Mardi intime: Do markets conflict with communal reciprocity?

Louis Larue (UCL, Chaire Hoover)
My purpose is to isolate intrinsic features of the market that are ethically right or wrong. First, I argue that the market is a system of coordination of actions that implies a certain form of social relation and a certain way of valuing objects. Second, I study several arguments in favour of the market. I argue that the market may be an efficient and neutral coordination mechanism that should be allowed to operate freely within an already just institutional setting. Third, I examine what may be intrinsically wrong with the market. I analyse four types of arguments. The first is conditional: were people well-informed and rational, were talents, incomes and resources equally distributed, were basic liberties guaranteed for all, markets would not be wrong. The second concerns market dependence. Economic prudence requires that the subsistence of all does not rely entirely on market coordination. Third, I argue that a society truly devoted to value pluralism cannot rely entirely on market coordination. Fourth, I consider (but reject) arguments opposing the market for communitarian reasons. I show that most of them merely add confusion to the three previous arguments, or address another issue (egoism rather than the market, for instance).