"It has been true in Western societies and it seems to be true elsewhere that you do not find democratic systems apart from capitalism, or apart from a market economy, if you prefer that term"
About this Quote
Peter L. Berger points to an empirical pairing that marked the 20th century: stable liberal democracies have tended to be embedded in market economies. He does not claim a logical necessity so much as a recurring pattern. Markets diffuse economic power across firms, associations, and households, making it harder for the state to monopolize resources. Private property, contract enforcement, and the rule of law anchor predictable exchanges; the same legal and institutional frameworks provide citizens avenues to organize, dissent, and check rulers. A market society also generates a pluralistic civil sphere of parties, media, unions, churches, and NGOs that bargains with political authority rather than simply receiving orders. In this sense, capitalism supplies both the material independence and the institutional scaffolding that democratic competition requires.
The claim drew force in the Cold War era, when socialist command economies were almost uniformly authoritarian, while North America, Western Europe, and later parts of East Asia democratized alongside market-led growth. Even the social democracies of Scandinavia fit the pattern: robust welfare states financed by and layered atop capitalist production, not a replacement of the market. Berger, a sociologist of modernity, religion, and development, sharpened this argument in The Capitalist Revolution, offering it as an observation about how freedom, prosperity, and pluralism reinforce one another under market arrangements.
The pattern is not without stress tests. Authoritarian capitalism, from Pinochet-era Chile to contemporary China, shows that markets can coexist with political repression, at least for a time. Critics add that market-generated inequality can hollow out democratic citizenship. Yet the historical record still leans toward Berger’s inference: where democracy endures, it has typically done so with a market economy in place, and where planners have extinguished markets, political freedoms have withered. The link is contingent and contested, but it remains one of modernity’s most persistent pairings.
The claim drew force in the Cold War era, when socialist command economies were almost uniformly authoritarian, while North America, Western Europe, and later parts of East Asia democratized alongside market-led growth. Even the social democracies of Scandinavia fit the pattern: robust welfare states financed by and layered atop capitalist production, not a replacement of the market. Berger, a sociologist of modernity, religion, and development, sharpened this argument in The Capitalist Revolution, offering it as an observation about how freedom, prosperity, and pluralism reinforce one another under market arrangements.
The pattern is not without stress tests. Authoritarian capitalism, from Pinochet-era Chile to contemporary China, shows that markets can coexist with political repression, at least for a time. Critics add that market-generated inequality can hollow out democratic citizenship. Yet the historical record still leans toward Berger’s inference: where democracy endures, it has typically done so with a market economy in place, and where planners have extinguished markets, political freedoms have withered. The link is contingent and contested, but it remains one of modernity’s most persistent pairings.
Quote Details
| Topic | Freedom |
|---|
More Quotes by Peter
Add to List








