Wait you think free markets cant have corruption? What about monopolistic practices or monetary influence on legislations. Or just take any African states ruked by warlords. Or exploitation of labor?
Corruption has to do a slack of legal framework more tgan anything
I call a monopoly, if it is freely established, and not a privilege of law, simply a way of doing business. Certainly not corruption.
The only exploitation of labor is when there is slavery, that is, people are forced with the threat of violence, to work. Any other free agreement to sell labor against something else is business.
If you starve to death, and I propose you a contract where you get one bowl of rice per week if you work 16 hours a day for me, then that's a business proposal. You're probably better off with it, than without it. Up to you to decide. That's business.
Monetary influences on legislation is exactly corruption, because legislation is "supposed to be for the general interest" and clearly people with the privilege to make legislation and supposed to act that way, take personal advantage to adapt legislation to their "customers".
In other words, they're supposed to write law in the general interest, and that's why they got their privilege to write the law, and in fact they are setting up a commercial activity of selling their privilege to their customers who pay for it.
I consider warlords in Africa as "states". To me the state is the violence monopolist. The one with the biggest gun. If that happens to be a guy on a jeep with a big machine gun, then that guy is now locally "the state". No matter what they think at the United Nations. The one pointing a gun at you and telling you what to do, is the state.