The state is a necessary actor to intervene in the economy. In my opinion linking the state to entrepreneurship is working. It can be seen very different ways : the Roosevelt plan of 1932 and the NEP of Lenin are showing, in very different manners, that this intervention, without a total control, can be beneficial to the economy.
The question of the state has been posed for a long time. In France Colbertism was giving to the state the possibility of making impulsions concerning different sectors (manufacture…). However Great Britain and its much more liberal policy was able to counter France which was three times more populated at this time. To this extend it is possible to say that liberalism was seen as the most powerful factor of success in the economy. The fact Napoleon was vanquished by the British and its much more developed market system was a real sign of this.
There was during a very long time the opposition between the liberals and the socialist/Marxists. While the Marxists prevailed overs Proudhonians, it was difficult to find another way more balanced between those two theories. Keynesianism brought a response concerning this aspect. It is a compromise between the state which is impulsing long term policies, is injecting money in the economy during crisis, and the possibility for companies to invest. To this extend it is possible to say that this combinaison of the state and companies was applied by Roosevelt to counter the 1929 crisis. It led to a long run prosperity of the United States that made it become the first power in the world.
Hayek demonstrated why liberalism was superior to communism: a variety of microdecisions was in the long run more efficient that a macrodecision. To this aspect Keynesianism is taking into account this factor. It is a compromise between the state and the market. The country applying the most this theory is today China, in the field of the economy. The companies are following the quinquennial plans of the state, and the possibility of enriching oneself complies with the long term goals of the communist party. It led to a lack of crisis for 40 years, and a Chinese economy which is weighting more and more year after year. This strategy is combined with a massive investment in education, which led 800 million of Chinese out of poverty into 40 years.
This presence of the state is not about controlling everything. It is more seen as a contributor than as an omnipotent organization. This pragmatic view looks to work pretty well compared to many other organizations. The fact, for instance, that banks of investments are separated from banks of deposits is an interesting signal. It is necessary to assess that this approach of the state is reasonable, present but not omnipotent, and can be a factor of prosperity in the long run.
The observer 