Well, that came out a little snarkier than it sounded in my head when I wrote it. I was hoping it will quickly and efficiently describe my position in a whimsical way. Now that I'm rereading it, it sounds a bit douchy. My apologies about that.

Now to the issue. It's not surprising that you wouldn't see it as utopian if you see it as the correct model to be striving towards. I personally think the free market has a lot of power and that's what an economy should be built on. But in my opinion there are many things that a free market does not have the means to handle efficiently, effectively or sometimes at all and that's why some level of social organization is the only practical or realistic way to handle them that I can think of. Not saying governments are perfect or inherently good or anything like that, but that they serve some crucial functions even while being flawed.

Let me give a few examples of issues the market can't handle in my opinion:

1. Contract enforcement
2. Infrastructure
3. Protection of fundamental personal rights
4. Safety

How would the free market provide those better than a mediocre corrupt government? I live in a country that isn't or wasn't doing well on many of those issues and I'd still prefer that imperfect government over no government at all because I'm convinced things would devolve even more without it.

Part of my thinking also includes this - if the free market (that we arguably have at least to an extent in many places around the world) could provide everything, why hasn't it done so already?