6 ms·

I'm pretty sure corporations have done both of these things. Also Governments die all the time....

by pfisch 13y ago

ekianjo 13y ago
Corporations, making war? Like what, millions of people backing them up? Any source to share to back your argument up ? At most you can say that corporations have been influencing governments to go to War, but a single corporation has not enough leverage to hire hundred of thousands of soldiers to fight. Ultimately War needs State involvement. Governments dying all the time? Like where? You mean in small countries? I'm talking about developed countries here, with big governments in place. They are very unlikely to die any time soon.
- jacques_chester 13y ago
  The East India Company behaved like an independent state, complete with an army, civil service and diplomatic corps. As for countries dying, even great powers, consider this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugqGueQ9Ud8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugqGueQ9Ud8
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    Wow, great, you could come up with a SINGLE example for a company with State-like powers, and that was 200 years ago. And they never waged war on large regions at a time. And let's not forget their expansion was blessed by their own government. Do you have any recent example of super-powerful corporation waging war around the world by themselves? Any example of corporation launching WW1 or WW2, or even something remotely big as the Vietnam war, all by themselves ? It's fairly obvious that no corporation nowadays has the financial means to wage war by themselves. It takes 100 billions to wage war in Iraq. Top tier companies make that much in REVENUE, not even profit. How would you expect them to spend so much? Your point does not make sense.
    - jacques_chester 13y ago
      If you look elsewhere, I've pointed out that companies take on state-like functions and character when a government monopoly on violence hasn't yet been firmly established. The EIC is one such case. My problem is that I am arguing a centre line that two schools of thought are misunderstanding. The centralisation of violence in the state serves a useful social function that decentralisation does poorly; but that selfsame centralisation is dangerous and must be closely and jealously guarded. The first clause of my argument angers certain strains of libertarian and the second clause confuses various kinds of leftists who mistake me for a libertarian.
      - unimpressive 13y ago
        >but that selfsame centralisation is dangerous and must be closely and jealously guarded. How exactly?
        jacques_chester 13y ago
        The best techniques I'm aware of are either a benevolent monarch -- which is ostensibly great until the benevolent monarch dies or is killed -- or by dividing the state against itself in a structured way.
    - coldtea 13y ago
      >Wow, great, you could come up with a SINGLE example for a company with State-like powers, and that was 200 years ago. Read a little history. HE came with a single example, because you ASKED for an example. Read history books on the issue, and you'll find tons of other examples. From Shell in Nigeria, to United Fruit Company in Latin America, to the big coprs in Hitler's Germany. E.g: """Big business developed an increasingly close partnership with the Nazi government as it became increasingly organized. Business leaders supported the government's political and military goals, and in exchange, the government pursued economic policies that maximized the profits of its business allies. Nazi Germany transferred public ownership and public services into the private sector, while other Western capitalist countries strove for increased state ownership of industry.""" There are tons of other examples. Not to mention that the question is quite brain-damaged: corporations don't make war directly, hiring an army and such. They make them by exercizing political and financial influence. And that is not usually done by a single company: it's done by multiple corporate interests, that pursue their goals in tandem. E.g the so-called "millitary-industrial complex". >It takes 100 billions to wage war in Iraq. Top tier companies make that much in REVENUE, not even profit. How would you expect them to spend so much? Your point does not make sense. LOL. They don't spend "so much". That's not how it works. It's like he's explaining that to a ten year old. Corporations bribe the right persons, create the right conditions, push and influence policy and such, and let the people of a country (or several) fight. That is, what corporations do is diverting governments and politicians, from serving the people, to doing their work for them.

I'm pretty sure corporations have done both of these things. Also Governments die all the time....

by pfisch 13y ago

I'm pretty sure corporations have done both of these things. Also Governments die all the time....

Corporations, making war? Like what, millions of people backing them up? Any source to share to back your argument up ? At most you can say that corporations have been influencing governments to go to War, but a single corporation has not enough leverage to hire hundred of thousands of soldiers to fight. Ultimately War needs State involvement. Governments dying all the time? Like where? You mean in small countries? I'm talking about developed countries here, with big governments in place. They are very unlikely to die any time soon.

jacques_chester 13y ago
The East India Company behaved like an independent state, complete with an army, civil service and diplomatic corps. As for countries dying, even great powers, consider this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugqGueQ9Ud8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugqGueQ9Ud8
- ekianjo 13y ago
  Wow, great, you could come up with a SINGLE example for a company with State-like powers, and that was 200 years ago. And they never waged war on large regions at a time. And let's not forget their expansion was blessed by their own government. Do you have any recent example of super-powerful corporation waging war around the world by themselves? Any example of corporation launching WW1 or WW2, or even something remotely big as the Vietnam war, all by themselves ? It's fairly obvious that no corporation nowadays has the financial means to wage war by themselves. It takes 100 billions to wage war in Iraq. Top tier companies make that much in REVENUE, not even profit. How would you expect them to spend so much? Your point does not make sense.
  - jacques_chester 13y ago
    If you look elsewhere, I've pointed out that companies take on state-like functions and character when a government monopoly on violence hasn't yet been firmly established. The EIC is one such case. My problem is that I am arguing a centre line that two schools of thought are misunderstanding. The centralisation of violence in the state serves a useful social function that decentralisation does poorly; but that selfsame centralisation is dangerous and must be closely and jealously guarded. The first clause of my argument angers certain strains of libertarian and the second clause confuses various kinds of leftists who mistake me for a libertarian.
    - unimpressive 13y ago
      >but that selfsame centralisation is dangerous and must be closely and jealously guarded. How exactly?
      - jacques_chester 13y ago
        The best techniques I'm aware of are either a benevolent monarch -- which is ostensibly great until the benevolent monarch dies or is killed -- or by dividing the state against itself in a structured way.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >Wow, great, you could come up with a SINGLE example for a company with State-like powers, and that was 200 years ago. Read a little history. HE came with a single example, because you ASKED for an example. Read history books on the issue, and you'll find tons of other examples. From Shell in Nigeria, to United Fruit Company in Latin America, to the big coprs in Hitler's Germany. E.g: """Big business developed an increasingly close partnership with the Nazi government as it became increasingly organized. Business leaders supported the government's political and military goals, and in exchange, the government pursued economic policies that maximized the profits of its business allies. Nazi Germany transferred public ownership and public services into the private sector, while other Western capitalist countries strove for increased state ownership of industry.""" There are tons of other examples. Not to mention that the question is quite brain-damaged: corporations don't make war directly, hiring an army and such. They make them by exercizing political and financial influence. And that is not usually done by a single company: it's done by multiple corporate interests, that pursue their goals in tandem. E.g the so-called "millitary-industrial complex". >It takes 100 billions to wage war in Iraq. Top tier companies make that much in REVENUE, not even profit. How would you expect them to spend so much? Your point does not make sense. LOL. They don't spend "so much". That's not how it works. It's like he's explaining that to a ten year old. Corporations bribe the right persons, create the right conditions, push and influence policy and such, and let the people of a country (or several) fight. That is, what corporations do is diverting governments and politicians, from serving the people, to doing their work for them.