The Orwellian twist to all of this is the repurposing of the word “freedom”. “Freedom” is historically a political idea: freedom from oppression. The idea of economic freedom as promoted by libertarians and Chicago School economists, is ultimately hostile to political freedom.
Huh? As I understand it, economic freedom is the freedom for two parties to make a mutually beneficial exchange. Wikipedia says it this way:
The free market viewpoint understands economic liberty as the freedom to produce, trade and consume any goods and services acquired without the use of force, fraud or theft.
And this hostile to freedom from oppression? That only makes sense if you believe it is “oppression” when you are not free to take what you want from those who produce it. Maybe it’s the prohibition of force, fraud, and theft that some people find objectionable. That doesn’t make sense either. What does make sense is for me to stop commenting on these widely read but incoherent blog posts!