I don’t think this comment is at the same level as your previous comments though.

At least one of the criticisms you make I already made myself: yes I am aware that big companies can become corrupt, that’s what I meant when I said “they can run amok,” and I specifically named LTCM and Enron.

As for your examples, I wrote a 1000+ word post a few months ago about GM’s problems. I’m not sure what IBM did wrong though. They’re probably the best example of a company successfully reinventing itself (under CEO Louis Gerstner: towards a more service-oriented business model).

You ask where it’s written that business organizations are the most effective way we have to accomplish things: it’s written in this post! It’s not the word of God, it’s an claim I made in order to explore it in this post (and more posts to come).

I’m trying to get beyond the old dualism of socialism vs. capitalism. I used the word “lens” in the title because I’m trying to look at the old conflicts in new ways.
Take careful note of the wording though, I don’t use words carelessly: I’m not saying “capitalism is the best” in absolute terms; I’m saying business organizations are the most effective way we have to accomplish things — to accomplish specific things. And then they go out of business and are replaced.

Unfortunately the one word I really screwed up on was “vs” in the title. It should’ve been “socialism AND capitalism.” I’m doing a critique of both — not favouring one over the other. I’m trying to identify the best features from both in order to conceive something better.

As for my alleged claim that “capitalism is young,” that’s a misreading. I clearly specified it’s a “creative” or “conscious” variety of capitalism — a new way of doing business that isn’t just about making money — that is young.

Did you follow the two links I provided? If you want more sources on the new approach to more enlightened management you can look at Peter Drucker, Abraham Maslow On Management, MacGregor’s Theory Y management, C.K. Prahalad, Bob Sutton and Jeffrey Pfeffer, Thomas Petzinger’s New Pioneers… management theory has been steadily going in the direction of “enlightenment” — beyond the old, simplistic, greed-driven practices and ideas that are at odds with socialist values.

As for your last criticism. the “failure” from your quote was a failure of business people to learn from past mistakes. The word “excuse” doesn’t fit. I didn’t use it and didn’t imply it. There are no excuses in business (or there ought not to be). Private investors notoriously have no time to listen to excuses.

And I didn’t say that failure to learn was because of outside factors, I said “it had less to do with the idea of capitalism and more to do with the social and political background in which it had to operate.”

The key word there is idea of capitalism. I’m not denying it was capitalists or business people that fucked up. I’m saying the reason they fucked up had more to do (not only to do) with what was happening in the world (in the same way that “I understand” how hungry people can be outraged about AIG bonuses), and less to do with some abstract ideology.

I don’t think this comment is at the same level as your previous comments though.

At least one of the criticisms you make I already made myself: yes I am aware that big companies can become corrupt, that’s what I meant when I said “they can run amok,” and I specifically named LTCM and Enron.

As for your examples, I wrote a 1000+ word post a few months ago about GM’s problems. I’m not sure what IBM did wrong though. They’re probably the best example of a company successfully reinventing itself (under CEO Louis Gerstner: towards a more service-oriented business model).

You ask where it’s written that business organizations are the most effective way we have to accomplish things: it’s written in this post! It’s not the word of God, it’s an claim I made in order to explore it in this post (and more posts to come).

I’m trying to get beyond the old dualism of socialism vs. capitalism. I used the word “lens” in the title because I’m trying to look at the old conflicts in new ways.
Take careful note of the wording though, I don’t use words carelessly: I’m not saying “capitalism is the best” in absolute terms; I’m saying business organizations are the most effective way we have to accomplish things — to accomplish specific things. And then they go out of business and are replaced.

Unfortunately the one word I really screwed up on was “vs” in the title. It should’ve been “socialism AND capitalism.” I’m doing a critique of both — not favouring one over the other. I’m trying to identify the best features from both in order to conceive something better.

As for my alleged claim that “capitalism is young,” that’s a misreading. I clearly specified it’s a “creative” or “conscious” variety of capitalism — a new way of doing business that isn’t just about making money — that is young.

Did you follow the two links I provided? If you want more sources on the new approach to more enlightened management you can look at Peter Drucker, Abraham Maslow On Management, MacGregor’s Theory Y management, C.K. Prahalad, Bob Sutton and Jeffrey Pfeffer, Thomas Petzinger’s New Pioneers… management theory has been steadily going in the direction of “enlightenment” — beyond the old, simplistic, greed-driven practices and ideas that are at odds with socialist values.

As for your last criticism. the “failure” from your quote was a failure of business people to learn from past mistakes. The word “excuse” doesn’t fit. I didn’t use it and didn’t imply it. There are no excuses in business (or there ought not to be). Private investors notoriously have no time to listen to excuses.

And I didn’t say that failure to learn was because of outside factors, I said “it had less to do with the idea of capitalism and more to do with the social and political background in which it had to operate.”

The key word there is idea of capitalism. I’m not denying it was capitalists or business people that fucked up. I’m saying the reason they fucked up had more to do (not only to do) with what was happening in the world (in the same way that “I understand” how hungry people can be outraged about AIG bonuses), and less to do with some abstract ideology.

It may be offensive to some that business organizations are the most effective way we have to accomplish things.

Is this written in the sky somewhere? If yes please tell me where…

And that governments become corrupt and have difficulty letting go of ideas that don’t work, cannot the same be said for big companies? IBM, GM and the other North American car manufacturers are examples, amongst so many others.

Capitalism is still young. What about socialism? Is this an old system that has been in place since the Middle Ages? If so I’m not aware of it.

And that markets self regulate by failing companies that do not work out, well seems to me this is a problem. The market is regulating, which means that by the time they do fail these not working companies, a lot of damage has already been done. If the people were managing through government in a well designed democratic system, failures could be acknowledged and dealt with quicker with less damage. But of course this supposes, as said, a better designed democracy.

I agree that Google does have some interesting ideas, but Google is very young and is still managed by a few founders. What will happen when they are gone and managed by people that forget about the ideals and stick to bottom line management?

and failure in this regard had less to do with the idea of capitalism and more to do with the social and political background in which it had to operate (e.g. economic boosterism after 9/11 prevented structural and cultural problems related to dot-com and Enron from surfacing and being eliminated).

It seems to me too easy here blaming these failures on something outside. This could be said about any failure, including government ones.

Again, sorry, if my comments bother you please just let me know, I’ll stay away.

It may be offensive to some that business organizations are the most effective way we have to accomplish things.

Is this written in the sky somewhere? If yes please tell me where…

And that governments become corrupt and have difficulty letting go of ideas that don’t work, cannot the same be said for big companies? IBM, GM and the other North American car manufacturers are examples, amongst so many others.

Capitalism is still young. What about socialism? Is this an old system that has been in place since the Middle Ages? If so I’m not aware of it.

And that markets self regulate by failing companies that do not work out, well seems to me this is a problem. The market is regulating, which means that by the time they do fail these not working companies, a lot of damage has already been done. If the people were managing through government in a well designed democratic system, failures could be acknowledged and dealt with quicker with less damage. But of course this supposes, as said, a better designed democracy.

I agree that Google does have some interesting ideas, but Google is very young and is still managed by a few founders. What will happen when they are gone and managed by people that forget about the ideals and stick to bottom line management?

and failure in this regard had less to do with the idea of capitalism and more to do with the social and political background in which it had to operate (e.g. economic boosterism after 9/11 prevented structural and cultural problems related to dot-com and Enron from surfacing and being eliminated).

It seems to me too easy here blaming these failures on something outside. This could be said about any failure, including government ones.

Again, sorry, if my comments bother you please just let me know, I’ll stay away.