Technically, no.
Even the freest economies ever had some direct state interventions. Perhaps more importantly, they were also connected to centrally planned economies, which means their own markets were distorted by those foreign state interventions.
Democracy is incompatible with fully free markets, unless it's heavily constrained to a small set of trivial coordination questions.
Free markets are predicated on private property rights being protected. State interventions violate those, by definition, in almost all cases.
I guess a completely free market requires a complete absence of government, and that has not happened, as long as there is government, there will be intervention.
reply
Correct
reply
Private property rights are more important than defending democracy.
There is a good argument for restricting the franchise to property or business owners.
reply
I agree about that protecting private property is far more important. From reading some of the founding fathers words it seemed almost like this was an obvious idea amongst them, I wonder what changed.
reply
The progressive movement was and is antithetical to the original vision of the USA 🇺🇸 Constitution
reply
I agree, but the scope of what can be voted on also has to be heavily constrained.
reply