From: [email protected]
I haven’t any interest in privatizing the military nor the business schools,
although I’m a fan of neither. My examples were the financial, energy, and
pharmaceutical industries. I think they are more relevant subjects given
widespread public hostility to all three. But not so hostile that a US
politician or other public figure would be prepared in the present political
climate to make a case for their being taken out of the private sector.
=================
Well I guess we have fundamental disagreement as to just where/what the
problems of the dismantling of the p-p distinction entails. I provided the
list where at least one thoughtful person thinks the deployment of public
utility discourse in the energy sector is worth reviving and expanding, an
issue clearly generalizable to other sectors of the political ecologies and
administrative structures dispersed across the planet. The fetishizing of
obsolete notions property vis a vis the p-p binary is counterproductive at the
current conjuncture. There are a staggering variety of ways contract, tort,
corporate governance, securities and environmental law can change the imbalance
of social 'forces' to reduce inequality.
What makes Exxon and Pfizer private? What makes them public?
What makes neurogenetic data public? What makes it private?
Was John Wheeler a better physicist when he worked for Princeton or the
University of Texas?
E.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
