-Mart attorney said the store chain does not regard the drug as "commonly prescribed."

If Wal-Mart is in violation of any law at all, then they are in violation of an irrational law. No withholding of a service can be a crime—unless men are regarded as self-sacrificial servants of one another under the law.

And that is the implicit philosophy that is revealed by this incident, shared by every party involved: the state legislature who created the law, the lawyers who presume its legitimacy, the plaintiffs who regard themselves as victims, and the pro-choice groups who back the plaintiffs. Even Wal-Mart doesn't challenge the philosophical basis of this regulation.

Under capitalism, legitimate rights are defended and pseudo-rights are exposed. The right of businessmen to choose their own inventory is legitimate. The right of consumers to purchase whatever they want, wherever they want, is phony because it contradicts the right of the businessman.

And what tragic fate befell these three plaintiffs when they discovered that Wal-Mart does not carry the item they were looking for? They had to get back into their cars and drive down the road to CVS.

In economics, demand is met through the voluntary supply of goods. In politics, demands are met at regulatory "gunpoint." The marketplace is no place for the latter.

____

¹ "Women Sue Wal-Mart Over Morning-After Pill," Washington Post, February 2 2006

©2005-2010 The Lucidicus Project, all content unless otherwise noted.