3 ms·
>I think the problem is businesses are tiny little fascist dictatorships. They are always trying to pay less taxes, evade regulations, layoff workers, monopoliz
by gruez 2y ago
>I think the problem is businesses are tiny little fascist dictatorships. They are always trying to pay less taxes, evade regulations, layoff workers, monopolize, destroy competitors etc
Are you just using "fascist dictatorships" as a generic label for things you don't like? The things you've listed might be bad, but they're neither dictatorial nor fascist. It's even questionable whether some of the things are even bad. Don't we all try to minimize our tax burden? Is there anyone out there who refuse tax credits because that means "paying less taxes"?
- lurk2 2y ago> Are you just using "fascist dictatorships" as a generic label for things you don't like? That has been the pattern for the last 10 years.
- thethethethe 2y agoNot a huge fan of calling random things you don't like fascist but op has a point here > The things you've listed might be bad, but they're neither dictatorial nor fascist. Uhh I'm pretty sure that CEOs/executives act very similar to dictators. Large companies certainly don't act like democracies. Companies often employ many forms of totalitarian control used by fascist dictatorships. There's often mass surveillance (mouse trackers, email auditing, etc), suppression of speech, suppression of opposition, fear of termination, cult of personality. The tax stuff is irrelevant imo though
- gruez 2y ago>Uhh I'm pretty sure that CEOs/executives act very similar to dictators. Large companies certainly don't act like democracies. Companies often employ many forms of totalitarian control used by fascist dictatorships. There's often mass surveillance (mouse trackers, email auditing, etc), suppression of speech, suppression of opposition, fear of termination, cult of personality. Where does employment/voluntary association end and "fascist dictator" begin? If you're being paid for your time, it's only fair that whoever's paying you can monitor your work and decide what you're doing. I agree that some businesses go beyond this and try to regulate what you do outside of work, but it's a stretch to make a broad claim like "businesses are tiny little fascist dictatorships". That makes as much sense as "governments are tiny little fascist dictatorships", just because some of them are authoritarian.
- Herring 2y agoYou're missing the point. My response was to the article: > The report somehow fails to mention the bit where the Silicon Valley VC and executive crowd worked their backsides off to elect Trump and several of them sat in the front row at his inauguration. Then they were actually surprised when the leopard ate their faces too. They vibe with Trump because they have the same training, and they've done very little actual democratic governance. Very little thinking about the common good. You can argue most companies are actually more like benign dictatorships, but that's irrelevant. To be fair I'm often a fan of markets, but not when the companies are monopolies larger than most nation states, actively increasing inequality and fighting counters like regulation/unions, not to mention affecting elections like fb/musk. In that case it's not voluntary. Wikipedia has an entire section on market failures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure
- thethethethe 2y agoYou are taking my counterpoint a little too far. All I am saying is that there certainly are similarities between the way fascist governments and large corporations, not that they are the same thing. Based on your response, it sounds like you agree that companies often act in an authoritarian manner, its just that you think it is justified in some way. To be clear, I am not making a value statement here, I am just pointing out similarities between two systems. I don't claim to have better systems for managing corporations. Tbh, I wouldnt want the majority of my coworkers calling the shots and if I was CEO, I would work to consolidate power
- hackable_sand 2y ago> If you're being paid for your time, it's only fair that whoever's paying you can monitor your work and decide what you're doing. I disagree. It is authoritarian to assume ownership over someone's body. It doesn't matter how much you've paid. You cannot compel someone to labor.
- econ 2y agoWhere are all the good ideas to defeat this formula? If we can't why are we using democracy to run countries?
- thethethethe 2y agoDemocratic control of production. See the mondragon corporation for an imperfect but interesting example. Strong unions are another alternative to totalitarian control of companies. Not ideal, but there are plenty of examples throughout history. I'm not claiming these alternatives are better or worse, I'm just pointing out that other systems are possible and already exist. Fwiw, whenever my team has done democratic planning it has always led to bad outcomes
- Herring 2y agoBetter anti-monopoly enforcement, better worker-rights regulations, better taxation schemes for redistribution, better healthcare etc. Even stuff you wouldn't think about like free college or good Singapore-style public housing reduces economic pressure on workers, which reduces companies' leverage.
- econ 2y agoInteresting, yes employee maintenance cost like healthcare and specially housing hurts the economy magnificently. That said, those things only make the dictatorship model more palatable. I want a system to compete with it and kill it.