The big thing to me is as a person with a strong interest in history I think I probably see the free market as something a lot different than most people. Most people think free market = United States and Europe is running some different economic system and that’s why they have universal healthcare, presumably better social services across the board and a better retirement system.
Well, in truth the United States isn’t anyone’s definition of a “true” free market the United States has a vast welfare state, vast social services programs, spending in the trillions on such things. We pay trillions in taxes, we pay on average more than 30% of our gross pay back to the government.
Some people also think of the gilded age America when robber barons ruled the country, children worked 12 hours a day and workers who died on the job were thrown away and their families given no compensation whatsoever.
When I think of the free market I tend to think of what we had before (and this is Western centric) we had basically a lot of local markets with very little trade. Obviously trade has been around as long as civilization, but I don’t think most people realize that even as recently as the 1600s/early 1700s large parts of European states like France and Germany were essentially entirely self sufficient. Their interaction with the outside world was minimal, their trade was minimal, they mostly grew everything they needed to survive and these people did not have varied diets at all. I read an account of the life as a peasant farmer in Europe c. mid 1600s and people were literally eating like a pound of bread a day as their entire food consumption. It had enough calories to keep them more or less okay but none of the nutritional variety we come to view as essential to our health.
A merchant wanting to ship goods from the eastern part of Germany to say, the middle of France would probably have to go through over 100 different customs charges. This wasn’t just because of all the micro-states of Europe at the time, this was true for internal trade as well. Just moving stuff from one part of France to another resulted in a commodity having its final selling price usually doubled or more just because of all the various local taxes and tariffs extorted from various entities (cities, local nobles, various religious orders that also had taxation privileges and etc.) One of the major factors of production, especially then but still today, is land. Vast tracts of land were owned by the Church and by the nobility. These entities weren’t paying tax on this land, and in fact in most cases they extracted rents from it (in the form of a share of harvests, usually.) These great powers essentially had permanent right to this land, no amount of mismanagement would result in some sort of central body taking it away. Even the most cash poor noble could usually hold on to their land if they wanted to, immune from modern day concerns of foreclosure, inability to pay property taxes and etc. Some nobles had massive tracts of land that were just kept for their value as hunting locations, meanwhile the 99% of the country that wasn’t part of the Church or the nobility had to eke out a subsistence living and then have part of their production taken from them by the permanent upper class…just because.
Obviously the farther back you go the worse it gets. I’m really talking about “relatively” modern times so far. If you go back to the real middle ages, say 1200 or so, serfdom was far more prevalent and far closer to true and absolute slavery. (By the 1600s most Western European states had abolished serfdom, although most people were still impoverished tenant farmers.)
It really was, in my opinion, the free market that brought that whole system toppling down. The more and more influence entrepreneurs have, the more innovative society became, this didn’t just mean less poor people and a growing middle class. It also meant a more educated population, and that created the nucleus of educated people that were necessary to really bring down the old regimes of Europe.