Amazon.com Widgets

Is a revolution necessary today to dislodge capitalism and to ensure equality and democracy with the removal of corporations?

Asked by: Edwardmv
  • More Yes than No. However, Capitalism can exist without Corporations, which are detriments to society in almost every way.

    Capitalism is not necessarily an inherently oppressive social or economic system, it can be, but then again so can socialism and communism as history has clearly demonstrated. Capitalism encourages and promotes progress in innovative fields and allows for efficient generation of wealth, HOWEVER, Corporations do not need to be in the equation for Capitalism to succeed, in fact Capitalism is probably better off without it.

    Corporations are holders of wealth and capital and the people that own these corporations often spend and invest less money than they hoard, therefore becoming a detriment to the economy as they're personal standing wealth becomes wasted capital. Corporations should be replaced with the much more profitable and EQUAL organisation called a Syndicate or Confederation, which are more democratic in business practice and are much less susceptible to corruption and worker abuse as well as wealth hoarding. This system of delegated business would not only spread with equally but also efficiently and fairly according to Capitalist practice, the wealth spread and garnered by reorganisation of Corporations would therefore increase consumer spending and thus boost economic growth.

  • We do need a revolution.

    Rentier corporations and the plutocrats that own them have become far too powerfu,l and the economy has become far less efficient as a result. The political process can no longer be used to rectify the problem either, since the SCOTUS has effectively wrested control of policy away from the voters and is about to do so again.

    We have already fought one civil war against the neoliberal plantation economy; maybe its time for another; because at the end of the day, no society is more civil or democratic than its distribution of wealth.

  • Yes I think so

    Big corporations such as oil, heating, electricity, TV, banks, water companies can, if allowed to become powerful enough, stranglehold the market and hold us to random by hiking prices and forcing out competition (eg big fish eating smaller fish). Such underhand tactics are often legal and they employ them to their advantage.

    On the internet the giants are privacy abusers such as Microsoft, google, and facebook. These shady companies cannibalize smaller companies for more customer information and profiling. They dominate the internet meaning thousands of business can't compete unless they sign up to their surveillance and data sharing programmes.

    In sport the teams that have won more trophies gain more money through sponsorship and endorsements, which in turn allow them to poach talented players & drivers from poorer teams, which in turn the poorer teams have even less chance to succeed and lower income. Rinse and repeat. This creates an unfair monopoly.

    As more and more power go to all these huge corporations, the more they will walk over us and screw us over.

  • Corporations cause inequality

    Corporations and capitalism is clearly a barricade to democracy because it leaves a small minority with incredible power, a power that is today used to corrupt the government, control people's lives, and to ruin the economy, as well as give a certain class of people a higher quality of lives than the 99%

  • Capitalism is the best.

    Capitalism is the only natural state of economy. It allows people to do what they want when they want within reasonable bounds of moral inhibition. Any restriction, however necessary, is unnatural. This can be seen in countries with no power controlling them or policy to follow. Somalia, one such country, still saw trade much like what occurs in a capitalist economy. People bartered or purchased what they considered valuable. Not that a lawless country should be a model of perfection, but just that free markets are the natural state of humanity. There would have to be a gargantuan reason to change that. However, I see no reason. Here I would like to borrow from the previous commenter a saying I have heard before "Equal opportunity, not equal outcomes". I have, perhaps in error, boiled this down to treat every person as a human being, but nothing more until they deserve it. People deserve to be treated in a certain fashion. They do not however deserve to hold others back from life. To be truly equal would be to make everyone the same as the most physically incapable fool in the world since making the weak strong has yet to be accomplished. If someone can't walk, you shouldn't walk etc.
    For one final point, no man deserves the fruit of my labor no more than I deserve the fruit of his labor. Thomas Hobbes theorized that man first created a government to protect themselves from this same principle. Hobbes argues that in a place where everyone is equal, there is no law, and therefore no property, what you own is as much yours as the next mans (I apologize for my murder of this esteemed mans opinions please read his works for a much better account. Very enlightening.) I don't think any man truly wants such a world accept the poorest. Whether poor in spirit, money or power of body and mind. Rather people look on high to the corporations and say that they are not fair they are wrong. They are jealous/envious. They do not realize these people have worked for what they have, or their fathers did etc. It would be wrong for you to have it. Whether you agree with the Bible or not, the message though shalt not covet your neighbors... Is a hard one to argue with. On the other hand these corporate managers have corrupted the version of Capitalism created by Adam Smith. They do not have transparency and meddle in the government to get what they want. They have also formed oligopolies (several large businesses) which make it very difficult for new competition to emerge. These are the problems as I see them, not the system, but the people corrupting it.

  • This poll is biased and inaccurate.

    Equality in a democracy is defined as being equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. If corporations were to be destroyed in the name of equality, that would be communism. Under communism, there is no incentive to work hard. If you accomplish more than the next person, it will only mean the government is stealing more from you than him. True equality is equal opportunity, which comes from capitalism. In a capitalist system, people get to own business, not the government. If you work hard, you can succeed. If you build a successful business from the ground up, that is you taking advantage of the opportunity capitalism presents you. Corporations are the result of people working hard. Take away people's ability to own a business or work their way up the corporate ladder, and they will have no incentive to work hard. Thus, they won't work hard because it will not benefit them as it would in a free market system. The result will be decreased productivity and economic decline for the nation as a whole. There is no equality in attacking someone else's success.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.