2 ms·
> And still, corporations are mostly authoritarian, with top down decision making and big hierarchical structures. And worse, the majority of people are ok with
by kergonath 4y ago
> And still, corporations are mostly authoritarian, with top down decision making and big hierarchical structures. And worse, the majority of people are ok with this even if they champion democracy outside the workplace.
Public corporations are imperfect representative democracies, if you keep in mind that the citizens are the shareholders, not the workers. You can reconcile both if the employees have a controlling stake in the corporation, either because they collectively have most shares, or because their shares have more voting weight. This is more or less the European social-liberal model. This is being torn down following neo-liberal ideology because there seem to be more money to be made on short-term stock trading than developing a company over the long term, and that the interests of employees and shareholders are badly misaligned. Also, these employee-owned corporations are vulnerable to profit-oriented, corner-cutting companies willing to jeopardise long-term stability to race to the bottom. So this needs a specific regulation framework to work at scale.
- hither_shores 4y ago> You can reconcile both if the employees have a controlling stake in the corporation, either because they collectively have most shares, or because their shares have more voting weight. This is more or less the European social-liberal model. Not really. This sort of model was an aim of many social-democratic (not social-liberal: those are the FDP in Germany, the Liberals/LibDems in the UK, etc.) parties before the neoliberal turn in the late 70s, but it was never actually achieved. Germany comes the closest: workers get 50%-1 board seats at large employers, but that's not the same as ownership.