Life Inc - How the World Became a Corporation
Submitted by legalizeliberty on Thu, 10/22/2009 - 22:29
In Life Inc., award-winning writer, documentary filmmaker, and scholar Douglas Rushkoff traces how corporations went from a convenient legal fiction to the dominant fact of contemporary life. Indeed as Rushkoff shows, most Americans have so willingly adopted the values of corporations that they're no longer even aware of it.
»
THIS IS THE GREAT FALLACY THAT F.A. HAYEK TALKED ABOUT
Many people see corporatism as the cause of socialism, as Hitler seemed to portray when the German Historical School propogated that mind set in the mid 1900's. Many people became scared of the private sector and confused individualism with selfishness. In fact, socialism is a natural response by authoritarians (whether it is monarchs, presidents, or prime ministers) who get upset when they see their power being transferred to a more decentralized system of commerce. Free markets are self-regulating and ultimately in the purest form of free markets government of all types will cease to exist. At the end of the day we the people should not even need a constitution to set limitations for governments since it will already be intrinsically expressed.
The role of a farmer, in Fukuoka's mind, is an observer, not an intervener, of the natural order in his/her particular landscape. How is that any different than Hayek in regards to Economics?
Been a Libertarian since
Been a Libertarian since 1979 and I think this video is true libertarianism and its dead on right. I am not a libertarian scholar, but I think if taken to the extreme, corporations would not exist in a libertarian society.
Socialism and Capitalism both can exist in a Free Market because they both can be voluntary.
I don't see how socialism can exist in a free market
I'm not trying to act like a know it all because I hate when people do that especially on passionate issues like this one but I am extremely confused by something you said and I have to ask how you came to your conclusion when you say socialism can exist within a free market. The study of the Austrian school teaches us free market thinkers that any nationalization of the means of production within the private sector disrupts commerce and the freedom for markets to self-regulate. But I do agree that if taken to the extreme, corporations would not exist in their current structure. It would be decentralized into compatible niches across related industries.
The role of a farmer, in Fukuoka's mind, is an observer, not an intervener, of the natural order in his/her particular landscape. How is that any different than Hayek in regards to Economics?
For Example...
Insurance, of any type, is an example of voluntary socialism (so long as it isn't mandated). The funds collected from premiums (taxes in state socialism) are pooled and then are divested to the policy holders in accordance with the policy (welfare or other type of benefits in state socialism). Another example is co-op (cooperative) farming, the details of which I won't go into but, as the name suggests is well nigh communist in its implementation.
Voluntary socialism is not state socialism, and in so far as the institution remains transparently voluntary it conforms with "Libertarian" principles, leftist though they may be. Social Security and Medicare would be legitimate, in my opinion, if in addition to actually operating in the black (not subsidized by revenue from other sources), people could choose not to participate.
Cooperating with your fellow man is often a good idea, however when this "good idea" is forced on people it becomes inherently immoral.
collective action
Most people think that socialism is just collective action. They race past the enforcement part that requires the government to steal resources with the threat of violence.
Socialism as collective action can exist in a libertarian society...it just needs to be voluntary.
I'd have to totally agree
This is junk. This viewpoint is called Libertarian Socialism. It is dangerous because it gives people a false perception of a true Libertarian.
?
This is false history. How did the video get on this site?
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
So how do you take it back?
For those that read the book, can you provide a summary of how Rushkoff advises we take life back?
i hate to break it to you but...
as it stands now nothing (literally nothing) out of the head of man has thus far been invented other than the theory of the capitalist mode of production or the socialist mode of production (and the socialist mode of production has long been discredited as a valid scientific theory for the organization of society), if you personally have miraculously invented this radically new system by all means share with us....
sorry for the location but i was meaning to be a reply to.
"Trouble with people around here ..."
feudalism
feudalism
Ventura 2012
Corporatism and capitalism
Corporatism and capitalism and free markets are not necessarily the same thing. Corporations as we know them can not exist without the state. The corporate charter is a government grant of limited liability. The corporation is given an advantage at the expense of individual rights by the state. And thus the incestuous relationship between government and the corporate world begins, forming an elite class opposed to the interests of the individual. And soon, together they own you.
private
private property as a means of production or public ownership (government ownership) as a means of production.
yes their are slight variances of these two modes of production but none the less they fall between these two distinct types.
corporatism or its original term "fascism" is supposedly a new social organization of production but in these instances private ownership is only a outward guise for absolute government control in the form of mandated directives.
were splitting hairs here and avoiding the social organization at its fundamental level.
i would like to recommend Middle-of-the-road policies leads to socialism by Ludwig Von Mises.
in his short article he argues failed interventions will inevitably lead to more interventions bringing about in time socialism.
their is no third system, this "new" mode of production will lead to one or the other depending on public and political opinion.
I think the challenge posed
I think the challenge posed by the documentary is to corporatism. Those who suggest, as many do, that socialism is the answer are tragically mistaken. Fredrich Hayek, the 1973 Nobel laureate in economics, and student of Austrian economics, pressed the point that fascism, state socialism, new dealism, welfare statism and communism are all variants of COERCIVE COLLECTIVISM. I would add to that; the government envisioned under the United States Constitution also a type of coercive collectivism.
The American Declaration of Independence represents the stillborn revolution that brought forth the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the New Deal, the Great Society and the Patriot Act. These are points along a path of devolution.
To achieve lasting peace, prosperity and freedom, self-government is the answer. Coercive collectivism is the enemy, in whatever form.
How about the Distributist mode?
.
The problems with
The problems with distributivism are many but the main trouble comes down to its dogmatic opposition to modern technology and modern forms of property ownership. They imagine reform toward an equal distribution of private property (as if there is no trading on day 2), a return to agricultural life, and restoration of community-based work, and even something of a resurgence of medieval gilds, but they don't come to terms with the possibility that forging such a world would require totalitarian planning structures, the end of anything resembling free enterprise, and might end up starving most of the world's 6 billion people who cannot be fed, clothed, and housed in the context of a 12th-century-level of the division of labor.
I know they mean well, and they have a decent critique of the modern state and state capitalism but I can't get passed the impression that these nice people are really engaged in a kind of romantic sharing of poetic reflections rather than engaging in real-world analysis. In this way, they seem to have much in common with pre-Marxian socialists.
Nor is this tendency irrelevant. It makes conservatives more sympathetic with bogus policy plans such as those promoted by environmentalism. And it leads to subtle "lifestyle" books designed to spread loathing of capitalism such as those pushed by the Crunchy Con movement.
As with the socialists, the way to deal with these people is to ask the question: what is to be done? The answer--always some version of "dismantle industrial civilization"--is less than viable
-Jeff Tucker
I posted this comment, among
I posted this comment, among others:
It will help if you kill your TV. I love my corporation-built automobile. I could never afford a hand-built one. I love my corporate-built computer with the clear, wide corporate-built LCD monitor. But I don't need to see car advertisements or computer advertisements, even the cute ones. I do not need to see cable news political pundits either.
[I killed my television over 14 years ago. RIP.]
thought-provoking
The reason people are too tired to do anything "but sit down for a few minutes in front of the tv before we go to bed", as he said, is not because of THE CORPORATION.
That's way to simplistic.
It's because, yes, of our values. We spend, spend, spend, trying to acquire more and more. Yes, our values have deteriorated as a culture.
But a huge, monumental reason mom and dad are working is because of 2 things: 1) too much government regulation of the economy. Paperwork, licenses, taxes, inspections, etc., etc.
And 2) because of the devaluation of the dollar by The Fed.
Yes, the author is right. Obama / Congress shouldn't have bailed out the banks, but let them fail. As Ron Paul says, let them be liquidated, like any other business enterprise that is insolvent. You don't just keep propping up a badly run business. You GET OUT!
I think the author is on to something, though I do not know if he's a hard leftist.
He's attacking the corporation. Look what the corporations have done to America! That's his revelation.
But the thing is that the corporation and government are married. They are one in the same. Goldman Sachs = Federal government power.
But it's not JUST the corporation. It's the men like the Rockefellers, the Carnegies, the Morgan's of the world who have made allies in government and they've inbred through the years that they are the same evil entity.
And like Ron Paul has said, they (the Powers That Be), the ultra rich and their appointed managers (like Ben Berdanke and Greenspan, and Obama/ Bush, etc.), they think they're doing "good" in the world as they centrally plan for the masses.
Perhaps the author is right -- the time is ripe for a change. If there's a collapse economically, and I think we're in it right now, and if the federal gov't starts bouncing checks when the dollar crashes, as it's destiny IS to be, then perhaps out of the rubble, starvation, chaos, and despair, true freedom and constitutional government by righteous good men and women may once again see the light of day.
But I'm afraid we may have to go through the hell of another autocrat who will rule like a Hitler or Stalin for a season. That's why we should support Oath Keepers.
I'd like to know what agenda the author has. Is he a good man, is he one of those who hopes for a blissful socialist paradise? Or does he have sense enough to realize that the gift the Founders gave us is the ideal to which we should return to?
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
His book is published by a corporation
His book is published by a corporation, namely Random House, Inc.
His neighbors are not all that concerned about him. His conclusion: Their minds have been twisted.
Rushkoff's NWO
I've heard many theories that try to combine social and economic history with the zeal and innocence of a high school social studies teacher. I remember when I was told that the reason for inflation was the wage price spiral, by such people.
:
The concluding statement sounds like twisted neo-conish political rhetoric @ 8:29; Rushkoff contrives a big government collectivist solution if the cards are played right. This is a fairy tale new world order nightmare if I ever heard one.
Hey, how about protecting and inforcing the constitution that is already the law.
and then you die
interesting but fundamentally misdirected
I can’t but help here socialist ramblings demonizing the individual as a selfish monster.
He rails against the industrial revolution as if the common man did not benefit from gaining so-called evil products.
The truth is the poor directly benefited in such a way that his life was elevated from the grinding poverty of subsistence to a standard of living that would have made all the kings of antiquity murder all of their slaves to possess.
I am very puzzled to why this obviously left leaning (“let’s get back to the glory days of only eating bread) man’s video has been posted on a web site dedicated to freeing the American people from the grip of economic tyranny.
He was smiling as he recalled the family barbeque that he so enjoyed with his father as if the modernization and more to the point industrial revolution had NOTHING to do with it.
I wonder if he be smiling if he had to hand plow a field for 14 hours a day just to feed his family, instead of reaping all the “evil” leisurely luxuries provided to him by the industrialization of America?
I haven’t read his book, it may very well be a book supporting an actual free market, I don’t know. (I doubt it)
But I heard nothing but anti-capitalist remarks spewing out of his mouth hole.
Missing the point
That was an interesting video, but he seems to be drawing the wrong conclusions. It sounds like he's saying that free markets are 'dehumanizing' and that improvements in production have resulted in people barely scraping by.
Like many people, he's not seeing the separation between a real free market and the supposedly free systems we've been operating under for centuries. Corporations as such aren't the problem - the privileged relationships between corporations and the government, including government control over the money supply via the central banks, is the cause of most of the problems he talks about.
I don't know if the author says it ... but I will ...
Because of human nature there will NEVER coexist a society in which huge corporations actually care more about their customers and employees than they do about what lines their pockets.
The US and world economy offer living proof that people with money use it to buy influence, cut corners, cheat people, etc.
The libertarian idea of unbridled capitalism is the oxymoron from hell. Philosophically speaking, capitalism is the Siamese twin of communism. Both are atheistic and materialistic. Atheists, in general, have no restraint (such as the Ten Commandments), and materialism spawns greed (a capital sin which, unless repented of, will never be satisfied).
It just can't work!
just
because you state an opinion dosnt make it reality.
If you have any basic knowledge of market processes you would retract that statment with great speed.
your treat liberty as if it is too hot for your hands (or as Nietzsche put it) too cold for your spine.
Trouble with people around here ...
.... is that they've been boxed into a capitalism vs communism world, as if those were the only two possible solutions. Neither has existed for very long and both popped up about the same time. The same class of people created both systems and are presently bringing them together.
Most people are so poorly educated today (government schools) that they are incapable of thinking anymore. They get an emotional high just speaking about liberty. Well, emotional highs get you nowhere in reality.
It's been said that those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. The world is wallowing in people who don't know history. They also don't have a clue about fallen human nature, about what, in the final analysis, makes people happy or miserable.
What I stated was a very educated "opinion." And, your "basic knowledge of market processes" is a concoction of the bankers and Wall Street ... it's a made up system full of bs so that they can rip everyone off, and they have ... over and over again, one generation after another.
I suggest that you "emotional" libertarians and free marketers start dealing with reality.
They are corporatists
I find you are doing a great job in explaining the reality. My only complaint is that I do not believe they are free marketeers or libertarians. but corporatists who like their corporations, emmulate humans, "emotional" libertarians.
WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")
I'm afraid you've hit the nail on the head!
But they believe they are free marketeers and libertarians. They are simply people who have never known there is another, far better way to live. They can't let go of a life of wage slavery with a little Wall Street crap shoot on the side.
I hate the way they knee-jerk trash ideas that don't fit the old paradigm.
Bravo!
This is excellent. I'm impressed that in nine minutes he traced its roots right back to the Renaissance and stuck it to the Industrial Revolution too. The term "renaissance," (re-birth) was a typical historical misnomer. It was actually the beginning of the anti-spiritual devaluation of human life. (Money, money, money, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure). We've been sliding into the sewer ever since. Based on the depraved behavior at the G20, I'd estimate we are near bottom now. We live in a thugdom, not even in a country of individuals anymore.
Human happiness does not depend on wealth and the accumulation of stuff. (Except for very superficial people). Real happiness can only be attained by a right relationship with God and our fellow human beings. When we start living like that, the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers will have no power over us.
Life Inc
Anyone read the book Life, Inc? It is published by Random House Incorporated.
Liked it, despite that BBQ story
Not sure how a communal BBQ is seen as some neighborhood utopian event.
I would hate that.
You miss the point
It wasn't utopian, it was FUN! It was connecting to real people! There's real security in having people around you who actually care about you.