The less free market we have, the more we use the phrase ‘free market’. George Orwell would be proud.

Blair Fix

In [The Growth of Hierarchy and the Death of the Free
Market](https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2019/05/15/the-growth-of-hierarchy-and-the-death-of-the-free-market/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}, I argued that economic development involves killing the
free market. What was the evidence? As energy use increases, so does the
relative number of managers.

This growth of managers, I argued, indicates that economic development
involves the growth of hierarchy. I showed that a simple model of
hierarchy could explain why the number of managers increases with energy
use. To get a sense for this model, try the app below.

<figure id="attachment_372" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-372" style="width: 3000px">
<a href="https://blair-fix.shinyapps.io/energy-managers/"
target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img
src="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/shiny_screen.png?resize=723%2C554&amp;ssl=1"
class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-371" loading="lazy"
decoding="async" data-attachment-id="371"
data-permalink="https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/shiny_screen/"
data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/shiny_screen.png?fit=865%2C663&amp;ssl=1"
data-orig-size="865,663" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}"
data-image-title="shiny_screen" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption="&lt;p&gt;shiny screen&lt;/p&gt;
"
data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/shiny_screen.png?fit=300%2C230&amp;ssl=1"
data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/shiny_screen.png?fit=723%2C554&amp;ssl=1"
data-recalc-dims="1" width="723" height="554" alt="shiny_screen" /></a>
<figcaption> 
A web app showing how the growth of hierarchy leads to the growth of
managers. Click the image to use the app.</figcaption>
</figure>

So as societies develop, they replace small-scale competition with
large-scale hierarchy. In other words, economic development means
killing the free market and replacing it with central planning.

At the end of the
[post](https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2019/05/15/the-growth-of-hierarchy-and-the-death-of-the-free-market/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}, I noted that the term 'free market' is often used in an
Orwellian sense. Free-market advocates evoke pleasant images of
entrepreneurs and small businesses. But the policies sought in the name
of the 'free market' often benefit *big business*. So the term 'free
market' is doublespeak for the unfettered power of large hierarchies. In
the name of 'freedom', we're actually concentrating hierarchical power.

This is an incendiary idea that deserves more investigation. In this
post, I'm going to *quantify* the doublespeak nature of the term 'free
market'. I'll show you that the *less* free market we have, the *more*
we use the phrase 'free market'. George Orwell would be proud.

### Google Ngrams

Before diving into the analysis, I'll talk about the tool that I've used
to quantify word frequency. It's called [Google Ngram
Viewer](https://books.google.com/ngrams){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}.

As part of its gluttonous appetite for data, Google has digitized
millions of books. Using these books, Google has created a database of
the frequency of words and phrases in the English language. They call it
the 'ngram' database. Why? Because in linguistic jargon, a sequence of
text is called an
[n-gram](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-gram){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}. Freely available, the ngram database is a gift to those
interested in our changing language.

My only qualm with the Ngram Viewer is that it doesn't allow you to
download the data from a given search. But with a bit of finagling, you
can get the data from your browser. Johannes Filter has a nice
[tutorial](https://johannesfilter.com/how-to-export-data-from-google-ngram-viewer/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"} on how to do this.

### Talking About the 'Free Market'

Back to the analysis! Here I'll use Google Ngrams to measure the
frequency of the phrase 'free market'. I'm going to compare this
frequency to the growth of management in the United States.

Remember that the number of managers is our proxy for hierarchy. More
managers means more hierarchy and less *actual* free market. To make the
comparison to US data fare, I'll look only at word frequency in American
English.

We'll begin with the growth of management in the United States (Figure
1). The relative number of US managers grew continuously from 1860 to
the late 1990s, before declining slightly in the 2000s. So for more than
a century, the *actual* US free market declined and was replaced by
hierarchical central planning.

<figure id="attachment_424" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-424" style="width: 3000px">
<img
src="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/us_manager.png?resize=723%2C578&amp;ssl=1"
class="alignnone size-full wp-image-424" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
data-attachment-id="424"
data-permalink="https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/us_manager/"
data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/us_manager.png?fit=3000%2C2400&amp;ssl=1"
data-orig-size="3000,2400" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}"
data-image-title="us_manager" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption="&lt;p&gt;us_manager&lt;/p&gt;
"
data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/us_manager.png?fit=300%2C240&amp;ssl=1"
data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/us_manager.png?fit=723%2C578&amp;ssl=1"
data-recalc-dims="1" width="723" height="578"
alt="Management share of US employment" />
<figcaption> 
Figure 1: The growth of management employment in the United
States. For most of the last century, the management share of
US employment grew continuously. Note that this chart uses a log scale
on the y-axis. Exponential growth appears as a straight line. For data
sources, see <a
href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171823">Energy
and Institution Size</a>. 
</figcaption>
</figure>

Now, you'd think that as the *actual* free market dies, we'd use the
*phrase* 'free market' less. But it turns out that the opposite is true.
In American English, the frequency of the term 'free market' grew
continuously from 1860 to the 1990s, before declining slightly in the
2000s.

<figure id="attachment_422" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-422" style="width: 3000px">
<img
src="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram.png?resize=723%2C578&amp;ssl=1"
class="alignnone size-full wp-image-422" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
data-attachment-id="422"
data-permalink="https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/ngram/"
data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram.png?fit=3000%2C2400&amp;ssl=1"
data-orig-size="3000,2400" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}"
data-image-title="ngram" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption="&lt;p&gt;ngram free market&lt;/p&gt;
"
data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram.png?fit=300%2C240&amp;ssl=1"
data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram.png?fit=723%2C578&amp;ssl=1"
data-recalc-dims="1" width="723" height="578"
alt="frequency of &#39;free market&#39;" />
<figcaption> 
Figure 2: The relative frequency of the term ‘free market’ in
American English. Data is from Google Ngram. Note that this
chart uses a log scale on the y-axis. Exponential growth appears as a
straight line. 
</figcaption>
</figure>

Does the trend in Figure 2 look familiar? To me it looks very similar to
the trend in US management employment (Figure 1). Let's look at the
correlation between the two series. It's pretty tight:

<figure id="attachment_423" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-423" style="width: 3000px">
<img
src="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram_v_management.png?resize=723%2C578&amp;ssl=1"
class="alignnone size-full wp-image-423" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
data-attachment-id="423"
data-permalink="https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/ngram_v_management/"
data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram_v_management.png?fit=3000%2C2400&amp;ssl=1"
data-orig-size="3000,2400" data-comments-opened="1"
data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}"
data-image-title="ngram_v_management" data-image-description=""
data-image-caption="&lt;p&gt;ngram_v_management&lt;/p&gt;
"
data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram_v_management.png?fit=300%2C240&amp;ssl=1"
data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ngram_v_management.png?fit=723%2C578&amp;ssl=1"
data-recalc-dims="1" width="723" height="578"
alt="frequency of &#39;free market&#39; vs management share of employment" />
<figcaption> 
Figure 3: Talking more about the ‘free market’ as hierarchy
grows. This figure plots the relative frequency of the term
‘free market’ in American English against the management share of US
employment. I assume that the growth of management indicates the growth
of hierarchy and the death of the free market. 
</figcaption>
</figure>

So as management employment increases, our use of the term 'free market'
grows in lock step. In other words, we talk more about the free market
as it dies.

I view the correlation in Figure 3 as a testament to the Orwellian
nature of the term 'free market'. It's not about small-scale
competition. Instead, the 'free market' is a euphemism for unfettered
*power*. So the more we concentrate power, the more we talk about 'free
markets'.

### *Who's* talking about the free market?

Here's an interesting thought. What if it's the *management class* that
is talking about the free market?

This would explain why the term 'free market' is tightly correlated with
the relative number of managers. If most managers are free-market
ideologues, the use of the term 'free market' should grow with the
number of managers.

If this is true, the irony is palpable. Managers are essentially central
planners, so their job is the farthest thing from the free market. If
managers are spouting free-market ideology, it means the management
*talk* doesn't match the management *walk*.

This potential disconnect between what managers say and what they do is
easy to imagine. It has a parallel in the economics profession. You'd be
hard pressed to find a group of people who love the (idea of a) free
market more than academic economists.

But ask yourself where academic economists *work*. Are they
self-employed, selling their ideas on the free market? Of course not!
They live in the ivory tower, a bastion of hierarchy and bureaucracy.
Academic economists talk about the free market while working in an
institution that is the furthest thing from it.

### Lying and getting away with it?

I'll conclude this foray into free-market doublespeak by quoting Edward
S. Herman. In his book [Beyond
Hypocrisy](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/386303.Beyond_Hypocrisy){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}, Herman writes:

> What is really important in the ... world of doublespeak is the
> ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away
> with it ...

If my theory above is correct, then the management class is collectively
lying to us. They talk about the 'free market' as they increase
hierarchy. And it seems, in large part, that they have gotten away with
it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

#### Support this blog

Economics from the Top Down is where I share my ideas for how to create
a better economics. If you liked this post, please consider becoming a
patron. You'll help me continue my research, and continue to share it
with readers like you.

[![patron_button](https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/supporter_button-1.png?w=220&ssl=1){.size-thumbnail
.wp-image-1180 .aligncenter decoding="async" attachment-id="1180"
permalink="https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/patron_button/"
orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/patron_button.png?fit=434%2C102&ssl=1"
orig-size="434,102" comments-opened="1"
image-meta="{\"aperture\":\"0\",\"credit\":\"\",\"camera\":\"\",\"caption\":\"\",\"created_timestamp\":\"0\",\"copyright\":\"\",\"focal_length\":\"0\",\"iso\":\"0\",\"shutter_speed\":\"0\",\"title\":\"\",\"orientation\":\"0\"}"
image-title="patron_button" image-description="" image-caption=""
medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/patron_button.png?fit=300%2C71&ssl=1"
large-file="https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/patron_button.png?fit=434%2C102&ssl=1"
recalc-dims="1"}](https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/membership/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}

------------------------------------------------------------------------

#### Stay updated

Sign up to get email updates from this blog.

:::: {.jetpack_subscription_widget}
## {#section .widgettitle}

::: {.wp-block-jetpack-subscriptions__container}
Email Address

Keep me up to date
:::
::::

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[![](https://i0.wp.com/economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/by.png?w=150&ssl=1){.aligncenter
decoding="async"
recalc-dims="1"}](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/){rel="license"} 
This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
License](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/){rel="license"}.
You can use/share it anyway you want, provided you attribute it to me
(Blair Fix) and link to [Economics from the Top
Down](https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/).

------------------------------------------------------------------------

In The Growth of Hierarchy and the Death of the Free Market, I argued that economic development involves killing the free market. What was the evidence? As energy use increases, so does the relative number of managers. This growth of managers, I argued, indicates that economic development involves the growth of hierarchy. I showed that a simple model of hierarchy could explain why the number of managers increases with energy use.

Messaggi di Rogue Scholar

As it Dies, We Talk About the ‘Free Market’ More