This question invokes a much deeper response than the easy-peasy answer the people in the supposedly freest country in the world would gravitate towards. Absolute self-determination and self-governance are wonderful ideals but impossible in a world consisting of different people, with all too many desperados only interested in serving themselves. Relativity, not absolutism, matters.
Self-regulation is always preferred, says Apple CEO Tim Cook crucifying the actions of Facebook embroiled in the Analytica scandal.
I say, stick to your day job Tim, of not destroying what Apple became under Steve Jobs. Just because you glide Steve Jobs’ vector downstream into the world’s biggest technology company does not mean you have the chops to comprehend how humanity must evolve upstream. Tim is only a genius to people who cannot comprehend the difference between up and downstream. Ignore his advice on changing the world for the better, his past actions reveal he has no clue.
Saying self-regulation is always better is to suggest a game of soccer is best played without a referee enforcing the rules of soccer. How naïve.
All marketplaces require regulation for a simple reason; the participants are the same. Hence, all marketplaces require pretty much the same regulation. As all marketplaces deal with the same dynamics of a small but destructive group of participants who want to bend the rules of the said marketplace in their favor. The self-proclaimed freest country in the world, the United States of America, has more police than other “advanced” democracies. Proving that freedom cannot exist without paradoxical rules protecting individual freedoms from encroaching on the trust in collective freedom.
The bottom line is; the interest of personal freedom of each participant must serve the collective interest of all participants to secure trust in the marketplace.
Self-regulation is the pursuit of personal freedom that can and will differ for each participant. Government regulation is supposed to protect the collective interest in a marketplace. A marketplace can only exist and prosper when the collective interest, by some form of government entity, is duly protected from the vile maxims of nefarious participants attempting to take the marketplace for a selfish ride.
In well-defined marketplaces, where the theory and systems are established and vetted before participants are allowed to partake, some of the governance of those marketplaces can be deferred to participants with earned merit in the marketplace. “Trust, but verify” applies to the evaluation of those newfound moderating participants.
Make no mistake, all marketplaces require the same kind of governance, as the nature of participants is the same. Efficient marketplaces, by their merit of consistently delivering collective benefits, have merely proven to defer regulation from a central governing entity to their well-behaved and double-checked participants.
Check the marketplace rules before you attempt to create one.