Molyneux's DROs Vivisected (2 of 2)

Dispute Resolution Organizations exposed to analysis.

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• market
• anarchy
• philosophy
• atheism
• relativistic
• skepticism
• DRO
• Dispute
• Resolution
• Organization
• Stefan
• Molyneux

[MarmaladeINFP]

Your criticisms in this video are similar to my own. Market anarchism wouldn't create the idealized meritocracy. Without a democracy with balance of powers, there is no incentive for those with power to regulate themselves and no method for those without power to force regulation. Arbitration would be run by those with power and so would favor those with power. That is just plain commonsense. In Market anarchism, a company could profit by killing or oppressing people w/o political repurcussions.

[pyrrho314]

@MarmaladeINFP : yes, though arbitration is a great thing in concert with a real legal system.

btw, fwiw I think that there is no such possible thing is a meritocracy, and power must be transient, never centralize via merit but only via geographic practicality.

imo what do you think?

[MarmaladeINFP]

@Sivels My point is govt shouldn't be decreased in size & power unless corporations are also decreased in size & power. We live in a world of transnational corporations which have power that transcends the power & regulation of any single national govt. The idea of a corporate charter was originally the idea of govt, but at this point transnationals no longer depend on specific govts to maintain their power. That is a problematic situation for workers, small business owners, & local economies.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@Sivels OTOH I have some leanings toward libertarianism, minarchism, & anarchism. I think there should be a separation between local & federal power similar to how the federal govt is internally separated into 3 branches. I think local govts should have more independent power. I'd prefer the military-industrial complex to be dismantled and have the federal govt merely serve a regulatory function & to deal w/ issues that transcend any single local govt.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@Sivels I don't disagree. Both big business and big govt have problems. To me, all concentrated power makes abuse of power more probable. The only answer to this is division of power. Similar to separation of church & state, corporations should be kept separate from govt. Corporations shouldn't have personhood, shouldn't have immense lobbyist power, & shouldn't be free to fund campaigns to the extent they do. Both big business & big govt, but the real danger is when they collude in corporatism.

[Sivels]

@MarmaladeINFP I was responding to this part: "In Market anarchism, a company could profit by killing or oppressing people w/o political repurcussions." How are modern governments (with all those 'balances of power') any different from that description. In practicality they discover endless new ways to oppress people born into these predatory, generation-slavery systems.

And don't you think a for-profit company would lose it's reutation instantly were it to engage in killing people and hence p

[MarmaladeINFP]

@Sivels What does that have to do with anything I wrote?

[Sivels]

@MarmaladeINFP And what exactly is it that most governments are doing if isn't imprisoning millions and causing the death of millions upon millions throughout history as well as to day.. Please don't tell me I need to provide examples, that would take a SHITLOAD of time.

[MarmaladeINFP]

I'm probably more or less in line with you about meritocracy. It's not that merit doesn't have it's place, but that meritocracy is (inevitably?) used to rationalize plutocracy. The problem is that power when centralized (whether perceived as earned or not) undermines the (relative) freedom of markets, undermines the democratic process, and undermines the protection of civil rights. It doesn't matter if the power is concentrated in a divine king, a dictator, a communist regime or a corporation.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@pyrrho314 I'm mostly a moderate in my opinions & I'm certainly not a believer in ideological absolutes. I don't think any one system is the solution for everything in all situations & in all societies. The general idea of our society is good (although there is always room for improvement): democracy & capitalism balancing eachother, separation of church and state, division of powers within the federal govt, division b/t federal govt & local state govts, public & private schools, etc.