Now, let me go through the contended arguments above, and circumnavigate them to see whether they are water tight and coherent.
To begin with, I challenged the argument from a previous comment whether the ideal free market exists, I am disappointed when you ignore that by claiming it does doesn't matter whether such a country exists in the world, you went further to stick on the validity of the argument. I never questioned the logical validity of your assertion. The issue is whether what you suggest seem pseudoclaim. It is unattainable if you agree with that then why would advice African governments to adopt the system which by itself is unattainable. It can't work!
Mind you the validity of argument does not necessarily mean desirable or practical or pragmatic. One can have a valid claim an yet the argument is unreasonable and counter intuitive.
You said
"The reality is that Governments are the end product of group-think and tribalism. They innately exist to enforce the mobs preferences over the minority. They are a result of the human nature to rely in the strength in numbers instead of thinking for themselves. The outcome is that the opportunistic humans who have an addiction for power take advantage of this flaw in human nature in order to gain control over the mob or majority"
I certainly think that you have a myopia view of what Government is, It is not true that a democratic government is the result of group or tribe thinking. There are no premises from your argument which lead you that doubtful inference. Furthermore, to equate a democratic government with rule of majority which asserts the notion that majority wins all, this too is incoherent to the principles of democratic government. Yes, in a democratic government majority vote puts someone in power but this does not mean that majority can do whatever they want to or majority can illegitimately coerce the minority. A democratic government is the government of majority but bound with the democratic principles like equality to all, liberty to all. In other words, government is limited by the idea of dignity. If that is true, then the minority cannot impose their preferences to minority to issue pertaining individual responsibility to live up their lives as they wish as long as they live consistently by honoring other's dignity.
Mind you again, government has many purpose not only ensuring economic activity but also it protects the property and lives of people. So, to downgrade the role of government is to be inconsistent with the very principle of free market you try to advocate. Free market presupposes tranquillity and harmony in the state. It is impossible in today's world to that without such an important human institution. Free market leads to monopoly capitalism.
It's simple economics and if you leave these monopoly enterprises to dominate, then the country is gonna be ruled by the greedy of capitalists in free market.
"Free market presupposes tranquillity and harmony in the state?" The free market cannot presuppose anything it is not a person. You make that presupposition. The free market is made up of individuals who voluntarily interact. When Gov. intervenes in a free market interaction such as competition in a sector, the company with the most money capable of lobbying the individuals that make up the Gov. will always win over the smaller companies. Monopolies are innately the result of Gov intervention. In a purely free market without regulations to hinder competition companies will rise up to compete and there will never be a company capable of holding a whole sector because it will always loose the incentive to produce better goods and the customers will ostracize it out of business.
Free market does not lead to monopoly capitalism. The terms monopoly and capitalism contradict each other to begin with. In pure capitalism if a sector is lucrative there will always be competitors. The only way a sector lacks competitors is if there are barriers of entry such as the licensing of businesses, taxes and the regulations that one would have to comply with which would hinder competition because they make it more costly and less lucrative to compete in a sector. Gov does more to kill competition than it does to help it.
To answer your questions there are multiple countries that don't collect income taxes such as Bahamas, Monaco and Bermuda.
The ideal free market will never exist because that term ideal isn't specific enough. Ideal to who's standards exactly?
The only standard that will ever be ideal to everyone at all times is that individual freedoms and property should never be infringed on and that every interaction between individuals should be voluntarily.
"Pseudoclaim" is not an actual word. To claim the model I am proposing is unattainable simply based on the fact you haven't observed it happen is equivalent to a man who living in the age before fighter planes were invented saying flying in an aircraft faster than the speed of sound is unattainable.
If an ideology is practically, rationally, morally and intellectually superior then it doesn't matter whether you think its unattainable just because you've never tried to achieve it yourself. You're the equivalent of the naysayers whenever someone is trying to achieve progress. "Oh its unattainable. Oh its never been done. Oh we are used to the oppressive systems we have." Who the https://jamii.app/JFUserGuide cares? If you like Gov then keep liking its boots as it comes taking your hard earned money in the name of progress that you have yet to observe.
Government is not bound by any principles but instead bound by the greed of the parasites who peruse Gov. power.
Equality and liberty are terms Democratic parasites love using on gullible people such as you. Equality is such a broad term that sounds so virtuous but in the natural reality it doesn't exist. If you've even taken a second to observe all the environments, species, land, geography, races, groups, cultures, e.t.c you would realize that equality among individuals and their outcomes cannot exist. You will always have cultures that are morally superior, technologically more advanced, races that are physically more gifted, environments that are much better to live in than others.
You cannot have an equality of outcomes even in the same family where the children have the same parents, opportunities, and grow up in the same environment. One of the children is going to do better than the others.
What the religious followers of Gov. like you assume is that Gov. can guarantee equality of outcomes. To do that Gov. would have to fabricate a whole new reality were the laws of nature do not exist.
"In other words, government is limited by the idea of dignity. If that is true, then the minority cannot impose their preferences to minority to issue pertaining individual responsibility to live up their lives as they wish as long as they live consistently by honoring other's dignity."
This sentence has no coherence whatsoever. Government is limited by the idea of Dignity? I don't believe that even you know what that even means. The structure of Gov. that is made up of individuals with their own personal interests cannot be limited by an idea. As long as there is power humans will use it to their own interest. In this case politicians use it to get more power over the individual. Even though those in the minority that support Gov. such as you, think they are safe they don't realize that they too are being used by the parasitic political class to gain more power. I'll assume you went to a government school and you were indoctrinated to believe that government is your savior. You might be suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
Hahahaha "gov ensures economic activity and protects the property and lives of people." I guess the fact that Gov. has always been the cause of world wars and that it is Gov. that has killed the most people throughout history is part of their plan to protecting the lives of people. Oh and toppling governments, running guns to terrorist countries and cartels, enforcing slavery and communism, oh and don't forget the mass murders.
Oh wait I guess the fall of currencies and the depressions of economies and the monopolies and world poverty that gets billions of dollars in aid money and still never ends is all a part of Gov. to ensure economic activity. Hahahaha I don't know how you can hear what you're saying and still believe it.
Look at the crime rates, home invasions and corruption in Tz and Zanzibar. Is that how Gov. ensures the safety of the lives of people? Or is it by how it muzzles opposition, individual freedoms and kills sectors such as sugar production, banking, investment and imports?
