• synthesis
    933
    In order to flourish, social man must conceive methods to attenuate the nearly omniscient power that both corporations and governments have amassed (as it is building dynastic political power bases and manufacturing great wealth that attracts the most accomplished sociopaths among us).

    Just look to the U.S. for daily glimpses of political figures acting like teenage mutant imbeciles, not to be outdone by the billionaire class acting as if we should have a world-wide crisis on a regular basis (just to shake loose those stubborn pennies and nickels the masses hold onto so tightly, while throwing the central banks' printing presses into over-drive...inflating their assets to the stars and beyond).

    The system (the coalition of government and corporate interests) has invested a great deal in the narrative that social and economic life is either one or the other resulting in all the platitudes inscribed here, there, and everywhere (as it fears above all else the masses catching onto the fact that one cannot exist without the other). Both of these behemoths spend the day throwing stones at each other and then retire to their opulent suites, change into their tuxes, and entertain each other by indulging in the spoils of a world awash in luxury.

    Those on the conservative side see the corporation as a necessary evil but one that preserves the ideals of free speech, free markets, and self-determination. On the other side, the liberal/left only seem to see the inequality, inequity, and social disintegration (a product of all human interaction) as being caused by the economic system, having unearthed Herr Marx and Mr. Engels for another ideological do-si-do.

    The left devoutly believes that an ideologically-correct government can fix these inequalities/inequities if only we can seize the majority of the wealth generated by the most productive members of society (and presumably redistribute it more equitably [while of course, stuffing a few dollars in their own pockets for their trouble]). Of course, we've seen how this horror show ends time and again.

    So, which is worse? Pick your poison...
  • Fooloso4
    5.4k
    In my opinion, politics is business by other means. We cannot draw clear lines between them. They are two sides of the same coin.

    Perhaps this is what you mean when you say:

    The system (the coalition of government and corporate interests)synthesis
  • Apollodorus
    3.4k
    Apparently, the Fabian Society, which was the main driving force behind the political left in England, believed that "socialism is a business proposition". But then so was liberalism and conservatism. It's been that way ever since. But I agree that vested interests, political or financial, do tend to cover their true intentions in a cloak of empty promises that only serve to fleece the masses.
  • NOS4A2
    8.3k


    Governments are worse because they have the force of law and the monopoly on violence. It's no wonder, then, that private interests seek its favor and protection. If the market was free, and governments didn't take it upon themselves to meddle in the economy, I suspect no such relationship would exist.
  • bert1
    1.8k
    Undemocratic governments are worst. Corporations next worst. Democratic governments least worst.

    At least you can periodically fire the last category.
  • MondoR
    335
    It's like Yin and Yang. Two sides of the same coin, who work together to gain wealth and steal from those who create wealth.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.