4 ms·
When corporations grow above a certain size (the exact size of which is for another discussion), they tend to gain power against the individual. I'm not sure wh
by LocalH 6y ago
When corporations grow above a certain size (the exact size of which is for another discussion), they tend to gain power against the individual. I'm not sure which is worse - powerful government, or powerful corporation. Both serve their own interests ahead of individual liberty, and collectively it means that people are less free and more beholden to corporate interests.
I don't want to put so many restrictions on small business, because they're more directly driven by individuals (although if their behavior starts having a significant negative impact on individuals, then perhaps that can be investigated). Small business has far less power to negatively impact individuals when compared to multi-billion-dollar multinational organizations.
I believe that society should favor and protect the freedom of the individual over the freedom of the large corporation. Without those individuals, society is useless. Of course, that's sidestepping the issue that society far too often sticks its teeth in where it doesn't belong, and won't bite down where they'd actually be useful.
Your last sentence is honestly a copout (not on your part personally, but in general as an intellectual idea). That basically embodies a race to the bottom, as countries around the world erode freedom, and the rest of the world "harmonizes" so as not to be disadvantaged on the world stage. You see this now with the current copyright situation.
It's kind of the same idea as the GPL protecting the greater freedom of software by restricting some of the freedoms that a developer may wish to have. Many similar arguments can apply too, as for example I've heard it said "GPL's restrictions will just push people to use less-restrictive licenses" That may be somewhat true, but there are also people who value the greater freedom more than their personal freedom to use the software in a non-free manner. Note that this isn't an endorsement of GPL over other licenses, just a parallel to be drawn that is somewhat relevant to HN.
- agent008t 6y agoI guess you approached the problem I have with libertarian arguments (which I tend to find intellectually appealing): if a corporation is powerful enough, it becomes barely distinguishable from government in practice, except without any democratic governance. At the extreme end you have a corporation that owns all the land in your nation and you have to abide by their arbitrary rules to be on their private property. Yes, they cannot physically assault you the way a government can, but you may be left with few options but to sign a contract you may otherwise not have wanted to sign (and then the government can physically assault you for breaking that contract). We are sort of approaching a standard argument between classical and modern liberals, so it would be pointless to just repeat the same tired arguments. Having said that, I would love to see more of thoughtful debate between classical and modern liberals. Usually you tend to see both sides just preaching to their choirs or a very shallow debate at best.