I am joined by Ron Dodson and The Black Horse to talk about a problem that is on the lips of everyone these days on the Online Right: distributed ownership and the problems it creates.
Excellent conversation, especially at the end there.
"In order to avoid creating this situation where you get an army of these parasites, what you want to be doing is creating a legal framework that aligns incentives so that you don't have to have laws. ...In order to govern without having an army of compliance officers you align [business] interests with the interests of the community."
Well put by Black Horse.
Also a great point made at 56:40, that fixing any of this necessitates a change in whose hands power lies, deserves more attention. The messy side of praxis relies on the recognition of those who currently wield power who are never going to give it up on acceptable terms. Ethically and philosophically, a lasting order must have a passive and active vigilance against resurgence of the factors which the defeated order relied on.
I have never once, in my entire life, been under the impression that someone who owns shares in a company has ownership in any real sense. I know it's a bit different when you have large or majority share ownership, but even then, especially with super-voting-shares, it's a bedtime story. It's the most pretentious thing next to people who think having a democratic vote empowers them politically, yet somehow even more absurd. Civics class for money mongers.
Excellent conversation, especially at the end there.
"In order to avoid creating this situation where you get an army of these parasites, what you want to be doing is creating a legal framework that aligns incentives so that you don't have to have laws. ...In order to govern without having an army of compliance officers you align [business] interests with the interests of the community."
Well put by Black Horse.
Also a great point made at 56:40, that fixing any of this necessitates a change in whose hands power lies, deserves more attention. The messy side of praxis relies on the recognition of those who currently wield power who are never going to give it up on acceptable terms. Ethically and philosophically, a lasting order must have a passive and active vigilance against resurgence of the factors which the defeated order relied on.
I have never once, in my entire life, been under the impression that someone who owns shares in a company has ownership in any real sense. I know it's a bit different when you have large or majority share ownership, but even then, especially with super-voting-shares, it's a bedtime story. It's the most pretentious thing next to people who think having a democratic vote empowers them politically, yet somehow even more absurd. Civics class for money mongers.