Free market and its hypocritical supporters and detractors in Colombia

The recent scandal of president Uribe’s children reveals the hypocrisy of some Colombians who preach for no state intervention over their economical and sometimes very profitable activities, although they don’t hesitate when finding an opportunity with the help of state to have a considerable advantage over the others.

But we also find another hypocritical group of Colombians. The ones who publicly reject free-market economy but can’t resist buying Diesel Jeans or signing for millionaire contracts in order to “support people’s causes”.

I was taught at school –like everybody does- that free market consists of low or no intervention from the state in the market. One of the main reasons to support this theory is that people’s wealth should depend on their own virtue, rather than any movement from the state. Another reason tells us that to let market operate, governments should promote economical stability by avoiding changes and reforms to law.

I was taught also that criticism to free market considers that state should always control the economy, so that there should be no room for private enterprises. This criticism states that people’s wealth should depend always from equal distribution by the state, and that reforms to law should be always considered for the good of the people.

Did I miss something? Or, does free market economy now depends on a certain intervention from the state in order to help somebody’s virtue considerably? Does stability exist when reforming law in order to benefit just a specific person? Where is virtue when the price of a piece of land increases exponentially from one day to another?

Did I miss something? Or, does a state-oriented economy now allow some private enterprises owned by specific persons? Where is the promotion of equal distribution of wealth when some of the leaders of the Colombian left earn many times a farmer’s basic salary?

We find people who truly support free-market; people who support free market but with a light intervention from the state; people who promote a high intervention from the state but accept that one can’t live without the market; people who truly reject free market, and many others in between. But one should practice what he preaches. If some people don’t want any intervention from the state, they don’t have to ask for any specific help from it. If some others don’t want free-market to govern people’s lives, they don’t have to ask for getting high benefits from it. Otherwise most of the people would think that free market and state intervention are just concepts made only to favor interests of very few.