13 ms·
>but you don't have corporations without government. Who says you don't, or won't in the future. Many corporations are now bigger and wield more power than qui
by H3g3m0n 13y ago
>but you don't have corporations without government.
Who says you don't, or won't in the future.
Many corporations are now bigger and wield more power than quite a few (maybe most) governments. Corporations are often international and don't really care about governments or countries as much as possible.
We live in a world where China is having fights with Google over censorship. That's a government having issues with a corporation, not another country.
In the case of China things are a bit more interesting, with communism in the mix it seems like the .gov and companies are basically the same. There the government tells the companies what to do. Else where it seems the opposite is on the way to becoming true.
- mindcrime 13y agoNote that I'm using "corporation" here to refer specifically to the legal fiction, created by the State, that isolates the owners of a corporation from liablity. The "organization" itself might exist organized through some other means, of course. But using the modern, legal definition of "corporation", they depend on the State for their existence. Now, you might ask, "mindcrime, aren't you just pedantically arguing about semantics then?" To which I'd say, no. The difference being that the modern, legal definition of "corporation" is a big part of what allows companies to grow very large, thanks to that ability to pool capital and dodge liability as an individual. If we didn't have the corporation (as we know it today) as a legal fiction defined by the State, it's very possible that we wouldn't have the huge mega-companies that you speak of. Of course that raises the question of whether or not we'd be better off without those, but that's a whole other topic.