The View | Capitalist and socialist rent-seekers eroding positive non-interventionism
Commitment to market capitalism still present in Hong Kong, but tone is shifting from saying no to saying yes
Positive non-interventionism, a policy implemented by Hong Kong in the 1970s under the financial secretary Philip Haddon-Cave, should be understood as a statement of both economic policy and governance strategy (or philosophy).
As economic policy, it upholds free market capitalism as official government policy. Hong Kong is known to the world as the freest economy and one of the great miracles of the second half of the 20th century.
This is not to say that the government limits itself only to upholding the rule of law, protecting private property rights, maintaining open competitive markets, low taxes, and free trade. There is a phenomenal amount of government intervention in the market that makes you wonder if Hong Kong’s reputation as a free market champion is well deserved. However, its imperfections have not diminished its status as the bastion of free market capitalism.
Hong Kong’s market oriented approach has spread to mainland China and elsewhere and had resounding success in the wake of rapid globalisation from 1980 to 2005 that showed free or less restrained markets could foster unprecedented prosperity.
The interests of the individual capitalist are best served when he does not have to compete in the market and receives the helping hand of government
Yet there are critics, in Hong Kong and elsewhere, who have obscured the true meaning and purpose of free markets and positive non-interventionism or perhaps want to push their own agendas.
One group points to the failure to share prosperity more equally – these are the socialists (meaning anyone who does not like capitalism). Often they want government to discriminate in favour of them or their cause, but they conveniently forget that positive discrimination in favour of one group always implies negative discrimination against all others.