DO FREE MARKET POLICIES HELP POOR COUNTRIES
Free Markets are advocated under the presumption that in a world without government interference **comparative advantage** will provide the optimum market for goods, services, and information to everyone. However, this doesn’t turn out to be true.
Free-Market is a code word for:
1 – all government non-interference trade by taxation.
2 – all governmental non-interference in trade by policy
3 – socialist government interference in the organization of production, distribution, and trade.
In the **developing world**, this translates to:
1 – on one hand, ‘the reduction and elimination of corruption’ and
2 – on the other hand ‘the privatization of common resources’ by internal members, and ‘the exploitation of common resources’ by outside members.
In the **Developed World** translates to:
1- Forcing all post-war nations to grant human (natural) rights (property rights), rather than territorial expansion (growth by warfare).
2 – Forcing all post-war nations to compete entirely by meritocratic production distribution and trade, so that survival is dependent upon being a good market citizen of the world, thus reducing the chances of another world war.
3 – (Failed Hypothesis) By encouraging democracy (which appears to have been a universal disaster) citizens both 1 and 2 will be brought to bear out of citizen’s self interest. (Despite the fact that communism and islamism are hostile to meritocracy.)
**This is America’s postwar policy in a nutshell.**
Add to this policy the unstated threat that ‘*You can Choose your own government under democracy but if you choose poorly we will punish you so severely that you’ll be back in the stone age.*”
The problem is that America promotes the CARROT but doesn’t mention the STICK. And it turns out that Authoritarian State Capitalism, which is just monarchy at greater scale, is superior to democracy in every case OTHER than small homogenous protestant nation states where everyone is a sixth cousin at the outside.