I'm not sure about the historiography, but it seems apparent to me that  
   activities such as false advertising, intimidation, slander, sabotage, arson  
   and thuggery all fit well within the definition of competitive behaviour,  
   yet  clearly  all  are antisocial and counterproductive. Policing such  
   behaviour expends resources even in perfectly competitive markets. This fact  
   points to a weakness in the standard model of perfect competition.  If  
   functioning of the model relies on competitive drives, enforcement costs  
   relating to negative competitive behaviour must be factored into efficiency  
   determinations. When enforcement costs exist, a competitive industry cannot  
   operate at the socially optimal level of output. Such 'enforced competion'  
   may be better than 'excessive competition' in net surplus terms, but it  
   still has a deadweight loss attached to it.  
  
Adam McHugh