{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019619865113427344, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.0, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Antitrust - The 'Other' Mode of Analysis

The prevailing theories and practices in antitrust are important as they, in fact, serve as the spine of antitrust laws and policies. It would, as such, not be far-fetched to say that without theories antitrust law will make no sense. Theories set out conditions that guide our analysis and application of the law. Notwithstanding their value, it does appear that if one looks at antitrust from a different perspective, the prevailing antitrust theories have their downsides – the divergence in the manner in which the field is understood and applied sometimes give the impression that the field is convoluted, confusing or confused. Proponents of specific antitrust theories explain, explore and evaluate the field through the primary values inherent in their theories. They interpret issues in light of their theories. In sum, they take their peculiar antitrust theory as the back-bone of antitrust which sometimes require the elimination of values which are alien to the theory under consideration. It is however noticeable from an outsider’s point of view that in eliminating non-compatible values, such a proponent is prone to denouncing all together, other theories that recognise such non-compatible value. The variety of values that could be sought through antitrust should be preserved and celebrated as they potentially increase the interests that can be served when tackling issues. Thus, any claim that a theory of antitrust contains all that is to be known about antitrust must be addressed with a lot of circumspection because antitrust itself is ever-evolving and transient.