Illegal, but not immoral. Using force to prevent them from selling at a loss would be immoral but apparently totally legal.
Maybe in some universe (the gates of heaven?), morality is the bottom line. Without antitrust laws, I don't think the majority of market actors will make decisions based on morality. What we'll get, instead, is an economy ruled by crime syndicates. In the absence of government power, we simply get private actors who (ab)use their strength to control others. Russian mafia? Mexican drug lords? They use 10x the force, since there's no government to keep them in check (or they own that government). I'd rather have a flawed democratic government with half-assed regulations that are enforced to protect the free market and the consumer.
I wish that using force were not part of human nature, but for many people it seems to be par for the course.
You are right... governments are the realization of an economy ruled by crime syndicates and we are living in a "free market" that hasn't found a product or service that is able to protect us from these crime syndicates.
You speak as if governments do not violate the very laws they impose on everyone else...
1) they steal
2) they kill
3) they lie, cheat, and defraud
4) they unilaterally break contracts
5) they threaten at gun point
6) they form monopolies on justice, law, etc..
7) there is no "government" to keep the government in check....
Bottom line... free markets will have to defend us against governments not the other way around.
This is all true but we accept it because at least they let us vote. If we have crime syndicates in charge do you think they'll let civilians vote? Civilians will just pay the tax or get beat up. So the actual choice for the civilian is to pay the extortion to the crime syndicate which is whoever has the power to extort them so they'll have to pay the "tax", or they pay the government to protect them from being extorted/"taxed" by the crime syndicate. So the only choice seems to be who to pay taxes to.
It's not really possible for free markets to protect us from governments. Governments are created by the free market. An emergent property of the free market which rises as a result of a power vacuum which society prefers to fill. Crime syndicates rise to power in the most free of the free markets to bring a sense of order, continuity, regularity, predictability, stability, and to reduce "market volatility". The more free the market is the more likely it is for a crime syndicate to take power.
To put it another way, if you remove all laws and regulations from the market then whoever has the most effective mercenary enforcers will dominate the market. This means whoever has the best military controls the free market and that does not change no matter what philosophy/ism you adopt. Absent of a constitutional government we would either have to form gangs and defend ourselves or pay the gangs to act as our security, and security costs can be quite expensive, which could lead to a society similar to Japan under the the Kamakura Shogunate.
The Taira and the Minamoto clashed again in 1180, beginning the Gempei War, which ended in 1185. Samurai fought at the naval battle of Dan-no-ura, at the Shimonoseki Strait which separates Honshu and Kyushu in 1185. The victorious Minamoto no Yoritomo established the superiority of the samurai over the aristocracy. In 1190 he visited Kyoto and in 1192 became Sei'i-taishÅgun, establishing the Kamakura Shogunate, or Kamakura Bakufu. Instead of ruling from Kyoto, he set up the Shogunate in Kamakura, near his base of power. "Bakufu" means "tent government", taken from the encampments the soldiers would live in, in accordance with the Bakufu's status as a military government.[5]
Over time, powerful samurai clans became warrior nobility, or "buke", who were only nominally under the court aristocracy. When the samurai began to adopt aristocratic pastimes like calligraphy, poetry and music, some court aristocrats in turn began to adopt samurai customs. Despite machinations and brief periods of rule by emperors, real power was then in the hands of the Shogun and the samurai.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurai#Ashikaga_Shogunate
Military might makes right. Morals are shaped by the consequences and consequences are determined by whoever has military might. This could be the mafia, it could be the military, it could be street gangs, or it could be the matriarch or patriarch of a family. He/she who has the capability to enforce rules is who makes the rules and the ability to enforce rules comes from military might in the form of some kind of force.
Markets are governed by information. Information can be controlled by force, coercion, or by military means. They can keep secrets through threats, or leak secrets through threats, which controls the flow of information in the market. It doesn't require a constitutional government but any group of people with an ability to hurt other people, which means even a terrorist group can act as a government.