Reflections on Market Dynamics

I identify as a free market capitalist. My preferences lean towards reduced government intervention, including lower taxes and fewer regulations.

I believe in the freedom of individuals to make their own choices. Ideally, my vision of economic freedom is akin to Thomas Jefferson’s take on religious freedom:

“It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are 20 gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

In simpler terms, as long as my neighbor’s economic actions don’t harm me financially or physically, then I wish them the best in their endeavors.

One crucial aspect for me is the call for equal protection under the law. I think that both my local store and a giant like Amazon should adhere to the same legal frameworks, regulations, and tax structures.

This brings us to some underlying issues.

The economic landscape in the United States isn’t truly free market capitalism. This perception has been misleading for decades.

Even more troubling, we seem to operate under the false notion that we have a free market. Each economic discussion in D.C. gets filtered through this distorted lens.

Ever wonder why there’s a rising interest in socialism in the U.S.?

What we often label capitalism is more like a diluted version of fascism—mixed with aggressive globalist tendencies.

Interestingly, even in the context of socialism, if the government mismanages funds, occasionally they might still reach some Americans. That’s not the case when we launch yet another pointless war abroad.

I genuinely believe what we have now could be termed as Diet Fascism.

For those who might get offended by that idea, let’s clarify our terms and examine the reality.

Stripped of ideological jargon, classic fascism is:

“A political and economic system where the state exerts considerable control over the economy, often through corporatism.”

Corporatism, in this context, refers to:

“A system aimed at promoting collaboration between the state and businesses…”

This description aligns quite well with the current situation in the U.S. It’s certainly more accurate than calling it a free market.

With last year’s U.S. economy sitting around $30 trillion, the federal government spent roughly $7 trillion and regulated at a cost of about $2 trillion.

The federal influence on the economy? At least 30%. That’s a clear indicator of “significant control,” and this influence has only intensified over the years.

And let’s not overlook the $39+ trillion federal debt, along with over $1 trillion in annual interest payments, which signifies further encroachment on the economy. The more money they borrow, the more the private sector suffers, and the debt just continues to grow.

So again, we see this “significant control.”

Are Big Government and Big Business in near-harmonious, fascist alignment? Absolutely.

Last year, $6 billion was spent on lobbying the federal government. When you compare it to the $9+ trillion that lobbying influences, that $6 billion seems small.

However, there has never been a greater Return on Investment in D.C. during the 21st Century. That $6 billion has led to trillions in cronyism.

Special laws. Unique tax rates. Tailored incentives. Government subsidies. Regulatory exceptions. No antitrust actions. No prosecutions for corporate wrongdoing.

And it continues on and on.

Your local retailers are likely not part of that $6 billion lobbying effort, but major players like Amazon ($2.7 trillion Market Cap) certainly are.

How did Big Business rise to dominance? Largely due to government favoritism.

This is how our marketplace has become so monopolized. Only the big corporations can afford to play this game. They fund government, and in return, they get to shape the rules.

A perfect illustration of this is the 2008 financial crisis—an endeavor fueled by this symbiosis.

The government incentivized large banks to issue risky mortgage loans by purchasing them soon after they were created.

When the inevitable crash hit, the government stepped in to rescue these banks, costing taxpayers around $29 trillion.

Following that, we saw legislation that, while promising to prevent “too big to fail” banks, ended up hurting thousands of smaller banks, which were then absorbed by larger institutions, further concentrating power.

It’s a clear case of Big Government and Big Business collaborating, often at the expense of the average citizen.

Now, why do I call this Diet Fascism rather than Classic Fascism?

It’s because, in the U.S., corporations often dictate terms to the government rather than the other way around.

A prime example is how Big Tech wields significant influence in D.C., getting what it wants from the government.

Do you think Big Government holds any substantial power? Look at politicians who campaign on “draining the swamp” or “taking on the deep state.” More often than not, they arrive in D.C. to find they have little authority, becoming order-takers for Big Business.

For a slice of that $6 billion lobbying money and over $14 billion in campaign funds, they must cooperate.

This game is played by Big Business, and Big Government simply accepts the proposals.

Nearly everyone within this system plays along. And those who don’t?

For instance, Congressman Thomas Massie from Kentucky has spent his career opposing this cronyism, documenting its flaws.

What has this integrity earned him? The power structures of D.C. have turned against him.

The essence of fascism—Diet or otherwise—will not tolerate any disloyalty:

“Fascism suppresses dissent through a blend of legal repression, violence outside the law, censorship, and propaganda, fostering an atmosphere of fear and control.”

If this description doesn’t resonate with the current U.S. landscape, it might be time to reassess what’s been happening.