From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Why vote Libertarian?
Date: 6 Apr 92 19:09:58 GMT
Distribution: usa,local
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU

In article <1992Apr6.100838.4157@athena.mit.edu> solman@athena.mit.edu (Jason W Solinsky) writes:
>In article <bma0hy.ff3@wang.com>, fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) writes:

>|> When will we get a party that's libertarian on civil-liberties issues, but
>|> regards businesses as potential threats to individual rights, just as the
>|> government is?  This party would do _very_ well.

>Business represents normal people spending money.Business has no power to force
>anybody to do anything. The only thing that a business is able to do is spend
>money. They get power over people, because people are willing to do things for
>them in exchange for goods and services. There is absolutely no philosophical
>basis for what you suggest. The only ways that businesses are limmited, are by
>governmental regulations that detract from the freedom of their owners.

See, I'm a civil libertarian, and am for intelligent government
policieis towards business (rather than plain antagonism) but *this* is
the thing that keeps me from being a Libertarian.  This total naivety, with 
a complete lack of historical perspective.

Have you heard of company towns?  Have you studied the history of the US
around the turn of the century?  Do you know how Pinkertons got started?

Why is government able to infringe on people's rights?  Because it is
big and has lots of power.  Major corporations have, or in the past have had, 
the exact same powers that government has to infringe on people's rights.  
That is, they're big and they've got lots of money, which can buy power.

Maybe in the long run the market *would* deal with these companies, but
30 or 40 years is too long to wait for most people.  (We hear some libs
pointing out how even major companies are ephemeral; even GM is losing power 
now, they say, thanks to the market.  This is true, but it took a really
long time for this to happen.

Which brings up a question I've had, which I hope the net.libs can
answer.  What's the Libertarian position on incorporation?  As far as I
can see, a true Lib should oppose the concept; a company is a bunch of
people getting together to do something, not a government defined person.
Incorporation prevents accountability; in the example someone gave about
a factory which leaks carcinogens, they pointed out that the EPA limits
liability, but that without it, the company would have incentive to NOT
pollute.  But as long as you have corporations, in which they can declare 
bankruptcy if too many people sue them, and in which the executives are 
not responsible, then Libertarian liability-accountability doesn't work.

>Jason W. Solinsky

-- 
David M. Nieporent              |ALEast 92: 1.Baltimore 2.Boston 3.Toronto
niepornt@phoenix.princeton.edu  |4. Detroit 5.Milwaukee 6.NY 8.Cleveland
"Baseball stathead, and card-carrying member of the ACLU.  And proud of it."
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:699 bit.listserv.politics:5718 talk.politics.theory:1988