- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
This is actually an older news story, and it does appear as though she recovered from this before her death.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/14389544
This is actually an older news story, and it does appear as though she recovered from this before her death.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/14389544
Fire is also no morals evil. Corporations are tools. Dangerous but powerful tools. You use them poorly and you end up with corporations murdering union leaders and poisoning communities. You don’t use them at all and you end up with breadlines and authoritarianism.
nah, fire is just the propagation of exothermic reactions.
Corporations require intent, they are designed to literally strip any moral consideration from their actions.
PS: about that breadlines and authoritarianism, the US has had plenty of breadlines, and still does to this day, also authoritarians love corporations, after all corporations are inherently authoritarian.
Corporations don’t do moral consideration by their nature, just like fire. You can say it was “by design” for corporations and coincidence for fire, but that is a distinction without difference. Irrelevant for the argument.
And funnily enough, having many authoritarians in a system surprisingly results in much less authoritarian system than having just one. That is why the 3 branches of government are split and it is why I don’t know of any true democracy that is not capitalistic. The authoritarians keep each other in check.
you do realize that corporations aren’t some law of nature? corporations are a social construct in the most literal meaning of the phrase.
secondly, you must think the HRE must have been some free paradise by your understanding, also I don’t know of any fascist system that that wasn’t capitalist, but I do know plenty of pre-capitalist democratic societies
Again, distinction without a difference.
And you may want a refresher on your ancient democracies ;) Which one did not have a separate class of landowners (owning the only relevant means of production back then)? Also, just comparing agrarian societies to modern economic systems is childish. I am much better of living under “tyrannical capitalists” today than in any of those societies.
I would wager to argue that one being, entirely a concept only existing in human thinking. The other being an exothermic reaction following the laws of nature is quite a distinction here.
unless you are going to concede that we could just trust bust fire, can i sue fire for the damages on my house? what exactly is the fiscal return on the primary product of fire?
as for:
You confuse the achievements of modernism with capitalism, it wasn’t capitalism the stopped famines in most of the world, it was a crazed Jewish-German nationalist with the backing of a local monarch
also, most of the Greek democracies had all not enslaved male citizens enfranchised, with the woman’s vote in most the world being a consequence of socialist campaigning
What are you even talking about?
You confuse using a hands crank with operating a nuclear powerplant. It is not about what created the modern industrial society. It is about whether an elected committee would be able to run it and average people be able to oversee it. Which they wouldn’t. People that dedicate their entire lives to studying management and economics are barely able to.
ok, really, REALLY simply put:
Fire, is generally an exothermic reaction, straight up chemistry/physics forces, there is nothing you can do that will change these functions.
a Corporation is NOT based on any natural laws, a Corporation does not exist outside the cognitive, it is not a real thing, it is an idea, there is no corporate matter in the universe.
in other words, Corporations, unlike fire, can be whatever we want them to be.
because corporations can be anything, anything bad they do is an Inherent moral question, and unironically you defend corporations with the idea of “just following orders”
You can redefine the word corporation just as you can redefine the word fire.
But corporations are groups of people (and some other stuff). They way they behave is not governed by what is written in a law-book or dictionary, but by the complex interactions of people and environments.
You can try to regulate them with laws like you can try regulate a fire by building a fireplace, but that control is always going to be far from perfect.
Of course, that certainly does not mean you shouldn’t try, you must try just like with fire. But you need to be smart about it. It becomes more difficult as the corporations and the economy becomes larger.
There are ways to control forest fires, but the most effective is often a counterintuitive one. Control burns. You set even more stuff on fire. Capitalism is in a way a similar technique. You allow some resources to be wasted by the wealthy but the result of complex interactions between people is economic growth and better living standards even for the common people. Or you mess it up and the fire gets bigger, its not easy to regulate corporations.
Communism is in my opinion like a fireplace. It may work really well if you keep the system small and simple. But it falls apart as you add scale and complexity.
Breadlines happened in the Great Depression. They happened because of Capitalism and Corporations.