The Myth of the Free Market

There is a moment that arrives again and again in history. A moment when people are reminded that the world does not operate quite the way they were told it does.

This week may be one of those moments.

Anthropic announced that it was ordered by the U.S. government to suspend access to two of its most advanced AI models, Fable 5 and Mythos 5. The company publicly disagreed with the decision but stated that it would comply.

Whether the government's concerns are justified is almost beside the point. What interests me is something deeper. The event serves as another reminder that the relationship between governments, corporations, and ordinary citizens is often very different from the story we tell ourselves.

The Story We Like to Believe

Many of us grew up with a simple narrative. Private companies innovate, entrepreneurs take risks, consumers choose winners and losers and governments stay largely out of the way. The market decides. Competition decides. Freedom decides. Some people DO like to call this Freedom.

This narrative contains some truth. But only some, because every few years, reality taps us on the shoulder and reminds us that there are limits to that freedom. Sometimes those limits are reasonable. Sometimes they are necessary. But they exist. And they are often much larger than people imagine.

The Invisible Fence

A company can spend billions of dollars developing a product. It can hire the brightest minds. It can attract investors from around the world. It can become one of the most valuable organizations on Earth. Yet there remains an invisible fence around what it is allowed to do.

When technology becomes strategically important, governments rarely remain spectators. They become participants. Then regulators. Then gatekeepers. And sometimes, ultimate decision-makers.

This is not unique to artificial intelligence. It has happened with oil. With telecommunications. With aviation. With nuclear technology. With finance. And now, increasingly, with AI.

The more important a technology becomes, the less likely governments are to leave it entirely in private hands. 

The End of the "Just a Company" Era

There was a time when technology companies could plausibly claim they were simply businesses. That era is ending. An advanced AI model is not merely a product, it is infrastructure. It influences education. It influences research. It influences military planning. It influences economic productivity. It influences information itself.

The moment a technology becomes this important, governments begin treating it less like a consumer product and more like a strategic asset.

Whether we like it or not, AI is entering that category.

The Question Nobody Wants to Ask

Perhaps the most uncomfortable question is this:

Who actually controls the future? Is it elected governments? Is it giant corporations? Is it investors? Is it the public?

The answer increasingly appears to be "all of the above." And that should make everyone pause.

For years, many people worried that corporations were becoming too powerful. Others worried that governments were becoming too powerful. But what happens when the two become deeply intertwined?

What happens when governments depend on corporations for critical technologies, while corporations depend on governments for permission to deploy them?

The result is a system that looks less like pure capitalism and less like pure government control. It becomes something more complicated. A partnership. A struggle. A negotiation.

Sometimes all three at once.

A Pattern Older Than AI

History suggests that whenever a technology becomes important enough, arguments about freedom give way to arguments about security.

The printing press faced restrictions. Radio faced restrictions. Television faced restrictions. Encryption faced restrictions. The internet faced restrictions. Now AI faces restrictions.

Every generation believes its transformative technology will be different. Every generation discovers that power remains power. Institutions protect themselves. States protect themselves. Organizations protect themselves. And citizens are often left trying to understand what happened after the fact.

The Real Debate

The debate should not be whether governments should have any authority whatsoever. Most people accept that some oversight is necessary. The real debate is where the line should be.

How much power should governments have over emerging technologies? How transparent should those decisions be? How much evidence should be required before intervention occurs? How can societies balance innovation, competition, safety, and liberty?

These are difficult questions. They deserve serious discussion.

Here We Go Again

Perhaps that is why stories like this feel familiar. Not because they are shocking. But because they reveal something that has always been true. When technologies become powerful enough, the conversation stops being about products. It becomes about power. Power between governments. Power between corporations. Power between nations. And ultimately, power over ordinary people.

Every generation rediscovers this lesson. Every generation is surprised by it. And every generation eventually realizes that the world was never quite as simple as the slogans suggested.

The free market exists. Government power exists. Corporate power exists.

The question has never been which one is real. The question is which one is making the decisions when it matters most. 

And once again, we may be watching that answer unfold in real time.

Thanks for reading. Abrazos.

Diego Rojas