Keith Hudson wrote: > It has been suggested that on FW I have been suggesting that "privatization > reduces corruption". > > For those who obviously don't read my words, but cast their own > interpretation on what I write, let me state that I have never said or > remotely suggested that "privatization reduces corruption".
Sure? Perhaps you're writing so much on FW that you don't even read your own words. To help your memory: On Tue, 25 Dec 2001 13:16:34 +0000, Keith Hudson wrote on FW: > I happen to think that corruption in corporations is less insidious and > dangerous than corruption in governments. Even if heavily corrupt, a > corporation has other enemies as well as exposure -- competitors -- and > before long is usually sidelined by another corporation with a new > technology. A corrupt culture in government (which, in a heavily corrupt > government, also extends to its senior civil service) is less easily > overcome by publicity alone. That's why I tend to criticise modern > government rather than corporations. So, basically your claim was that privatization reduces corruption, because corporations are "kept in check" by publicity. Of course, the opposite is true -- the least corruption occurs in a transparent direct democracy that is under the control of the people, whereas the most corruption occurs in privatized oligarchies of the corporations that own the most sophisticated PR agencies and spin-doctor media. > This would be ridiculous. Almost everybody, business people as well as > ordinary people, will take advantage of situations for their own advantage. True, but here you're contradicting your 25-Dec-01 statement. > Politicians, however, publicly state that they will uphold justice before > being elected. In so many cases they fail to do so when elected (nearly all > the present and recent prime ministers and presidents of European countries > for a start) and are themselves smeared with corruption. > > No wonder that politicians wring their hands at the increasingly low > turnouts for elections. Didn't it dawn on you that the turnout decreases (and corruption increases) with increasing privatization (yes, also in the EU) ? Q.E.D. > As to the Enron affair itself, I have spent several hours in the last few > days reading accounts of this in several newspapers from both sides of the > water. It is pointless to sound off emotionally at the present time because > there are many good people in America who are determined to get to the > truth of the matter. It remains to be seen whether there will be an "Enrongate". It's doubtful considering the hysteria and abolition of civil liberties re. "war on terror" (which happens to be causally linked to the Enron connection!). Chris
