Reinventing the Bazaar: Chapter 1

Discussion Questions:

Reinventing the Bazaar: Chapter 1

According to McMillan, there are several defining characteristics of a market, along with dozens of less conclusive traits (such as the presence of competition) which together form the idea of a market. The most important characteristic he highlights throughout the chapter is decision-making autonomy. This can be seen as the freedom of any party participating in a market transaction to veto the exchange at any time. The freedom of the consumer to decide to exchange elsewhere, with a different seller, and the freedom of the seller to choose what to sell, what price to ask for it, and in what manner to sell the item(s)--for example, in an online/virtual shop versus a physical trading location. McMillan discusses decision-making autonomy early in the chapter in order to provide the reader with the notion that without this key factor, markets would not be free, or true markets as we see them today. He states that even though participants in a market are limited by resources and rules of the market, "some choice, even if it is narrow, is usually better than none."

McMillan's statement about people's clashing opinions of markets rings very true for me, from what I've seen in my lifetime. The most prominent example that comes to my mind is the presence of communism throughout history. If no leader was afraid of decentralizing power and giving the freedom of trade to his/her people, we wouldn't see the differences in economic systems  that we often see today. The opposite is also true. Many people are so afraid of losing power to an over-controlling government that they do not want their leaders to have any power over their market. The difference in mindset here can be seen worldwide; in countries who boast markets with limited government intervention, and in countries whose government keeps tight control over the market and claims to keep problems such as unfair trade out of the picture. At this point in my educational journey, I don't know enough about either side to declare whether I personally lean one way or another, but I would say that rules are important in moderation, and that governments might be more respected if they offered guidance and suggestion rather than keeping control over the market like a playground supervisor. Elementary school playground supervisors often take away kids' opportunity to learn from their mistakes/experiences by telling them exactly what to play, where and when to play, and how to play. When everything is perfectly fair, perfectly controlled, and all possibilities of crises eliminated, I think that most of the learning opportunities are gone.

I personally don't have much knowledge of markets, but if I had to choose rules which I think would be important in a modern market, I would say that McMillan's "ordered brawl" metaphor makes a lot of sense in terms of allowing chaos to occur in small doses. I think that a market would need freedom and a loose enough control that people could learn from their own (and others') mistakes. But it would also need guidelines to prevent people from being taken advantage of. Without protection against manipulation, thievery, and other major problems, we would have a huge mess. I don't know exactly what these rules would state, but I do think it's important to eliminate issues in which someone has no choice but to give in to an unfair demand, or is taken advantage of in a situation not caused by his/her own ignorance.