Matthew Hennessey of the Wall Street Journal takes exception to the vice president’s description of the market as (just) “a tool.” Hennessey’s point is that there are laws of economics that apply even when commentators or politicians find them inconvenient. I’m not sure Vance was denying that.
The language Vance used reminds me of a debate from six years ago. Tucker Carlson had made a point of arguing that “market capitalism is a tool, like a staple gun or a toaster. You’d have to be a fool to worship it.” I don’t think either of the options Carlson presents is satisfactory — as I wrote back then.
Probably the most important question Carlson raised is how we — “we” especially meaning conservatives — should think about markets and capitalism. He denies, surely rightly, that we should make a religious dogma out of support for them. But it does not follow that we should regard markets as merely a tool. We don’t recognize property rights and contracts only because they produce good results. We are also moved by considerations of justice and freedom.
Treating economic liberty as something that has value in itself does not mean that it can never be limited. . . .