Not a rebuttal but rather an extension that has been on my mind for some time:
how does PN's theory of the self-preserving and self-perpetuating (are those different?) nature of a corporation fundamentally differ from the nature of any other power-gathering institution, individual or social?
Consider his clever summary:
"Externalize risk and perpetuate wealth for shareholders."
Now replace shareholders with whatever individual/group that a given institution is set up to serve the interest of (honestly shareholder still works, though maybe interest-holder is closer) - I would even venture to include non-profits and charities.
how does PN's theory of the self-preserving and self-perpetuating (are those different?) nature of a corporation fundamentally differ from the nature of any other power-gathering institution, individual or social?
Consider his clever summary:
"Externalize risk and perpetuate wealth for shareholders."
Now replace shareholders with whatever individual/group that a given institution is set up to serve the interest of (honestly shareholder still works, though maybe interest-holder is closer) - I would even venture to include non-profits and charities.
An interesting history, and useful narrative.