this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
695 points (94.7% liked)

solarpunk memes

5853 readers
503 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WaterSword@discuss.tchncs.de 149 points 2 years ago (2 children)

anarcho-capitalism is actually corporate fascism

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 55 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A bit debatable on the individual level but that’s likely what it would lead to. Some ancaps are weirdly anti-corporate though. They think somehow big powerful corporations were created by the state. Which is true in some cases but clearly not in others.

[–] mark3748@sh.itjust.works 44 points 2 years ago (4 children)

All corporations are created by the state. Corporations only exist because of the laws that create them. Without that special legal status it’s pretty much impossible to grow to the sizes most corporations do.

[–] poVoq@slrpnk.net 44 points 2 years ago (29 children)

The same is true for private-property and capitalism in general, which is why "anarcho-capitalism" is so absurd.

[–] mark3748@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 years ago

I wholeheartedly agree!

load more comments (28 replies)
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I’m not sure I fully agree… some corporate entities are large enough to be self reinforcing. In practice they may end up recreating the state, but I don’t think it’s necessary impossible for large corporate structures to emerge in a stateless society. Of course, the nature of the stateless society is a very important variable here. A society that is hostile to accumulated wealth and social domination would make this much more difficult.

[–] mark3748@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A corporation is a legal construct. While it’s theoretically possible for a single business to grow very large, most of the exploitation and legal cover provided by the simple act of incorporation becomes nearly impossible.

Plus without a state to push down competition, it becomes a lot harder to monopolize a market. Ideally there wouldn’t even be a market to monopolize, but that’s a different discussion altogether.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Incorporation is just a formality required by law. Corporations could still exist through internal cooperation without that, as long as there is no outside force that disrupts them.

In the absence of the state, a corporate structure can pursue its own coercive methods to maintain market dominance. And of course, some markets are naturally prone to monopoly due to the barriers to competition.

Anything the state can do, a large enough corporation can do as well. So this logic just doesn’t add up.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago

But without a state above them to reinforce laws the corporation would have to enforce them. So they don't have to follow their own laws, and thus become something else. More like a warband of kingdom or junta.

[–] Zoidsberg@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Are large street gangs (Crips, etc.) not an example of a huge corporation operating outside the benefits of the law?

[–] Bertuccio@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

A corporation by definition benefits from the law.

Corporations are businesses that have been given the the legal rights of a person. As if they had a body. Or corpus, if you will.

[–] Zoidsberg@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Personally, that just feels like semantics to me. They're a structured group of people that exists to generate profit. Whether they technically meet the definition of a corporation doesn't change what they'd be like under anarcho-capitalism.

[–] Bertuccio@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yes, shockingly, the definitions of words are semantics!

And to literally ask if something meets a definition then try to dismiss the response as semantic while offering your own incorrect definition is fantastically silly.

Gangs are structured groups of people that exist to generate profit illegally.

Unincorporated businesses are structured groups of people that exist to generate profit legally.

Incorporated businesses are structured groups of people that exist to generate profit legally with the special legal status of personhood.

Part of the point @mark3748@sh.itjust.works was making is that corporations are nearly identical to other organizations, even illegal ones, except they have a legal status that lets them do far more damage.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 years ago

Same with pirates. They have an internal structure and share profit, but are very illegal.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 years ago

It's just latter-day feudalism. Their program is to Make Landlords Lords Again.