It is widely known that there is no economic progress when the state intervenes in the economic activity beyond what it is needed. This means ,to go further beyond what the State do better than the private sector. It follow that the key point is not to get rid from the State , but how to improve the state performance. At the same time, to limit State intervention does not mean to give a blank check to the private sector, because by nature it also need some level of orientation ,which frequently comes from different sources, among them those which arises from the states policies.
The only source of pure private initiative ,lies upon the individual desire to be free ;to take advantage of all new opportunities ;and to get the benefits of freedom at personal and community level. Individual by themselves guided by the self interest , barely feel some fear when it comes to make decisions based on freedom to chose. The economic approach to welfare improvements, assumes no fear to get the best possible combination of different goods to get the highest benefit of living within a community, throughout voluntarily exchange and well informed decisions, otherwise the is no way to get such optimum . Fear mean suboptimal decisions .-
Society as a whole might have space for some fears because it is bounded to more restrictions than those human faces, such as :regulations, , accountability, news media and environment However ,as long as society is open enough to allow the individual energies to reshape what it is outdated , the whole community get the benefits from it as long as new and wider boundary appears on the process .It is like an open system , which has the proper level of feed back to avoid entropy, even though must fulfil its own restriction .
To avoid that entropy ,it is important to have enough information provide by different means, which is the support for optimal and efficient decisions. Any restriction on information means that society become restricted onto its own boundaries ,it imply no feed back and therefore it imply entropy. That was the experience of east Europe societies in the second half of the twenty century. It has been the experience of any state inspired revolution ,and so it will in the future. .State inspired revolutions; are no better than individual inspired revolution. .Fear within a society mean entropy.
Unfortunately, Latin American societies have been for quite a long time a sort of close societies based on fear ,ruled by different kind of groups whether they are institutional (political parties),dictatorial ( long tradition of military coups) or economics (state intervention),all of them one way or another represent their own interest whether it is to protect democracy , to save the nation or to improve equality and justice respectively. The vital contradiction is that no matter their justification ,it is implicitly founded on fear. Instead of relying on the individual, as a natural source of energy for economic progress ,Latin America societies are not founded upon the individual expectations,(freedom) but upon those coming from special interest groups expectations (fear).As a result ,Latin America is lagging behind the most dynamic areas of world economic growth, still depending on raw material highly volatile on prices , with limitations to private enterprise ,weak institutions and corruption .It seems that this is the continent of fear and worst of all, maybe we live in a continent in fear.-.