THIS CRITIQUE OF THE LAISSEZ-FAIRE MARKET ECONOMIC SYSTEM DEFINES CONSUMERISM AS THE BELIEF THAT CONSUMER ECONOMICS WILL RESULT IN A FAIR DISTRIBUTION OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES AND PRODUCTION. THIS IS CALLED ERRONEOUS BECAUSE ONE CONSUMER DOES NOT HAVE ONE VOTE. THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD TO PAY MORE CARRY MORE WEIGHT IN THE MARKET SYSTEM. POWER IS CONCENTRATED IN THE HANDS OF A FEW RELATIVELY WEALTHY CONSUMERS AND A FEW HIGHLY-CONCENTRATED INDUSTRIES. DISSATISFACTION WITH THIS SYSTEM HAS LED TO PUBLIC DEMAND FOR GOVERNMENT PROVISION OF NEEDS UNMET BY INDUSTRY: BETTER EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, HOUSING FOR LOW INCOME PERSONS, CLEAN AIR AND WATER, PARKS, AND ROADS. THESE COMMODITIES COMPETE WITH PRIVATELY PRODUCED COMMODITIES BECAUSE THEY MUST BE PAID FOR WITH TAX DOLLARS, WHICH ARE THEN UNAVAILABLE FOR THE PURCHASE OF PRIVATELY CONSUMED ITEMS. THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 'SOCIALISM' AND 'CAPITALISM' IS BASICALLY A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE BELIEF THAT PRIVATE ENTERPRISE CAN DETERMINE WHAT IS BEST FOR THE COMMON GOOD AND THE BELIEF THAT PRIVATE GOOD MUST BE SUBORDINATED TO THE PUBLIC GOOD. THREE CHALLENGES TO CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY HAVE ARISEN: (1) THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS AND SERVICES MERELY INCREASES WANTS, SETTING UP A DESTRUCTIVE CYCLE; (2) GREATER COMPLEXITY OF PRODUCTS MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR CONSUMERS TO KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR THEM; AND (3) SOCIAL COSTS OF PRODUCTS HAVE NOT BEEN FULLY DETAILED (POLLUTION, RESOURCE DEPLETION). IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE WORLD MUST MOVE AWAY FROM MARKET ECONOMICS. (GLR)