Political Theory

Re: Is Bob Black's criticism legitimate?

Nitroadict — Mon, 24 May 2010 06:52:31 GMT

Dondoolee:

As opposed to social authoritarianism, democratic authoratarianism, or a thousand other forms of authoratarianisms. A business or corporation will probably on average; be easier to ignore, exert less undesirable consequences, and wield less power, not counting perhaps relative social positioning. And for the understatment of the day: A business will, on average, be able to rationaly use and distribute desired valueable resources better.

/ end of thread.

Re: Is Bob Black's criticism legitimate?

William — Mon, 24 May 2010 06:28:02 GMT

As opposed to social authoritarianism, democratic authoratarianism, or a thousand other forms of authoratarianisms. A business or corporation will probably on average; be easier to ignore, exert less undesirable consequences, and wield less power, not counting perhaps relative social positioning. And for the understatment of the day: A business will, on average, be able to rationaly use and distribute desired valueable resources better.

Re: Is Bob Black's criticism legitimate?

filc — Mon, 24 May 2010 06:11:40 GMT

The problems are

A) The market is not a democracy. Both minorities and majorities win.

B) the "Greedy Corporations" are not the masters but the consumers are. It would be far easier to make the extreme argument that corporations are the slaves of the consumer, it's far more fetched to look at it the other way around. There is a reason why it's called "Consumer Sovereignty".

Now if the "Greedy Corporations" operate by means of coercion just as the state does, then he has a legitimate argument. But you cannot argue with honesty that changing the authority from a "Coercive Master" to a market where only voluntary association is allowed then it becomes entirely non-sequitur to say that your passing from one master to another.

One master has a ball and chain, whip and sword. The other master has bread and is willing to trade it to you for your milk. In other words, the other is no more of a master over you, then you are over him.

Is Bob Black's criticism legitimate?

cognitivist — Mon, 24 May 2010 06:01:14 GMT

"To demonise state authoritarianism while ignoring identical albeit contract-consecrated subservient arrangements in the large-scale corporations which control the world economy is fetishism at its worst." Bob Black, Libertarian socialist

A legitimate representative government is elected. But Libertarian socialists would say that all we do is "change masters." Corporations are the result of consumer democracy, but empirically speaking we obviously do not see nearly the same authoritarianism as exhibited by some of history's governments. And when corporate authoritarianism emerges, it has been with the State's endorsement, ala East India Trading Company.

So, does Bob have a legitimate criticism to make in light of Austro-Libertarianism's ideology?