Now I would consider myself someone who is flexible with definitions, because if you aren’t then your definitions tends to get in the way of actually communicating. Ya know, the only point of establishing definitions to begin with.
So I am not going to say that the current usage of a market place “free from government regulation” or “free from coercion” is a completely useless definition. But I think it is arbitrary and problematic in some ways.
For one thing, the answer of what a free market is depends on what you consider to be legitimate ownership. Property regulates what a market is.
For another thing, privilege in general can have the same economic effect as state intervention. Yet most “free market” advocates seem to be only concerned with the latter.
For example we can imagine two scenarios.
1: A law exists in where women are not allowed to take jobs
2: A sexist community where no one will hire women.
The results are the same. The root cause is the same (power disparities). Yet one is called a free market and the other is not.
