Monday 23 July 2007

Let's Put it to the Vote

It's Monday again.
Goodbye to last week's poll, in with the new.

Your verdict on the future of the Union was in favour of its dissolution, although to be fair this issue didn't really get any of you over-excited.
Seven of you thought it was time the UK passed into history.
Five of you thought it still had a purpose.

My guess is that the Union will pass into history and with relatively little resistance.
I think most of those who don't like the idea of its passing, can still see the writing on the wall.

I think Alex Salmond will get his wish one day.

So, on to this week's issue.

Well, you can guess.
We've been discussing it for the last few days.

Multinational Corporations.
A force for good in the world?
Or a hindrance to progress?

There have been some strong opinions either way, with some good arguments produced by both supporters and opponents of that small, largely anonymous, band of men who own our planet.

Pommygranate has certainly been a robust defender of the wisdom of the market; 'Sure we might not be back on the moon (thank God) but we do now have the internet, fantastic advances in medical technology that has added ten years to life expectancy, no-one in England need go hungry, women have equal status to men for the first time ever, and if we dont like our ruling party we can boot them out.'

Ed too, has concerns about what would take the place of the corporations; 'Would these democratic organisations be willing to take huge risks to create new industries? I doubt it. They might work in stable industries but I can't imagine they would be able to innovate like competitive companies can.'

Not nationalised corporations. Certainly not in my vision.
I've said, I look forward to a TRUE democracy where EVERYTHING is under democratic control.

On the other side, Helen had this to say; 'I think a civilization that sees no alternative to corporate exploitation than primitive, squalid conditions is doomed to fail. In the case of the steelworkers, why would experienced, highly-skilled metallurgists revert to subsistence living? If our future is to be re-written we must admit to failed systems and direct our course to a more egalitarian method of labor management and profit control.'

And Jenny thought this; 'Until we can check our materialistic ways, we will never have any progress! We value money and things over humanity.'

Anyway, I'll be interested to know the general feeling on this.
How do we feel about this?
Are they a force for good or a force for ill?
You decide.

Have your say.


Anonymous said...

Hurrah! My name in print!

Anonymous said...

Oh well i dunno about all that multicorporate whatever stuff - but i am CERTAIN the guy in your picture is trying to muscle in on that kiss. bastard.

Anonymous said...

Globilizations can be good and bad, but it will lead to way too much political influence on economics to too few people.

Anonymous said...

I nealry fisked your last post, but ran out of time. Due to my work for a mulit-national. salving drivings scum that they are....

Anyway, you are entirely incorrect in almost every assumption that you made. the entire history of development in the western world is based upon individual freedom to innovate. this in turn has spawned multi-nationals; but this is why they were given the same status as 'persons'. to keep the innovation.

People take risks for reward, in a democracy, people will not take the hard road but the easy. Everyone wants lower taxes and better schools and hospitals. Less money spent onf arms and a free world.

You see the problem here? It is the old Marxian mistake; human nature.

Being animals, we are driven by base nature. the advantage of capitlaism is that this is exploited for the good fo all.

your proposed way of making the world work would fail at the first hurdle. people would make irrational decisions that you would be surprised at. Politics would come to dominate everything and no major decisions would ever get taken.

This would not take us forward, but backwards.

On the plus side, you noted the world population explosion and summed it up well. this is the real threat to humanity, billions of poor people in nigeria and pakistan (check the predicitions, this is spot on) having been born ot ppor families unable to feed themselves.

Anonymous said...

The one area where I'm certain that corporate interest and global consolidation are NOT good things is journalism.

This I'm sure of. The public interest is not served when Disney owns ABC, when Time Warner is one company, when General Electric owns NBC, and when a tiny, elite group of people/heads of corporations sit at the top of a media pyramid.

Anonymous said...

Crushed- i'm afraid i'm with Slicker on this one.

Marxism has nothing to say of any interest or use to man.

Anonymous said...

Ed- You should see what The Sun is saying...

JJ- Some of these Highland customs seem strange to the rest of us.

Jenny- This is my feeling. That as things stand, too many of the things that affect people's lives are outside their control.

CityUn- You point about human nature is very true. But as I suggested earlier the model that best reconciles human nature to universal benefit may change over time, as technology and society change.
We co-operate for our own selfish ends.
People would always vote selfishly on anything.
That is how we knowe that democratic control of everything fits in with 'Each men knows best the route to his own happiness.'

I don't think the system we have now really gives a glimpse of what true democracy would be like.

Ruthie- Exactly. These companies are more powerful than many governments. They can override the democratic will of the people- and do.

Pommy- This is the problem, the'ism'. By looking at the theory through the failed experiment of some of its followers, we miss the fact that the economics is sound.

His economics served as a (lame) justification for a (pretend) Communism, but that doesn't mean the theory is wrong.
Darwin isn't wrong just because the Nazis were evil.
I think you can reject Socialism, but accept Marx economics, as I do.

Anonymous said...

Corporations are a necessary evil unfortunately. They bring benefits while exploiting the workforce just so they can make a bit more money. Whats wrong with making £900 million and paying your employees a fair wage instead of making a billion.

The only things corporations are loyal to is money.

I think a better alternative for the future would be worker co-operatives where the workers own the means of production.

Anonymous said...

though we need leaders and so-called "powers-that-be", there is a thin line between helping and exploiting from such a vantage point.... and usually personal agendas are fulfilled from such positions.

Anonymous said...

There are too few controlling everyone elses lives, those at the top of the ladder like you said...ahve no clue about the bottom rung!

Anonymous said...

...and if we dont like our ruling party we can boot them out...

To be replaced by clones from the other side. :)

Now you still haven't come clean on the delectable Jenny - is there any truth in the rumour?

Anonymous said...

YDKM- It is true that short term profit rules, rather than long term human interest. However, workers co-operatives running it still leads to power being exerted against the end user.
Not only the producers, but the consumers need control- the ideal of both capitalism and socialism united- Which is we I propose the full democratic solution I do.

Raffi- which is why separation of power is so necessary, its all about putting enough checks and balances in place.

Jenny- True. But its comforting to believe that its their own talent and no other factors that meant they never lived that way.
Its not quite true though.

Lord SB- Thats certainly the choice in the UK- Dumb versus Dumber.
This is a rumour I am unfamiliar with. Is the rumour that she's delectable?
I certainly don't disagree.

Anonymous said...

I am always amazed at the insight you have to be so young. I like it I tells ya!

Anonymous said...

Probably more a force for ill, as they get bigger and bigger. But I, too, think we are stuck with them and whatever would take their place?

Anonymous said...

Poody- I try to think outside the box. Vision is streamlined too much these days and we have got very complacent since the Berlin Wall came down. 9/11 was a wake up call to the west that all is not well on Earth, but the idea that the current winners of history are all-wise seems hard to shake.

Strangely, our individualistic system doesn't actually encourage individual thought much.

Welshcakes- If you as a voter can be trusted to decide who runs the army, why not the local school, railway, supermarket?
That's consumer choice,democracy AND Collectivisation.
Real choice.