At 04:29 29/10/2009 -0300, Mike Spencer wrote (among much else that was
very sensible):
Jay Hanson wants to put corporations in what every contemporary
investor, executive and biz person would call a straight-jacket, chains
and a padded cell. I agree with Arthur, too, that they "are built to
make profits, not to care for the commons or gen'l populace." The
issue is whether that should be be so or should be allowed to continue
to be so.
But modern corporations (like the sciences, with which they are
increasingly associated) have the ability to repair themselves (or die
completely) when facts change. But governments (and organized religions) --
which develop for power reasons by ambitious individuals -- become so
institutionalized that they can't repair themselves unless circumstances
change slowly. Otherwise, they lose power very quickly and are taken over
by new, and more efficient, forms of governance. What seems to be taking
place today is the development of specialized world-wide networks between
relatively small groups of individuals. These are laterally organized and
can more easily cope with the masses of information that otherwise gets
jammed up in bureaucratic pipelines. In a paradoxical way we seem to be
proceeding to our original hunter-gatherer format, forsaking the
hierarchies of the agricultural and industrial eras which can no longer
serve us. I don't think that nation-states have a chance of coping with
modern changes -- never mind trying to control the top executives of
corporations!
Keith
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org>,
<<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/>www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/>/>,
<www.handlo.com> _______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
