The model sketched in Parts Two through Five and grounded in the concepts of Part One is rock solid, not in bricks and mortar you'll find anywhere, but in decades of theorizing and research on corporations and government agencies. [1]
The model prescribes what a corporation would need to look like and do in order to meet the Gold Standard of business, consistently conducting it in a positive manner and consistently producing positive results. It is a tougher standard than it may appear and stands in stark contrast to the real nature of corporations in partnership with the other malefactor of the corpocracy, our government. The corpocracy epitomizes the worst behavior and the worst results.
But why does a model really matter as long as the corpocracy and its ominous realities are firmly entrenched?
It matters because anything conceivable is possible. Drones, for example, were once conceived somewhere in the dark recesses of the military/industrial/political triumvirate and now they exist and are killing people.
It matters precisely because there are these drones along with all of the other manifestations of the corpocracy that is gradually ruining
It matters because corporations can be a legitimate and appropriate form of doing some kinds of business. They are not inherently corrupt despite what critics may think. Starting out as a legal piece of paper, corporations grow corrupt in response to temptations and pressures, some self-made but most not. Almost all of the temptations, including the removal of certain external pressures, are part of the government's corporate-welfare policies and oversight negligence.
It matters because capitalism isn't inherently corrupt and socialism isn't the solution we should be seeking. Adam Smith, the putative "father" of capitalism, was a moral philosopher and would have recoiled at the very idea of the corpocracy s form of capitalism. He thought the emerging corporations of his time posed threats emanating from their unlimited life span; unlimited size; unlimited power; and unlimited license. It is the government, prodded by the industries, their corporations, and the wholly repudiated free-market theory and its ideologues, not capitalism per se, that removed those limits.
This last article in the series starts by showing how a real corporation might reform itself even though that may never happen because of the ominous realities the model is up against. Some of those realities in four industries and the outcomes of confrontations with them will then be reviewed. Next, a few possible scenarios of what might happen if those realities are left to follow their course will be pondered. Finally, a model of confrontation proposed for keeping any of those scenarios from happening will be summarized.
Voluntary Corporate Reform in Any Industry: From unlikely to necessary?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
