Not him, but it kinda works both ways. The government does indeed create new markets, because the government needs things done, often that wouldn't otherwise be done by the private sector, or at the very least, not at those scales.
More often, however, markets give rise to government. Whenever an area experiences enough trade over time, eventually, some group of merchants come together to regulate that shit, even if it's, initially, simply groups of the most successful merchants coming together to settle what's best for them as a sort of trade agreement, with some give and take along the way. No one fucks with the trade guild, save maybe, other trade guilds. Eventually, no one fucks with the Merchant Prince, if they want to do business in town.
Monopolies often involve no government intervention at all - most commonly observable in black markets. Mafias will dominate an area, make sure no one else trades in their market, and use force to make sure that remains the case. In some instances, mafias will actually replace other government functions as well, such as police enforcement, courts of a sort, and sometimes, even lotteries and welfare, as we saw during prohibition and still see today among drug lords in various areas where the government is weak.
The government is, however, the only legal entity that can prevent and dismantle monopolies, in addition to being a potential tool for furthering their interests. The private sector, on its own, can only accomplish the latter - it can create monopolies, but it cannot forcibly abolish them - at least so long as the monopoly is powerful enough to retain sufficient dominance over the mercenary market, such as with the olive trader families of old.
In the end, power begets power in gravitational fashion. The government requires a thriving economy to achieve its goals, but there's always a risk that it will be corrupted by elements of that economy, and corrupt it in turn.
Chicken or egg, eventually, chicken.
