From a philosophical point of view, I believe in the abilities of free and open markets to decide the best products, approaches to government, and a whole host of other things. In a real sense this represents the ultimate form of democratic rule. When left to their own devices, when they are open, broadly based, and operate freely among the participants, there is little that a market based approach cant handle. This of course doesnt apply to everything one can think of... for instance health care in which there are few "market choices" to be made in the decision to let grandpa live or die. Education is another place where markets can fail. And NO, money "markets" are not markets in this sense, they are a contrived form of money manipulation. But for many, many things markets provide the best answers we are likely to achieve. The GOP will tell you they too believe in this basic statement of market dynamics.
But they dont...
A central activity of our community, our "American way of life" if you will, is the protection of these free and open market dynamics. And, our community does this through the enacting of laws that prevent usury, monopolies, and other activities deadly to the formation of competitive advantage. It seems to be ingrained in us. For instance, many of us are skeptical of situations in which there is only one choice for a product etc. We like choices. Why? Because we perceive that they provide the optimal answers for our needs.
Our government, since the great depression, has done a reasonable job in insuring market fairness and function. Sure, there have been some disasters, but as a whole our government, at our request, has handled the job rather well. It has tried to protect the markets so they could do their job. Aside from Education, defense, health care, and a few other things like our entitlement programs for the poor, I would put forth the thesis that a central role of government is to protect the markets. Today we use words like "the commerce clause" but we all now what this means... protect the ability of markets to do their best.
As the GOP got the idea that Markets = Capitalism, well you see what has happened. The military industrial complex that even Ike warned about. A few banks control the financial system. Health care choices being made by a few large insurers. You would think that the GOP would have a fit about this given the lip service paid to markets. But in fact they have been the culprits of the market downfall through the reduction of participants, the reduction of choice, and the gaming of outcomes.
I believe this is because they do not realize that it isnt markets they believe in. They are pure and simply capitalists. The point of capitalism is to dominate a market, reducing its choices to one... theirs. Afterall, if I make cars, I dont want you to buy my competitors cars... I want you to buy mine. The whole point is to wipe out the competition. And in such a fiercely capitalist approach, making as much money as possible, quickly, works the best. It is for example very profitable to take viable and producing companies, leverage them and load them with debt through additional acquisitions, then bankrupt them. This is how Mittens has become so wealthy. But these companies and their products left the market through a means other than competitive disadvantage. And the decisions/choices they would have provided can not be vetted for their likely outcomes. This activity weakens the markets, and like the plank roads of New England, it offers solutions that are suboptimal. So Capitalism and Free Markets should be seen in some way as antithetical to each other. One providing short term gains in a highly efficient but ultimately destructive way. The other offering optimal solutions to decisions within our society, but with a less than efficient accumulation of long term wealth shared among the many that participate. The first a sort of corporate socialistic structure intended to extract wealth from the resources and means of the many, the latter to distribute wealth in a way which fairly accesses the "worth"of an idea or approach. I do realize that this is a touch simplistic, but there is little denying that Capitalism doesnt equal free and open markets.
By confusing these two words and concepts, modern capitalists falsely posit themselves as our great benefactors. In actual fact, they are the destroyers of the engine of innovation and wealth creation... the markets.
It would now seem that a central underpinning of the market mentality that we have given the government is also under assault - the two party system. The faithful opposition is a market idea, but listen the todays GOP... "we will make no compromise... All democrats are socialists... etc." Here too one can not deny that the intention is a one party system. And this system will decide winners and losers for us. It will decide the "rights" we are to receive and the products we will buy. It will also decide where the wealth will go. Unlike a Market, this single party will "value" its constituency. As a sort of "Brave New World" and "1984" all wrapped up into one, our "value" is to based in the usefulness we pose to a "winner" that has already been decided. Is this the Freedom they promise us? Is this the "Success" Mittens crows about? And if he is elected, exactly how long will it take for the "Ministry of Truth" to become the largest and most powerful arm of government?