Pure competition without framing norms produces social incoherence
Evidence
Rüstow (1950, 50) formulated his opinions in the same vein: “competition pure … means complete incoherence, complete shortage of social viscosity where it alone rules social relationships. A fortiori it depends in complementary ways and as a precondition on the counterweight of strong framing forces of a different kind, on ethical and sociological ties that are otherwise secured.”
— Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 567
Categorization
DEFINE: Rüstow’s explicit statement that ordoliberalism rejects pure competition as socially destructive — core to the ordoliberal critique of laissez-faire.
XREF: Connects to the ordoliberal Freiburg school vs. the Austrian (Hayek/Mises) strand of the Mont Pèlerin network — a key distinction in earlier chapters. — connects to: Social norms function as incentive-shifters against free-rider defection in collective action — W. David Marx, Blank Space: A Cultural History of the…, 855; Closure in social relations is necessary for effective norms to emerge — Coleman, SocialCapitalCreation-1988, 114; Intergroup competition selects prosocial norms that can simultaneously dehumanize outsiders. — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 558