If I had to describe my political position I would be tempted to call myself a "libertarian anarchist". The reason for the latter is that I don't like big business any more than I like big government. All power corrupts, and big business enslaves people almost as effectively as big government. Theoretically, a free market would allow people to just quit jobs at such places, but if big businesses keep running small businesses into bankruptcy, the choice becomes more and more theoretical.

As a result, I don't like these sorts of regulations because they disproportionately hit small businesses, which are the cornerstone of true economic freedom. It's funny that Democrats in the US continually talk about how consumption taxes disproportionately hit the poorest of Americans (i.e., the most vulnerable), yet don't care about all the things they do to kill small business, which is the equivalent of the poor American individual in the corporate world.

Yet small business is what keeps any country strong. Small business owners tend to pay their workers better, provide better benefits and a better work environment, if only because they have to look those workers in the face. Small business reinvests in communities. Small business owners are honest rich people (by and large).

As a result, I don't like these sorts of systems because they hurt the small businesses. Large corporations can swallow the added cost of added regulations on energy consumption. What it does is run the small companies out of business.

Anarchism as a principle speaks to decentralistaion on the principle that concentrations of power are the first step to incurring slavery. In that respect, I believe that anarchism as an ideal, rather than a set utopian goal, is a very rational and good stance to take.

Note that I am not a syndicalist in any way - my anarchism is more along the lines of Bakunin or even Proudhon.