Re: Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sabri Oncu" <soncu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "PEN-L" <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 8:30 PM
>Subject: [PEN-L:25023] Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism


> Michael writes:
>
> > You are absolutely correct.
> >
> > "Devine, James" wrote:
> >
> >> My impression is that Williamson studies non-market
> >> institutions in order to show that corporate hierarchies
> >> are a good thing.
>
> I don't know whether he studies market or non-market institutions
> but other than that what Jim said was more or less what he told
> me or what I recall from the things he told me: hierarchical
> and/or centralized forms of governance for the institutions of
> capitalism are/can be better than other organizational forms.
>
> Moreover, he had no urge to make use of the word "democracy" as
> he was making his claims. As I heard many times in the business
> world:
>
> "We are a business, we are not a democracy!"
>
> Here is another one:
>
> "We are not in the business of doing good. We do business and
> good comes out of it!"
>
> More or less, that is, as far as I recall.
>
> Sabri

====================

Would that Williamson and his fellow apologists do some actual economic
anthropology and sign up for a stint as a mail room clerk or executive assistant,
a cosmetics salesperson or an air traffic controller or load trucks or be a school
bus driver to see how accurately their categories, narratives and explanations map
the actual lobotomizing practices of today's big firms.

Business administration depts. are the breeding grounds for authoritarian,
autocratic personalities and they ought to be dismantled and rolled into those
remaining departments  that could teach them something about democracy and
manners............

Ian