The fact that the social market economy was first and foremost a tool to attain a certain political objective, rather than a scientific theory per se, reveals why there is (still) no closed theory of the social market economy comparable to the older elaborate ordoliberal system. Aims and objectives were developed step by step in response to concrete political developments, rather than according to logical extrapolations and derivations from ordoliberal theory. Consequently, these aims and objectives display to a large extent flexibility and adaptability toward changing economic, political, and sociocultural conditions in society. Thus, it was because of the evolutionary character of Müller-Armack’s approach that over the years tensions would arise relative to the dogmatic and normative character of ordoliberal theory in practice. “Whilst the ordoliberal concept provides a concrete program for the political caste, Müller-Armack’s concept of Social Market Economy can, in a nutshell, be understood as a methodical principle” (Starbatty 1986, 16).

Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, loc. 554