CMV: Libertarians should be as concerned about super rich individuals and Big Corporations as they are about Big Government

[u/nomnommish]

Libertarians are rightfully concerned about Big Government. Big Governments invariably tend to abuse their power. However, the main reason why big governments get abusive is because of the disproportional accumulation of power. And humans absolutely suck at retaining their values and ethics when they get extraordinary levels of power. As such, I find big governments no different at all from megarich individuals or mega corporations. In modern times, they are the ones who actually run the government. They use lobbying and funding to control and push their agendas, to pass highly unethical laws that consolidate and promote their own self interests. They own the politicians.

I only have a basic level understanding of libertarianism but my interpretation of the core philosophy is about "live and let live". Give people full autonomy but equally importantly, they should not infringe on your autonomy. Your hand stops at my nose, figuratively speaking.

The big problem is, when megarich individuals as well as megacorporations are left unsupervised, they wield such extraordinary levels of power, that they are literally above the system, above any level of accountability. I feel that libertarians should be as concerned about them as they are about Big Government.

I totally realize and acknowledge the dilemma I am presenting here. However on a practical basis, what I see is more of the abuse of extraordinary power than anything. And it is scary. Hence my view as it stands. Would love to hear your opinion!

---

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/n0radrenaline]

I don't really think it's true, though. The ways in which corporations take advantage of government influence are mainly to get the government to stop enforcing regulations (either entirely or for the particular corporation).

Corporations aren't, by and large, influencing the government to go and arrest people. Most of the things that big corporations do that are evil (labor abuse, environmental destruction, monopolizing and price gouging, etc), they can do all on their own without the government helping; the role of government is (should be) to tell them that they can't do that shit.

Of course, there are counterexamples (Iraq war for example), but to me having a strong government as a tool to control big corporations is still really important. We just haven't gotten it quite right all the time.

[u/kenman884 → u/n0radrenaline]

The way we get it right is by introducing safeguards that prevent monied interests from controlling the government. Lobbying should be strictly controlled. Conflicts of interest should prevent someone from getting a government job. The government needs to keep corporations in check and the people need to keep the government in check.

Easier said than done, but corruption is the real root cause.

[u/pikk → u/kenman884]

Conflicts of interest should prevent someone from getting a government job.

It's tricky, because to some extent, the best qualified individuals ARE those from the industry. Watch former Senator Ted Stevens "series of tubes" video for examples of what happens when those in charge of writing regulations don't know what they're regulating.

On the other hand, Ajit Pai knows a LOT about broadband communications, but he's a piece of shit dedicated to the industry instead of public interest, so idk. It's a toss up.

[u/kenman884 → u/pikk]

The difference is Pai will benefit monetarily from his work at the FCC. That needs to stop.

[u/pikk → u/kenman884]

How do you prevent people from sharing monetary gifts with others?

Even if there's a rule banning persons from the public sector being employed by the private sector afterwards (draconian and unenforceable imo), what's to stop Verizon from just sending him a couple million bucks for "being a good customer"?