Introduction
This article analyzes Milton Friedman’s thought, deconstructing the stereotype of the minimal-state ideologue and presenting him as a researcher of the conditions for a modern economic order. The text argues that Friedman’s critique of inflation, the welfare state, and overregulation stems from a fear of the tyranny of control, which destroys organic market mechanisms. Readers will learn how state errors deepened the Great Depression, why inflation is a test of governmental legitimacy, and how contemporary challenges—from the platform economy to school vouchers—redefine the boundaries of freedom and equality.
Political Freedom vs. Market Discipline
Political freedom requires limiting state power, as the fear of liberty leads to technocratic management that generates crises. From this perspective, inflation tests trust in market discipline—it is not a failure of capitalism, but a monetary phenomenon resulting from excessive money creation. Friedman describes it as a hidden tax that destroys the legitimacy of power, introduced without democratic consent.
Analyzing history, the author points out that the Great Depression was the result of Fed errors rather than market failure; a one-third contraction of the money supply transformed a recession into a catastrophe. Israel and France offer valuable lessons in fighting inflation: Israel’s stabilization in the 1980s, based on a balanced budget, contrasts with the French model of spending expansion, which forces permanent, ad hoc political compromises instead of clear rules of the game.
The Welfare State and Protection Mechanisms
Friedman argues that the welfare state destroys individual responsibility, promoting the pathological spending of "other people's money on others." Although modern theory differentiates between welfare state models (e.g., the fiscal model based on tax breaks), the warning against waste remains relevant. In the sphere of labor, market competition serves as a shield for both consumer and worker, provided there is a pluralism of employers. However, the platform economy weakens traditional labor protections, where algorithmic control can make freedom of choice illusory.
A key field of contention is education. State monopoly vs. freedom of choice is a battle for the quality of education; Friedman proposes school vouchers as a form of market pressure on quality. While critics warn of segmentation, the voucher is intended to restore sovereignty to parents, forcing schools to compete for students. Here, the role of the state shifts from a producer of services to a guarantor of standards and funding.
Equality, Corporations, and the Limits of Control
Logical analysis shows that equality of outcome is in conflict with freedom. To level natural differences in talent, the state must employ coercion, which destroys freedom and creates a new bureaucratic hierarchy. Modern behavioral economics signals the end of the myth of full rationality, justifying subtle interventions to correct cognitive biases, but it does not replace the price mechanism as the ultimate arbiter of resource allocation.
Differences are also visible on a global scale: French statism vs. the Israeli innovation model. French corporations are hierarchical machines with political backing, while Israeli tech firms rely on decentralized networks. In the face of uncertainty, technocratic failures expose the limits of control; command systems cannot replace the information provided by prices. Stability requires that institutions subject their claims to public criticism instead of hiding behind expert jargon.
Summary
In a world where certainty is becoming a luxury, the true strength of a system lies not in its dogmas, but in its capacity for constant self-reflection and adaptation. Friedman’s critique reminds us that every concentration of power seeks to emancipate itself from social control. The key to lasting prosperity is a procedural unity of justification: no institution—market, state, or corporation—can claim to be the final authority unless it is prepared for the ruthless, public verification of its actions. Perhaps it is this very uncertainty and constant revision that offer the only certain path to freedom.
📄 Full analysis available in PDF