3 ms·

nothing to see here folks, just a polemical amateurish regurgitation of pop doom econ tropes

by bedobi 3y ago

dmvdoug 3y ago
From 2011, no less. Like, the past 12 years alone refute the prediction of corporate decline.
- QuantumG 3y ago
  The comedy here is that he says this decline started in the 1990s. Since then corporations haven't really done anything have they? There hasn't been fundamental changes to every part of our lives driven by corporate decision making, has there?
NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
I'm not much of a r/latestagecapitalism fan myself, but there is something to important to explore in the history and concept of the corporation, and I'm disappointed every time someone brings it up and fails to make any of the important points. Somehow, at some point in the past that I haven't been able to precisely identify, everyone decided that corporations were legitimate "things", and started acting as if they should be. And I'm not sure why. We see practically nothing either in common law or in various national constitutions that authorize governments to create the damned things. It's quite bizarre, and more than a little dangerous. Stross likens them to gigantic, slow-as-dirt artificial intelligences designed explicitly with psychopathic motives. And most of the time it feels wrong to try to dispute that.
- somat 3y ago
  Corporations are governments. At some point you say "we want this operation to be run via rules" so you make some rules and form a government that runs under those rules. You usually will need a license to form a sub government from whatever larger government you will be operating under. Related, think how a town incorporates in order to form their own local government.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
    This analogy breaks down rather quickly. The government is a government because it has a monopoly on violence to enforce its rules. Even your tiny little village can constitute a police force that can arrest, subjugate, and in the face of extreme resistance, kill. No corporation is authorized to do that in any circumstances at all. While I certainly invite criticism of these entities, bad criticism benefits them.
    - namaria 3y ago
      >The government is a government because it has a monopoly on violence to enforce its rules. That's the definition of State. Governments are just administrative bodies.
      - NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
        These words of yours are synonyms. If there were a state without any government (some lawless anarchy), the idea that the "state" could still have a monopoly on violence is laughably asinine. You must be from some European country where "government" means something like "Congressional session" or whatever. I have little interest in wading through all that semantic nonsense.
        namaria 3y ago
        The separation is useful. Corporations are governed. There's no debate to be won, we're talking about understanding society better. Put your guard down, man...
    - somat 3y ago
      Corporations absolutely are able to use violence to enforce their rules, although just like public governments they have to be fairly large before they can start getting away with it. think security guards, railroad cops. etc. And it is not an analogy, a corporation is not like a government, it is a government. Often what we think of a corporation is a for profit endeavor(but it does not have to be) but not all for profit endeavors are corporations. So what differentiates a corporation from other for profit endeavors. A corporation has license to exists and operate under it's under it's rules instead of existing and operating under a single person. a government.
- Animats 3y ago
  > Somehow, at some point in the past that I haven't been able to precisely identify, everyone decided that corporations were legitimate "things", and started acting as if they should be. And I'm not sure why. We see practically nothing either in common law or in various national constitutions that authorize governments to create the damned things. It's quite bizarre, and more than a little dangerous. Corporate personhood happened because of one law reporter.[1] It's a very strange story. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern....
potsandpans 3y ago
your appeal for people to not read it made me curious enough to read it. why are you so scared?

nothing to see here folks, just a polemical amateurish regurgitation of pop doom econ tropes

by bedobi 3y ago

nothing to see here folks, just a polemical amateurish regurgitation of pop doom econ tropes

dmvdoug 3y ago

From 2011, no less. Like, the past 12 years alone refute the prediction of corporate decline.

QuantumG 3y ago
The comedy here is that he says this decline started in the 1990s. Since then corporations haven't really done anything have they? There hasn't been fundamental changes to every part of our lives driven by corporate decision making, has there?

NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago

I'm not much of a r/latestagecapitalism fan myself, but there is something to important to explore in the history and concept of the corporation, and I'm disappointed every time someone brings it up and fails to make any of the important points. Somehow, at some point in the past that I haven't been able to precisely identify, everyone decided that corporations were legitimate "things", and started acting as if they should be. And I'm not sure why. We see practically nothing either in common law or in various national constitutions that authorize governments to create the damned things. It's quite bizarre, and more than a little dangerous. Stross likens them to gigantic, slow-as-dirt artificial intelligences designed explicitly with psychopathic motives. And most of the time it feels wrong to try to dispute that.

somat 3y ago
Corporations are governments. At some point you say "we want this operation to be run via rules" so you make some rules and form a government that runs under those rules. You usually will need a license to form a sub government from whatever larger government you will be operating under. Related, think how a town incorporates in order to form their own local government.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
  This analogy breaks down rather quickly. The government is a government because it has a monopoly on violence to enforce its rules. Even your tiny little village can constitute a police force that can arrest, subjugate, and in the face of extreme resistance, kill. No corporation is authorized to do that in any circumstances at all. While I certainly invite criticism of these entities, bad criticism benefits them.
  - namaria 3y ago
    >The government is a government because it has a monopoly on violence to enforce its rules. That's the definition of State. Governments are just administrative bodies.
    - NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
      These words of yours are synonyms. If there were a state without any government (some lawless anarchy), the idea that the "state" could still have a monopoly on violence is laughably asinine. You must be from some European country where "government" means something like "Congressional session" or whatever. I have little interest in wading through all that semantic nonsense.
      - namaria 3y ago
        The separation is useful. Corporations are governed. There's no debate to be won, we're talking about understanding society better. Put your guard down, man...
  - somat 3y ago
    Corporations absolutely are able to use violence to enforce their rules, although just like public governments they have to be fairly large before they can start getting away with it. think security guards, railroad cops. etc. And it is not an analogy, a corporation is not like a government, it is a government. Often what we think of a corporation is a for profit endeavor(but it does not have to be) but not all for profit endeavors are corporations. So what differentiates a corporation from other for profit endeavors. A corporation has license to exists and operate under it's under it's rules instead of existing and operating under a single person. a government.
Animats 3y ago
> Somehow, at some point in the past that I haven't been able to precisely identify, everyone decided that corporations were legitimate "things", and started acting as if they should be. And I'm not sure why. We see practically nothing either in common law or in various national constitutions that authorize governments to create the damned things. It's quite bizarre, and more than a little dangerous. Corporate personhood happened because of one law reporter.[1] It's a very strange story. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern....

potsandpans 3y ago

your appeal for people to not read it made me curious enough to read it. why are you so scared?