When it said that we should vote with our pocketbooks in the free market, as opposed to just the voting booth, can that be considered a democracy? The more “votes” or money is spent on goods/services, the more it appears desirable, the less votes/money spent on good/services, it appears less desirable.
One may argue that the “Dollar Democracy” is not a democracy because you get what you pay for, (or not pay for), hence not enforcing a will on another individual. But by the same token, something desired by one individual may not be produced because it is not profitable to create.
On a slight tangent, socialist typically call for democracy, would not a free market be the ultimate form of a democracy?
One could say that it’s actually a form of participatory democracy. It isn’t so much money that’s the deciding factor as participation in the market process.
In essence, the more money an individual the more votes. The “poorer” individual may not find the same goods/services of value as the richer individual.
Just for clarification, a participatory democracy is desirable in that it is of ones own volition as opposed to coercion to suffer/reap the consequences of participation?
Exactly. This is why some who care more about “egalitarianism” than liberty hate a true free market system. People who care more about liberty than “egalitarianism” love the free market.