Key Takeaways
1. Market Fundamentalism: A Manufactured Myth, Not Ancient Wisdom
It is the true history of a false idea: the idea of “the magic of the marketplace.”
A quasi-religious belief. Market fundamentalism, often called market absolutism or market essentialism, is a quasi-religious belief that unfettered markets are the optimal solution for societal needs, with government intervention seen as inherently detrimental. This ideology treats "The Market" as a proper noun, an entity with agency and wisdom that functions best when left undisturbed. It insists that government cannot improve markets, only interfere with their "magic."
Twentieth-century invention. This pervasive belief, often cloaked in the "seemingly ancient raiments of received wisdom," was largely invented in the twentieth century by a group of self-styled "neo-liberals." Unlike classical liberal economists like Adam Smith, who recognized essential government functions such as infrastructure and bank regulation, these new thinkers argued that any government action in the marketplace compromised individual freedom and risked totalitarianism. This worldview, impervious to facts, would have been rejected by Smith himself.
Ideology over facts. The core motivation behind this ideology was not scientific literacy or economic understanding, but a deep-seated fear that government regulation—whether for public health, environmental protection, or consumer safety—was a slippery slope to socialism or communism. This fear, rooted in Cold War anxieties, led prominent figures to fight established scientific facts and hard-won knowledge to prevent any perceived "government control" over the marketplace, viewing environmentalists as "watermelons"—green on the outside, red on the inside.
2. Business Interests Engineered the Myth Through Propaganda
The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived, and dishonest—but the myth—persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Propaganda campaigns. American business interests actively manufactured the myth of the "magic of the marketplace" through extensive and often deceptive propaganda campaigns. Organizations like the National Electric Light Association (NELA) and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) spent millions to shape public opinion, not just to promote specific products, but to fundamentally alter how Americans viewed capitalism and government's role. These efforts were characterized by:
- Hiring academics to rewrite textbooks and curricula.
- Producing biased studies to "prove" private sector superiority.
- Ghostwriting editorials and press releases for newspapers.
- Creating radio programs, films, and lecture series.
Fighting social reforms. This propaganda was deployed to fight against crucial social reforms. In the early 20th century, NAM opposed child labor laws and workmen's compensation, framing these protections as infringements on business freedom and parental rights. They used slippery-slope arguments, ad hominem attacks, and outright lies, even accusing reformers of being socialist sympathizers or communists, despite overwhelming evidence of the appalling conditions faced by child workers.
The "Tripod of Freedom." A key element of NAM's campaign was the fabricated "Tripod of Freedom," claiming America was founded on three inseparable principles: representative democracy, political freedom, and free enterprise. This was a historical distortion, as "free enterprise" appears in neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution, and the 19th-century American economy was heavily intertwined with government involvement. This myth aimed to weaken public confidence in government institutions that curbed abusive business practices.
3. Intellectuals Provided Academic Legitimacy to Self-Serving Ideology
Thanks to Mises, campaigns that in the 1930s had been exposed as unprincipled propaganda now could be reconstructed as a credible intellectual program.
Importing foreign theories. To lend intellectual credibility to their self-serving arguments, American businessmen actively recruited sympathetic European intellectuals. Ludwig von Mises, an Austrian economist with absolutist views against government intervention, was brought to America and sustained by figures like Henry Hazlitt and Leonard Read, despite his ideas clashing with the prevailing Keynesian consensus and his own methodological shortcomings. His work provided a "stringent, crystalline vision of the free market" that resonated with business interests.
The Road to Serfdom. Mises's protégé, Friedrich von Hayek, became another intellectual pillar with his 1944 book, The Road to Serfdom. This work argued that any move towards centralized economic planning, even with benevolent intentions, inevitably leads to totalitarianism, thus linking economic freedom inextricably with political freedom. While Hayek's original text contained nuances and even acknowledged legitimate government functions, his American promoters, like the Reader's Digest and General Motors, aggressively simplified and distorted his message into an uncompromising anti-government polemic.
Steering the Chicago School. Wealthy patrons like Harold Luhnow strategically funded the "Free Market Project" at the University of Chicago, ensuring that figures like Aaron Director, Milton Friedman, and George Stigler would develop an intellectual framework congenial to business interests. This "Chicago school" of economics, while producing influential work, largely dismissed Hayek's caveats, downplayed market failures, and became oddly sympathetic to private monopolies, arguing against antitrust enforcement and effectively shielding polluters from responsibility for their "neighborhood effects."
4. The "Indivisibility Thesis" Became the Core Doctrine
The kind of economic organization that provides economic freedom directly, namely competitive capitalism, also promotes political freedom because it separates economic power from political power and in this way enables one to offset the other.
Capitalism and freedom as one. The "indivisibility thesis," championed by figures like Milton Friedman, became the cornerstone of market fundamentalism. It asserted that competitive capitalism is not just a system of economic freedom but a necessary condition for political freedom. Conversely, any government intervention in the economy, regardless of its intent, was framed as a step towards totalitarianism, threatening all other cherished liberties.
Rejecting the middle ground. This thesis perpetuated a false dichotomy: either central direction and coercion (totalitarianism) or voluntary cooperation through the marketplace (freedom). It deliberately ignored the vast spectrum of mixed economies and social democracies in Europe that successfully combined market mechanisms with robust social safety nets and democratic governance. Friedman's argument dismissed these as either temporary anomalies or inherently flawed paths to subjugation.
Economic freedom above all. Friedman elevated economic freedom to paramount importance, arguing that without it, other freedoms like speech or religion would inevitably be lost. He viewed taxes and compulsory social programs, such as Social Security, not as collective investments or safety nets, but as direct infringements on individual liberty. This perspective effectively prioritized the freedom of individuals to spend their money as they saw fit over collective well-being or social responsibility.
5. Popular Culture Amplified the Myth to the Masses
The American Family Robinson showed the answer was yes.
Reaching beyond the elite. To embed market fundamentalism deeply into American culture, its proponents understood the need to reach the general public, especially younger generations, through popular media. This involved a concerted effort to infuse libertarian ideas into entertainment and educational content, often subtly, to shape public opinion without appearing overtly propagandistic.
Children's literature and radio. Rose Wilder Lane, a radical individualist and libertarian, heavily influenced her mother Laura Ingalls Wilder's beloved Little House series. These books, marketed as true stories of frontier life, were meticulously crafted to promote themes of self-sufficiency and individualism, often omitting government's crucial role in settlement and social welfare. Similarly, NAM's radio program, The American Family Robinson, explicitly argued against "foreign" socialist theories and celebrated individual initiative, portraying government as an inefficient and threatening entity.
Hollywood and television. Hollywood also became a battleground. Eric Johnston, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, declared an end to films depicting "the seamy side of American life" or bankers as villains. Ayn Rand, a fervent anti-communist, drafted "Screen Guides for Americans" that became an FBI manual, pushing for films that glorified wealth and individualism while suppressing any critique of capitalism. Ronald Reagan, as host of General Electric Theater, became the charming face of corporate propaganda, delivering pro-business messages to millions of homes weekly, subtly embedding themes of self-reliance and anti-government sentiment.
6. Reagan Popularized the "Magic of the Marketplace" to Mainstream America
Will we, before it is too late, use the vitality and the magic of the marketplace to save this way of life, or will we one day face our children, and our children’s children, when they ask us where we were and what we were doing on the day that freedom was lost?
From actor to ideologue. Ronald Reagan, honed by his years as a spokesman for General Electric, became the most effective popularizer of market fundamentalism. His role at GE involved not just hosting General Electric Theater, but also touring factories and communities, delivering speeches that blended conservative ideology with relatable anecdotes. This experience transformed him from a New Deal Democrat into a staunch anti-government conservative, preparing him to articulate the "magic of the marketplace" to a national audience.
The "magic of the marketplace." Reagan's signature phrase, "the magic of the marketplace," became a powerful slogan that decoupled economic success from government action and attributed it solely to unfettered market forces. He consistently argued that government was "the problem," not the solution, and that cutting taxes and deregulation would unleash economic prosperity. This rhetoric, while often lacking factual basis, resonated with a public disillusioned by stagflation and a perceived decline in national confidence.
Ignoring inconvenient truths. Reagan's administration systematically downplayed or denied scientific and economic facts that contradicted his ideology.
- He falsely claimed that Mount St. Helens released more sulfur dioxide than a decade of cars to minimize acid rain.
- His supply-side tax cuts, based on the "Laffer Curve," failed to pay for themselves, leading to exploding deficits, yet the theory became Republican gospel.
- He dismissed market failures as inconsequential "neighborhood effects," prioritizing the "freedom" of polluters over public health and environmental protection.
This pattern of rejecting inconvenient truths became a hallmark of market fundamentalism.
7. Deregulation, Driven by the Myth, Led to Predictable Failures
The movement to deregulate the financial industry went too far by exaggerating the resilience—the self-healing powers—of laissez-faire capitalism.
Carter's cautious start. While often associated with Reagan, the dawn of deregulation began under President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat. Facing stagflation and energy crises, Carter and his economic advisor Alfred Kahn pursued market-oriented reforms in airlines, trucking, and natural gas. Their aim was to increase efficiency and lower prices by fostering competition, not to dismantle government oversight entirely. However, even these cautious steps laid groundwork for more radical changes.
Reagan's aggressive expansion. Reagan expanded deregulation far beyond price controls, targeting environmental, health, and safety statutes. He weakened regulatory agencies like the EPA through budget cuts and appointments of industry-friendly officials, framing these actions as "regulatory relief" for businesses. This approach, driven by the belief that government was inherently inefficient, led to:
- The savings and loan crisis, costing taxpayers billions due to lax oversight.
- Increased environmental damage due to weakened enforcement.
- A self-fulfilling prophecy where underfunded agencies appeared incompetent, further justifying calls for less government.
Clinton's completion of the revolution. Bill Clinton, a "New Democrat," completed the deregulation agenda, notably with the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. These acts, driven by the promise of increased competition and consumer choice, instead led to:
- Massive media consolidation and the rise of partisan news networks.
- The dismantling of firewalls between commercial and investment banking, contributing to the 2008 financial crisis.
- The creation of "too big to fail" financial institutions, whose losses were ultimately socialized.
8. The Myth's High Cost: Inequality, Crises, and Inaction on Global Threats
Five hundred thousand dead from opioids, over a million dead from Covid-19, massive inequality, rampant anxiety and unhappiness, and the well-being of us all threatened by climate change: these are the true costs of the “free” market.
Socializing losses, privatizing profits. The overreliance on "free" markets has led to a system where profits are privatized, but massive social and economic costs are borne by the public. The 2008 financial crisis, for example, resulted in a taxpayer bailout of banks and an estimated $23 trillion in lost income for Americans, demonstrating the catastrophic consequences of underregulation and the myth of self-healing markets.
Unaddressed societal ills. The market fundamentalist framework has consistently resisted facts that suggest a need for strong governmental responses, leading to devastating consequences:
- Opioid crisis: Nearly 500,000 deaths from 1999-2019, fueled by inadequate regulation and false marketing by pharmaceutical companies.
- Gun violence: Tens of thousands of deaths annually, far exceeding other developed nations, linked to lax gun control.
- Obesity and chemical exposure: Widespread health problems and massive economic burdens due to inadequate oversight of manufactured foods and endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
- Climate change: A textbook market failure, imposing trillions in external costs, yet consistently met with denial or calls for market-only solutions, despite overwhelming scientific consensus.
Erosion of well-being. The emphasis on individual self-interest and the demonization of government have contributed to a decline in overall societal well-being. The United States, despite its wealth, lags behind other developed nations in measures of happiness, life expectancy, and social mobility. This is directly linked to policies that prioritize economic freedom for the wealthy over robust social safety nets and equitable distribution of resources.
9. Government is Essential for a Functioning, Fair Society
Government is not the solution to all our problems, but it is the solution to many of our biggest ones.
Beyond the false dichotomy. The enduring myth of market fundamentalism presents a false choice between oppressive communism and heartless capitalism. However, history and the experience of other nations demonstrate that well-regulated capitalism, combined with effective governance, can lead to thriving democracies and high levels of citizen well-being. The Nordic countries, for example, consistently rank highest in happiness due to strong social safety nets, high trust in institutions, and robust public services.
The necessity of rules and regulation. Markets, like competitive sports, require rules to function fairly and prevent chaos. Unconstrained competition often leads to a "race to the bottom," destructive monopolies, and the exploitation of workers and the environment. Regulations are not merely "interference"; they define the market, protect competition, ensure safety, and enable collective benefits. As Adam Smith himself recognized, some "natural liberty" must be restrained when it endangers the security of society.
Reclaiming government's vital role. The COVID-19 pandemic starkly illustrated the indispensable role of a strong, coordinated government in addressing large-scale crises, from vaccine development to public health measures. The idea that "small government" is inherently better is refuted by evidence showing that states with higher taxes and stronger regulations often have better economic outcomes and higher human development indices. Government, far from being solely "the problem," is a proven tool for fostering prosperity, ensuring fairness, and protecting the collective good.
Last updated:
