5 ms·

I could argue that the State is becoming irrelevant as laws controlling corporations are written by the same corporations (through lobbying and general involvem

I could argue that the State is becoming irrelevant as laws controlling corporations are written by the same corporations (through lobbying and general involvement as an "experts of the field"). These laws are written not only be serving the corporation but also making the corporation blameless. So it is not a symbiosis per se but rather complete overtake of host (State). State becoming irrelevant makes politics a reality show.

FranksTV 4y ago
Tell that to the Ukrainians.
pas 4y ago
While this is a very popular cynical view, it simply doesn't explain much. Corporations would like many many things that are not happening, because certain groups of people want otherwise. (Eg. cheap immigrant labor, less restriction on building, lowering of tariffs, repeal of the Jones Act.) Though you could say that protectionism benefits a lot of companies, but a decrease in it would benefit more (and bigger ones).
- nswest23 4y ago
  By the time it explains more it will be too late. This is a prognostication - a warning about where we're headed. It's a caution sign by a trailhead leading to a washed out bridge.
riedel 4y ago
The counter view is that we are all becoming to apolitical and the world is becoming too fuzzy/overcomplex in our view, so that our traditional political system can cope with them. The thesis, antithesis, symbiosis mechanism described by Hegel has produced a great blur of least bad options for the majority (some being at least really bad for a few) . It would be up to the intellectuals to at least develop a more inclusive antithesis. I am only seeing hyper-capitalist BS as a proposed "radical" option. A revolution needs a good cause...
dalbasal 4y ago
I really disagree. It's really obviously symbiotic if you look at any level of detail. Old leftists see it as corporations taking over the state. Conservatives see it as the state taking over corporations. Meanwhile, it's extremely obvious that both are complicit and that they grow to rely on each other in quickly inextricable ways. This article is about Google doing police work: surveillance, analysis, investigation. It is only one example, a detail within a larger framework. Now, privacy focused competition represents an interference with critical police work. Meanwhile, Google is highly involved in drafting legislative detail about how copyright is implemented. How liability for platform usage is implemented. Etc. The state is not irrelevant at all. Politics might be a reality TV show, but that's always been the case.
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  >Conservatives see it as the state taking over corporations. But this is false. Corporations are and always will be exclusively answerable to their shareholders. Whereas the state can have any loyalty depending on who is controlling it
  - caeril 4y ago
    > exclusively answerable to their shareholders. Shareholders are pretty happy under a system in which the corporation benefits from tax breaks and loopholes, fat government contracts, favorable legal environments, carve-outs for regulation exemptions, regulations that make entry into existing markets prohibitively expensive, etc.

FranksTV 4y ago

Tell that to the Ukrainians.

pas 4y ago

While this is a very popular cynical view, it simply doesn't explain much. Corporations would like many many things that are not happening, because certain groups of people want otherwise. (Eg. cheap immigrant labor, less restriction on building, lowering of tariffs, repeal of the Jones Act.) Though you could say that protectionism benefits a lot of companies, but a decrease in it would benefit more (and bigger ones).

nswest23 4y ago
By the time it explains more it will be too late. This is a prognostication - a warning about where we're headed. It's a caution sign by a trailhead leading to a washed out bridge.

riedel 4y ago

The counter view is that we are all becoming to apolitical and the world is becoming too fuzzy/overcomplex in our view, so that our traditional political system can cope with them. The thesis, antithesis, symbiosis mechanism described by Hegel has produced a great blur of least bad options for the majority (some being at least really bad for a few) . It would be up to the intellectuals to at least develop a more inclusive antithesis. I am only seeing hyper-capitalist BS as a proposed "radical" option. A revolution needs a good cause...

dalbasal 4y ago

I really disagree. It's really obviously symbiotic if you look at any level of detail. Old leftists see it as corporations taking over the state. Conservatives see it as the state taking over corporations. Meanwhile, it's extremely obvious that both are complicit and that they grow to rely on each other in quickly inextricable ways. This article is about Google doing police work: surveillance, analysis, investigation. It is only one example, a detail within a larger framework. Now, privacy focused competition represents an interference with critical police work. Meanwhile, Google is highly involved in drafting legislative detail about how copyright is implemented. How liability for platform usage is implemented. Etc. The state is not irrelevant at all. Politics might be a reality TV show, but that's always been the case.

cuteboy19 4y ago
>Conservatives see it as the state taking over corporations. But this is false. Corporations are and always will be exclusively answerable to their shareholders. Whereas the state can have any loyalty depending on who is controlling it
- caeril 4y ago
  > exclusively answerable to their shareholders. Shareholders are pretty happy under a system in which the corporation benefits from tax breaks and loopholes, fat government contracts, favorable legal environments, carve-outs for regulation exemptions, regulations that make entry into existing markets prohibitively expensive, etc.