4 ms·

A public company's board of directors don't look too dissimilar to a body of elected representatives, if you squint really hard. Memes in the larger sense of c

by mLuby 5y ago

A public company's board of directors don't look too dissimilar to a body of elected representatives, if you squint really hard. Memes in the larger sense of contagious ideas are as political as it gets and have been driving social action for millennia. If Martin Luther's time used TikTok, his 95 Theses might've been set to a catchy dance routine.

xg15 5y ago
> A public company's board of directors don't look too dissimilar to a body of elected representatives, if you squint really hard. If you squint really hard. I think this overlooks the following points: - The "election" is not fair: It's extremely easy to buy additional votes (i. e. stock) and extend your influence - this results in certain investors having orders of magnitude more voting power than others. On the other hand, when you don't own stock, you don't have any voting power at all, even though the company can very much affect your life. - There is no clear process to appoint candidates. In a parliamentary democracy, potential candidates can choose between different parties to try and run for - or even found their own party. In a corporation, candidates for the board are chosen from within the company. - There are no checks and balances and no constitution. The C-suite and the board are maybe comparable to a government, but there is no equivalent to a parliament or an independent judiciary. The board has no other obligation than ensuring revenue.
- hardlianotion 5y ago
  And in the end, a very small proportion of society participate in any aspect of the corporate governance.
- mLuby 5y ago
  Good critiques, which also apply to democracies. 1. "The election is not fair/can be bought" Democracy's got that one all right. 2.a. "no clear process to appoint candidates" I'm sure the process is explicit in company bylaws or country laws. 2.b. "In a corporation, candidates for the board are chosen from within the company." Hmm, I thought public company board members were typically chosen from outside the company but I could be wrong. 3. "There are no checks and balances and no constitution." Most companies have "bylaws" which govern their operations. The biggest difference between company and government is that companies are subordinate to governments while governments (or confederations like the EU) are only ever have peers, there is no higher entity to which they answer. And that in turn allows companies to somewhat outsource enforcement of (by)laws and contracts to governments. The sci-fi trope of trans-national mega-corps answering to no government puts companies at the level of, or even higher than, countries, and then they need private armies of soldiers, not just of lawyers.

by mLuby 5y ago

xg15 5y ago

> A public company's board of directors don't look too dissimilar to a body of elected representatives, if you squint really hard. If you squint really hard. I think this overlooks the following points: - The "election" is not fair: It's extremely easy to buy additional votes (i. e. stock) and extend your influence - this results in certain investors having orders of magnitude more voting power than others. On the other hand, when you don't own stock, you don't have any voting power at all, even though the company can very much affect your life. - There is no clear process to appoint candidates. In a parliamentary democracy, potential candidates can choose between different parties to try and run for - or even found their own party. In a corporation, candidates for the board are chosen from within the company. - There are no checks and balances and no constitution. The C-suite and the board are maybe comparable to a government, but there is no equivalent to a parliament or an independent judiciary. The board has no other obligation than ensuring revenue.

hardlianotion 5y ago
And in the end, a very small proportion of society participate in any aspect of the corporate governance.
mLuby 5y ago
Good critiques, which also apply to democracies. 1. "The election is not fair/can be bought" Democracy's got that one all right. 2.a. "no clear process to appoint candidates" I'm sure the process is explicit in company bylaws or country laws. 2.b. "In a corporation, candidates for the board are chosen from within the company." Hmm, I thought public company board members were typically chosen from outside the company but I could be wrong. 3. "There are no checks and balances and no constitution." Most companies have "bylaws" which govern their operations. The biggest difference between company and government is that companies are subordinate to governments while governments (or confederations like the EU) are only ever have peers, there is no higher entity to which they answer. And that in turn allows companies to somewhat outsource enforcement of (by)laws and contracts to governments. The sci-fi trope of trans-national mega-corps answering to no government puts companies at the level of, or even higher than, countries, and then they need private armies of soldiers, not just of lawyers.