I Do Not Support Socialism: Why I Believe in Rules-Based Capitalism

I am consistently asked a question that, in all my life, I never imagined I would have to answer:

“Do you support socialism?”

So let me put it as plainly as I know how:

I do not support socialism. I have not supported socialism. And I will not support socialism.

It is also worth being clear about what the word means. Merriam-Webster defines socialism, among other definitions, as “a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.”

That is not the economic system I believe in.

I am a capitalist. More specifically, I believe in rules-based capitalism—an economic system built on private property, entrepreneurship, voluntary exchange, consumer choice, and free and competitive markets.

As I have written previously in Common Good Capitalism: A Rules-Based Approach to Prosperity, my economic philosophy rests on three basic principles: economic freedom under fair rules, prosperity through service and productive value creation, and accountability through measurable results and public trust.

I believe free markets are one of the greatest engines for prosperity and opportunity ever developed. But a truly free market requires more than simply declaring it free. It requires rules that protect property rights, enforce contracts, prevent fraud and corruption, and make sure competition is actually competition rather than a system tilted toward those with the most money, influence, or political connections.

The goal should not be government controlling the market.

The goal should be government establishing fair and predictable rules and then allowing people to compete, innovate, build businesses, create jobs, and prosper within them.

That is the kind of capitalism I believe in: free, competitive, productive, and accountable.

Markets serve society best when people prosper by serving the needs of others. Entrepreneurs succeed by solving problems. Businesses grow by serving customers. Workers prosper when their skills and contributions create value. Investors earn returns by supporting productive enterprise.

Competition should reward those who create value—not those with the best political connections.

That is capitalism working as it should.

I also believe government must exercise restraint when it comes to economic incentives.

There may be circumstances where incentives can encourage investment, job creation, infrastructure development, or economic activity that produces a clear public benefit. But government should never become a venture capitalist with taxpayer money, nor should political connections determine who receives an advantage.

When it comes to government incentives, I believe in a simple principle: incentives should reward promises kept, not promises made.

That means incentives should operate under clear and transparent rules, be based on objective standards, require measurable results, include public accountability, and provide clawbacks when commitments are not met.

The purpose should be to create the conditions for private enterprise to succeed—not to guarantee the success of any particular company.

Government should help create opportunity. The market should determine the winners.

That is the difference between economic development and crony capitalism.

And we should also stop pretending that every public service is somehow an example of socialism.

Public roads are not socialism.

Police and fire departments are not socialism.

Public libraries are not socialism.

Public education is not socialism.

These are institutions communities have created to perform legitimate public functions and provide the foundations upon which a free society and a market economy can operate.

That distinction is hardly a new one. Adam Smith, the author of The Wealth of Nations and one of history’s most important advocates for free markets, recognized legitimate responsibilities of government, including national defense, the administration of justice, certain public works and infrastructure, and support for education.

Believing that government has legitimate responsibilities does not make someone a socialist any more than believing in capitalism means believing government should have no responsibilities at all.

The question is not government or markets.

The question is what each is properly responsible for.

Government should protect our rights, uphold the rule of law, provide essential public institutions, establish fair and predictable rules, preserve genuine competition, and create a level playing field.

Then it should give individuals, families, workers, entrepreneurs, and businesses the freedom to build, compete, innovate, and succeed.

Markets should remain free.

Competition should be real.

Opportunity should be possible.

Success should come from creating value and serving others—not political connections, monopoly power, or special favors.

And when government acts, taxpayers should be able to see what was promised, what it cost, and whether it worked.

That is not socialism.

That is rules-based capitalism: freedom under fair rules, prosperity through service, and accountability for results.

With respect for all Arkansans,

Joshua Irby

Paid for by Joshua Irby