Our economy is based on certain philosophical precepts or ideas. 

If these ideas or precepts are wrong, then our economy won’t work properly. It won’t serve the needs of the majority; it will be dysfunctional. That’s why it’s important that our economy is built on rock-solid ideas, not on fairy tales about how it is supposed to serve the majority, but rather on how it actually serves them. 

So, that’s the big question you face – do you believe and support the neoliberal (or free market) ideas which currently underpin our economy, or do you reject them as the cause of our major socioeconomic and environmental problems?  If you believe in goblins, gnomes, and the tooth fairy, then you may just believe in the neoliberal fantasy world. Otherwise, you will struggle to make much sense out of the baloney they sprout. 

Of course, if you are one of the elite rich making more money out of their lies than you can cope with, then I will understand why you support the absurdity, which is neoliberalism (also known as neo-feudalism or economic apartheid.) 

The rich, although only a tiny minority, are extremely powerful. So much so that they have been able to divert the course of democracy by implementing policies and strategies that benefit them while hurting the majority. They have managed to do this by lying and misleading us. Only through mass awareness and action can we take them on and reverse their elitist policies. We are living under a form of Economic Apartheid, where only the rich benefit. 

Let’s start by understanding the lies we’ve been fed. As I said earlier, if the basic precept or idea underlying a hypothesis is flawed, then the policy is nothing more than a flawed policy. Of course, this depends on your point of view. If you hold an elitist point of view, then it's not flawed but an extremely effective policy. However, if your point of view is that of an average person, then it stinks. As economic policies are supposed to serve the majority – it’s a smelly, horrible mess. 

Free market policies comprise three key ideas.

1. Self-regulating markets.
2. Spontaneous order of markets, and
3. The importance of individual freedom.

With these three ideas, they are trying to justify policies which call for small governments and limited regulation. This, in turn, leads to lower taxes and less government oversight and regulation. This being their primary goal because, with less government oversight and control, that puts them in a strong position to implement policies which favour them rather than the majority or the environment. Lower taxes are a bonus (a big one.) 

Let's look at these nonsensical claims one by one. 

1. Self-regulating markets – really? Pull the other leg. A self-regulated system generally refers to a system which brings itself back to equilibrium without intervention. However, this does not accurately describe the interrelationship between supply, demand, and price, which they use to justify the claim that markets should be left alone to self-regulate. 

Far from self-regulating, all three elements are easily manipulated to favour one party over others. So, what this interrelationship actually shows us is that all business processes are interrelated with one another, not just supply, demand and price. Business functions as a causal model (i.e., a cause-and-effect model.) The common denominator of all business processes is not a monetary figure but rather a value measure. The purpose of each business process must be to add value to the business. Hence business functions as a value creation causal model. We need to understand this model and all its interrelationships to optimise business value creation for the benefit of society. This requires wider measurement and management, with greater government regulation and oversight, not less. 

2.Spontaneous order of markets – another baseless ruse to mislead us. What they mean by spontaneous order is that when individuals pursue their own self-interest by buying and selling goods and services, they unintentionally contribute to the overall order of the market. According to them, competition and market dynamics lead to the efficient allocation of resources without a central authority directing these actions. They use this argument to claim we don’t need big governments. 

Entrepreneurial drive is good, but when unfettered, it's bad, as it becomes a matter of self-interest over social interests. This is not a question for debate. The economy is supposed to serve the majority, not minority needs. We are not challenging the entrepreneurial spirit; I’m saying it needs to be controlled through careful oversight, and that requires big government. Spontaneous order of markets is a red herring intended to confuse and mislead you into believing there is no need for big government, regulations, and oversight when there is. 

3. The importance of individual freedom – another red herring. The idea that if you want greater individual freedom, then you require smaller governments, less regulation and oversight is a fallacy. In fact, the opposite is true in a democracy. The difference between emerging and developed economies is their investment in Common Capital. This is all the money the government has invested over time in building infrastructure and providing high levels of services to its citizens. Common Capital is what distinguishes developed economies from developing economies where their investment is substantially lower and thus their quality of life is lower. Their judicial systems, level of policing and many other “basics” protecting individuals and allowing them to exercise their full potential are not as good as in developed economies. All thanks to BIG GOVERNMENTS and their investments in COMMON CAPITAL. This helps businesses grow and prosper far better than in an emerging economy. So, if you think small government, limited regulation and oversight benefit you - go and live in a developing economy, otherwise wise up to the need for big government, regulations, and oversight.

Now you understand why the three basic ideas underlying neoliberalism (aka free markets, neo-feudalism, or economic apartheid) are flawed and why our economy is dysfunctional.

You may read other articles by Adrian Dore on Medium at

https://medium.com/@adrianmarkdore/