Thank you for clarifying your position. I am a conservatarian pragmatist, not necessarily a Jeffersonian. While I sympathize with many different points Jefferson articulated in his various papers, I would not go so far as to argue for his romanticized view of the yeoman farmer. I would argue for greater decentralization while maintaining a free market. The problem with banking in its current form (in terms of the largest entities) is that they are quite likely to receive bailouts or government aid when they risk failing. My argument is to let them fail. ‘Too big to fail means’ definite failure.
The banking system is not what I have a problem with. Rather, it is particular entities engaging in crony capitalism. A fight for decentralization means appealing to local communities to be much more cognizant of the full impact of their choices. This is certainly an uphill battle in terms of wrestling power and influence away from a few mega-cities, but it is nowhere near as doomed as the prospect of expecting a central government to successfully impose regulations.
The practices of business are the practices of business so far as they are concerned with making money and meeting customer demand. Running the economy is a doomed project. This is due to the fact that the complexities in the vast webs of supply and demand contain too much information for any single individual or institution to accommodate or even respond to.
Necessary government regulations can make sense on a local level (to a certain extent). When scaling up, however, these become much more problematic. Side note, the people in such top-down government bureaucracies (think of motor vehicle) are never going to be as efficient at solving problems as the private sector. I grant that some necessary local regulations will have some impact for the following reasons:
- the municipal government is closer to the people (in proximity)
- the municipal government is more likely to understand the workings of the local community that some far away power center
- the local government has more skin in the game as far as the success of the local community goes
I do share your distaste for ideology (Jordan Peterson has described ideologies as ‘fragmentary mythologies). These various labels, commonly used and misused, are seldom helpful — except perhaps as a very general sketch of a person’s outlook, one without much detail. I would, however, go further and state that rationalism itself can be such an ideology as well. Reason is an excellent servant (to human nature (realist position) or the potential of humanity through reaching toward great virtues (idealist position)). Reason is also a terrible master. Our capacity for reason is merely the gossamer thin latest layer of the simian brain. It can and should inform but is incapable of ruling totally.
Many of these economic and political problems would be greatly reduced if there existed about 100 countries instead of the vast United States (the same could be said for any vast country).