Elon Musk is releasing info that Twitter colluded with government against the people.
So assuming that Twitter is guilty of criminal conspiracy with the State, then it would be funny to see a multi-billion dollar fine on Twitter for its crimes.
When is a company responsible for the actions of its employees, and when should actual humans be punished?
IF actual people were responsible, then we would see less of companies breaking laws. ATM, it is just "cost of doing business".
And this is part of my objection to "companies" in a free society. Corporation is a construct of the State, which leads to a lot of rot in society, which both ancaps and socialists can agree on.
Anarchists want the State to be gone, as we see it as the root of the problem. Socialists just want to control the State for their own good and bad purposes, such as ending corporations and subjugating/oppressing the populous..
bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
@niclas it's a bit OT but what's your view on anarcho-communism?
i read some stuff a bit earlier and came upon the explainer that the anarcho-communist-flavors are only against private property not being governed, while mutualist and ancaps are against states and being ruled by them.
.. which explained in one sentence why the ancoms always gave me a feeling of impending doom. is it really just stalinism for cool kids?
I have tried many times to get answers from ancoms, but most of the time they don't want to discuss principles. But the bottom line seems to come down to;
The ancom's argument is that "Property doesn't exist" and therefor the ancap position is not valid.
But that would, IMHO, mean that you own nothing, are a slave to the collective that you somehow are a part of, but not free from...
I can imagine idealists trying commune living in a free society....Cont'd
... since they seem to refuse my position to be valid; Non-aggression principle, individual autonomy, property rights and voluntary interactions only, then I can't respect their underlying ideology.
I don't think they can encourage all people to sacrifice all for a collective. I think it must be self-serving to the individuals for it to work.
Yes, that is one possible outcome.
Another is that dissent will grow and metastasize in the group and someone will rise and "give me power and I can solve your discontent". (which seems to be the "solution" in mismanaged countries in South America. Promise free stuff, if you put me in power.)
@niclas thanks for the reply! if people decide to work as commune it's of course perfectly fine. that's just a contract after all.
imo the problem with universal ancom is that it's bound to end as hotel california and you can't leave because you own nothing and will die without the group. feels like the wet dream of bullies.