5 ms·

Watch Chomsky's Requiem for an American Dream if you want a great analysis of the cyclical nature of corporate power being further and further entrenched as the

Watch Chomsky's Requiem for an American Dream if you want a great analysis of the cyclical nature of corporate power being further and further entrenched as they gain more power to write the laws that benefit them.

ttoinou 9y ago
Chomsky's solution? Moar state !
- fny 9y ago
  You inevitably need more state to combat antitrust.
- culturalzero 9y ago
  Of course, because he's so find of power structures in general. *Queue eye rolling
  - Y_Y 9y ago
    You seem to be overly fond of data structures! ("Cue", rather than "queue")
- 32hkwejr 9y ago
  AKA Control of the society that is... 1) Openly documented 2) Viewable by all 3) Accountable to the people not the highest bidder Exactly as the Founding Fathers wrote and spoke of it? They were pre-capitalist, saw the origins of capitalist philosophy beginning, and wrote of their fears about where that will lead a country of free people; straight into the back pockets of the elite (remember the crown was essentially the same way, owned/controlled all, required the masses to entertain them and provide value for THEM). You seem convinced contributing to your government is a scam, and you should go shovel whatever for some rich wanker. You got something else to add? Or are you going to just regurgitate the banal fear mongering of the last 200 years?
  - ttoinou 9y ago
    Control of the society What does it even mean ? How do you make the government accountable, transparent and openly documented ? Mystery to me
    - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
      >How do you make the government accountable, transparent and openly documented ? Mystery to me Sure but less of a mystery than how we can make corporations transparent, accountable and openly documented.
      - ttoinou 9y ago
        Producing information is costly. There is a market for it but no general magic solution (this applies to both govt and companies, but I guess it's easier to look into a bunch of small companies rather than one huge govt). Corporations are accountable of the wrong they do to third parties. It's the whole point of having a judicial system. How do you control a govt ? By rioting and voting every 4 years ? Here's how it can work for companies : http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/MarketforCorporateControl.html http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/MarketforCorporateControl...
  - slavik81 9y ago
    If the founding fathers were concerned about government capture by the elite, why did they limit the right to vote to land owners? They basically decided that only the wealthy could vote.
    - libertyEQ 9y ago
      At the time (e.g. 18th century), it was the best proxy for education. In the age of the internet, we have at least the prospect of learning at our own pace regardless of financial means. This requires an interest in knowledge while minimizing biases.
      - 9y ago
- katastic 9y ago
  Well, regulations work pretty damn well for the FCC's control of the wireless spectrum. So some regulations definitely work.
- pfranz 9y ago
  (I haven't watched the doc or followed Chomsky much) I think a lot of the contention is putting faith in the "the market" (but I would hope even staunchest libertarians realize at times that can be disproportionately large companies) or governments. I feel like the extremes on both sides put too much faith in one or the other. To keep each other in check one can't be too much larger, or wield too much power over the other. When companies become multinational, things can get weird because they can evade single governments. I'm not saying it's always bad, but it is hard to keep them in check.
  - ttoinou 9y ago
    I put my faith in voluntarily actions, competitive entreprises, innovative ideas and good mechanisms of check and balances. The first word that comes to my mind is 'free market', not 'huge government'..
    - pfranz 9y ago
      I guess I know what side you put faith in. "Free market" is just an illusionary goal--there's no such thing in practice. Every aspect of reality creates some bias to one party or another. Governments try to encourage competitive entreprises, innovative ideas and good mechanisms of check and balances by eliminating monopolies, reducing dynasties/incumbencies and other barriers of entry, in addition to other things like maintaining a fair legal system.
      - ttoinou 9y ago
        Every aspect of reality creates some bias to one party or another ? And every government action steals resources from someone and prevents them to do it on their own. Have youbever seen govt reducing barriers of entry ? I need examples Only govt can create monopolies, unless you're talking about mafias.
        pfranz 9y ago
        I wholly admit the government can do those things (that was the point in my original reply). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_market The only example there that could be remotely tied to the government is cable companies (I think the last-mile expense barrier to entry is the main contributor to those monopolies). All of them prevent a "free market" and the idea is that governments break those things up or regulate them. Breaking up a monopoly reduces barrier to entry. After the breakup of at&t, long distance rates dropped due to the new competition. A few things most governments do to reduce the barrier of entry when starting or running a business: maintain a legal system to facilitate agreements between parties, educate a workforce so there's a pool of citizens with basic skills you can hire or sell things to, maintain open access roadways for transport of workforce and goods, maintain a trusted currency for the exchange of goods and services. All of those would be huge hurdles if I wanted to open a lemonade stand. > unless you're talking about mafias. So they're the only fly in the ointment if governments didn't exist? What is the solution to mafias if the government just steals resources? I'm earnestly curious, if governments only oppress a market, where your best or ideal example? Is there any free market that doesn't have a government? How come when governments fail (or countries without strong governments) a strong free market doesn't develop to overtake the EU or US?
- musage 9y ago
  Quote him. Don't interact with your own straw man, face the man.
  - ttoinou 9y ago
    Yes you are right. I actually was a fund of him years ago. 'More state' is definitely the feeling I remember of him

ttoinou 9y ago

Chomsky's solution? Moar state !

fny 9y ago
You inevitably need more state to combat antitrust.
culturalzero 9y ago
Of course, because he's so find of power structures in general. *Queue eye rolling
- Y_Y 9y ago
  You seem to be overly fond of data structures! ("Cue", rather than "queue")
32hkwejr 9y ago
AKA Control of the society that is... 1) Openly documented 2) Viewable by all 3) Accountable to the people not the highest bidder Exactly as the Founding Fathers wrote and spoke of it? They were pre-capitalist, saw the origins of capitalist philosophy beginning, and wrote of their fears about where that will lead a country of free people; straight into the back pockets of the elite (remember the crown was essentially the same way, owned/controlled all, required the masses to entertain them and provide value for THEM). You seem convinced contributing to your government is a scam, and you should go shovel whatever for some rich wanker. You got something else to add? Or are you going to just regurgitate the banal fear mongering of the last 200 years?
- ttoinou 9y ago
  Control of the society What does it even mean ? How do you make the government accountable, transparent and openly documented ? Mystery to me
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    >How do you make the government accountable, transparent and openly documented ? Mystery to me Sure but less of a mystery than how we can make corporations transparent, accountable and openly documented.
    - ttoinou 9y ago
      Producing information is costly. There is a market for it but no general magic solution (this applies to both govt and companies, but I guess it's easier to look into a bunch of small companies rather than one huge govt). Corporations are accountable of the wrong they do to third parties. It's the whole point of having a judicial system. How do you control a govt ? By rioting and voting every 4 years ? Here's how it can work for companies : http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/MarketforCorporateControl.html http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/MarketforCorporateControl...
- slavik81 9y ago
  If the founding fathers were concerned about government capture by the elite, why did they limit the right to vote to land owners? They basically decided that only the wealthy could vote.
  - libertyEQ 9y ago
    At the time (e.g. 18th century), it was the best proxy for education. In the age of the internet, we have at least the prospect of learning at our own pace regardless of financial means. This requires an interest in knowledge while minimizing biases.
    - 9y ago
katastic 9y ago
Well, regulations work pretty damn well for the FCC's control of the wireless spectrum. So some regulations definitely work.
pfranz 9y ago
(I haven't watched the doc or followed Chomsky much) I think a lot of the contention is putting faith in the "the market" (but I would hope even staunchest libertarians realize at times that can be disproportionately large companies) or governments. I feel like the extremes on both sides put too much faith in one or the other. To keep each other in check one can't be too much larger, or wield too much power over the other. When companies become multinational, things can get weird because they can evade single governments. I'm not saying it's always bad, but it is hard to keep them in check.
- ttoinou 9y ago
  I put my faith in voluntarily actions, competitive entreprises, innovative ideas and good mechanisms of check and balances. The first word that comes to my mind is 'free market', not 'huge government'..
  - pfranz 9y ago
    I guess I know what side you put faith in. "Free market" is just an illusionary goal--there's no such thing in practice. Every aspect of reality creates some bias to one party or another. Governments try to encourage competitive entreprises, innovative ideas and good mechanisms of check and balances by eliminating monopolies, reducing dynasties/incumbencies and other barriers of entry, in addition to other things like maintaining a fair legal system.
    - ttoinou 9y ago
      Every aspect of reality creates some bias to one party or another ? And every government action steals resources from someone and prevents them to do it on their own. Have youbever seen govt reducing barriers of entry ? I need examples Only govt can create monopolies, unless you're talking about mafias.
      - pfranz 9y ago
        I wholly admit the government can do those things (that was the point in my original reply). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_market The only example there that could be remotely tied to the government is cable companies (I think the last-mile expense barrier to entry is the main contributor to those monopolies). All of them prevent a "free market" and the idea is that governments break those things up or regulate them. Breaking up a monopoly reduces barrier to entry. After the breakup of at&t, long distance rates dropped due to the new competition. A few things most governments do to reduce the barrier of entry when starting or running a business: maintain a legal system to facilitate agreements between parties, educate a workforce so there's a pool of citizens with basic skills you can hire or sell things to, maintain open access roadways for transport of workforce and goods, maintain a trusted currency for the exchange of goods and services. All of those would be huge hurdles if I wanted to open a lemonade stand. > unless you're talking about mafias. So they're the only fly in the ointment if governments didn't exist? What is the solution to mafias if the government just steals resources? I'm earnestly curious, if governments only oppress a market, where your best or ideal example? Is there any free market that doesn't have a government? How come when governments fail (or countries without strong governments) a strong free market doesn't develop to overtake the EU or US?
musage 9y ago
Quote him. Don't interact with your own straw man, face the man.
- ttoinou 9y ago
  Yes you are right. I actually was a fund of him years ago. 'More state' is definitely the feeling I remember of him