Capitalism and Free Market

The concept of 'Free Market' in Capitalism is ambiguous, since in at least Smith's pioneering version, there are two Markets--National and inter-National--that are incommensurate, because the goal of National Wealth divides them.  Now, Smith's primary interest in Free Marketism is as a counter to Protectionist Mercantilism, i. e. as inter-Nationalist, with an extension to domestic Markets less clearly delineated, i. e. the distinction between Laissez-Faire in Wealth-accumulation, and in Wealth-distribution, two different processes, is not sharply drawn.  Current evidence of the persistence of the confusion is an emphasis on domestic de-regulation combined with the general unawareness that protectionist tariffs are Mercantilist, not Capitalist. In any case, there have been three different grounds of a defense of Free Market principles: 1. Reverence for some inherent mechanism; 2. The Right to privately transact; and 3. Efficiency in National Wealth-accumulation.  But, Capitalism is a Means to National Wealth-accumulation.  Thus, the only one of three that is relevant on Economic grounds is #3, i. e. #1 has a Theological origin, and #2 draws upon a Political principle.  Likewise, counter-arguments such as the contention that Free Market Capitalism is exploitative is primarily directed elsewhere: at the goal of the system, i. e. that the priority of Wealth is potentially de-humanizing is extrinsic to Free Marketism qua Means.  So, the only sound internal critique of Free Marketism is one that demonstrates its shortcoming in that function.  One version of that critique, for which conclusive evidence seems to be lacking, is that a regulated domestic Market is a better Means to National Wealth-accumulation than an unregulated one. But another may be more persuasive--when Free Market Profits are negated by collateral Losses.  A specific example of that negation is the increase of health-care costs as a consequence of an unregulated tobacco industry.  The more general one is that Loss is the correlate of any Gain in a Market that is Zero-Sum.  So, at minimum, the advocacy of Free Market Capitalism is typically superficial and short-sighted, while the opposition to it tends to miss a ripe target.