This assertion of a constructivist orientation raises the pressing issue of just what sort of ontological entity the neoliberal market is, or should be. While one wing (the Chicago School) has made its name attempting to reconcile one idiosyncratic version of neoclassical economic theory (which predates neoliberalism by more than a half-century) with this “nonnatural” orientation, other subsets of MPS have innovated entirely different characterizations of the market. The Misean wing of Austrian economics attempted to ground the market in a purely rationalist version of natural necessity. Perhaps the dominant version at MPS emanated from Hayek himself, wherein “the market” is posited to be an information processor more powerful than any human brain, but essentially patterned on brain/computation metaphors. This version of the market is most intimately predicated on the epistemic doctrines covered above, which in the interim have become the philosophical position most closely associated with the neoliberal Weltanschauung. From this perspective, prices in an efficient market “contain all relevant information” and therefore cannot be predicted by mere mortals. In this version, the market always surpasses the state’s ability to process information, and this constitutes the kernel of the argument for the necessary failure of socialism. Another partially rival approach emanates from ordoliberalism, which argues that competition in a well-functioning market needs to be directly organized by the state. It is important to see that part of the function of MPS discussions was to explore whether these rather divergent visions of the market might nevertheless lead to more or less identical programs for state intervention in creating and sustaining a market society.

Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, loc. 2126