The Rise of Neofeudalism in Corporate Governance

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Rashna, Jul 13, 2015.

  1. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    Mutation of Medieval Feudalism Into Modern Corporate Capitalism: The Rise of Neofeudalism in Corporate Governance…



    Feudalism
    is still alive and well in today’s modern corporate world, in spirit and intent… Question: What is the most enduring and stable system of economic and social order the world has ever known? It’s not capitalism, or socialism, or dictatorship: It’s feudalism… Feudalism was primary political system of the Middle Ages (9th to 15th Centuries). The system came about, for the most part, because the reigning king had two major woes; he couldn’t keep the people from rebelling and he couldn’t take care of all his land. In order to solve these problems, the king created the feudal system, in which he would give sections of land, called fiefs, to his most important nobles, barons and bishops in exchange for their services and their loyalty… Peasants or ‘serfs’ were considered to be the lowest of the lower class, and rather than being given land in exchange for loyalty, they were forced to work the land, and the lord of that land would offer them protection… The brilliance of this system is that it ‘killed two birds with one stone’, solving both of the king’s problems– he now had control over both, people and land…

    Though brilliant in its conception, feudalism was a biased hierarchy of authority, rights, power… that extended from monarchs downward, creating an intricate network of obligatory situations that infringed on almost every basic human right… Thus with growth of commerce and industry, feudalism gradually gave way to the class system as the dominant form of social ranking… Feudalism means different things to different people and its origins depend on its meaning: Narrowly defined, feudalism is a system in which a weak central government distributes its power to people who support it… The strength of such a system is that a problem that develop at a local level can be dealt with faster than it could be if the central government had to mobilize to deal with it… According to Dredd blog; feudalism– feudal society was a military hierarchy in which a king or ruler offers a fief, a unit of land to control in exchange for a military service… The feudal society was constructed for one reason: Security… The nobles wanted the security for maintaining control over their far-reaching kingdoms, and like wise the peasants who worked the land for the nobles wanted security from robbers, marauders, barbarians. However all this came at great expense for the common man: He gave up his many freedoms for security…

    [​IMG]

    According to JacobSloan; everything old is new again– make note of the growing belief that modern sociopolitical structures increasingly resemble those that were found in feudalist societies– a concept called neofeudalism: Among the issues claimed to be associated with the idea of neofeudalism in contemporary society are class stratification, globalization, immigration, open borders policies, multinational corporations, and ‘neo-corporatism’… According to Scott Powell; the fundamental feudalism relationship was the basic form of barter, which defines every feudal relationship– ‘land for loyalty’… In this barter arrangement, a vassal was granted territory (a fief or feud) by his lord in exchange for various expressions of loyalty. Whenever the lord required an army in defense of broader objectives, the vassal was to provide a levy of knights and fighters from his land, and in exchange the vassal’s claim to his land was sanctioned and protected by his lord. If one landholder’s claim was threatened by another it was the lord’s obligation to arbitrate the relative claims of his vassals and to interpose his military might when needed. This type of relationship existed at every level in the medieval social hierarchy, from serfs and farmers to knights, barons, counts and dukes, all the way up to kings and emperors…

    In the article Modern Feudal State? by Aglaya writes: Feudalism is the system whereby political and economic power is held by a relatively small group of capital owners who permit their capital to be worked or used by the large majority of landless people for their subsistence. The landless have little or no political power of their own, but in a stable system are guaranteed a basic set of rights… Europe through most of its history, since the Dark Ages, was a series of feudal states, which remained remarkably stable for hundreds of years, until power was slowly devolved to larger and larger groups of people… Also, the very stable Asian societies in Japan, and especially China have long been feudal in nature…

    The basic contract in the feudal state is the majority of the population will be content to remain relatively uneducated, unsophisticated, and unambitious. They will demand little more than a job through which they can feed, clothe and house their families. They will expect a basic level of fairness within their class, guarantees of protection by their lords, and perhaps some government entitlements, e.g.; healthcare, free education, and the ability to retire before death (although these last three are mostly represented in a modern feudal state, they are not historically traditional one). In return, the holders of capital are allowed to be wealthy, comfortable and separated from the majority, so long as they provide the basic measures of subsistence to the landless… Although to most people’s psyche this social contract may appear grossly unfair and extremely repressive, it has, nonetheless, proven unequivocally to be the most successful in history, in terms of pure longevity…

    [​IMG]

    In the article Corporate Feudalism: The End of Nation States by Steve Lovelace writes: Feudalism developed in the medieval ages when communication and transportation were both scarce and unreliable. Kings had little control over the day-to-day affairs of their kingdoms, and most of the power was held by the lords and barons. Borders, as we know them, did not exist and instead there was property and allegiances… Then over time, advances in technology allowed nation states to form, and national borders became much more rigid. To this day, people still think in terms of nations and borders, but times are changing…

    The same technological advances that built the nation-state are now leading its demise. The Internet and modern communications allows companies to have employees and suppliers anywhere in the world. Container shipping allows goods to be made in the cheapest places possible. Air travel allow people across the earth to have the same cultural experience, the same points of reference. This means that a company can incorporate in Delaware, design goods in California, produce them in China, ship them on a Norwegian ship registered in Liberia, and sell them all over the world. Tech support can be based out of India, and the executives making the money can keep their money in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. This kind of thing happens everyday, and the ramifications are just beginning to be felt. Ultimately, this will lead to the return of feudalism… As the power of multinational corporations grows, you will find a weakening of nation states: Corporate oligarchy will be the new norm…

    In the article Feudalism in America? by absurdistan dan writes: The term ‘feudalism’ elicits images of kings in their vast, fortified castles, knights in their armor defending the land, and poor peasants working their land from dawn to dusk. Feudalism was a strict social hierarchy in Medieval Europe and was certainly an oppressive political and economic system from the tenth century that disappeared after the fifteen century… Except that it hasn’t disappeared: Feudalism’s success wasn’t due purely to the strict separation between different social classes, but rather the fact that the population accepted their class standing in society… The American dream’s selling point is that hard work over a long period of time allows people to support their family and allow them the benefits of home ownership… Except serfdom was often defined as serfs who were bound to the land which they worked to pay taxes to their lords…

    Then fast forward to modern times; as an intelligent person I keep asking myself: Why do I work as I do? A part of me knows that the only reasons I’m still working is because of the large bonus everyone in the industry looks forward to at the end of the year. The bonus that one day will release me from the tyranny of corporate slavery and allow me to do something more enjoyable like running my own business or investing in other people’s businesses. Basically, it will grant me the freedom to one day be able to live my life on my own terms, and not be stuck in the office late into the early morning, on weekends and be subject to menial tasks… Little did we all know that we were actually signing our lives away to serfdom. But if anything, this was the job that gave me the best chance to one day free myself from modern-day serfdom… A prominent politician once said; in today’s modern world the corporation is the lord and master, and most of its employees have been desensitized much as were the medieval peasants who never knew they were serfs…

    [​IMG]

    In the article Corporations Are Feudal Manifestations by Russ writes: Contrary to popular belief, there’s nothing modernistic about the corporation. On the contrary, they’re a carryover phenomenon from feudalism… The corporation originally arose out of medieval guilds and the monopoly charter. This charter was also called a ‘searching and sealing patent’ and it had nothing to do with production of goods or services. The charter-holder, who generally was some royal crony, did not produce or do anything… So corporations were one form in which elites tried to continue their feudal prerogatives into the 19th century… According to Ted Nace; what is not as well-known is that, long after ratification of U.S. Constitution and the adoption of the Bill of Rights, most aspects of employer-employee relations continued to be regulated by a common law legal structure that continued to enforce the principles of privilege and hierarchy derived from the feudal society of the late Middle Ages…

    As explained by political scientist Karen Orren; The original, mainly landholding, masters had long since been overtaken by business owners and managers; however, their privileges remained and passed on to their successors largely intact… The power of employers over their workers was considered a private relationship, where normal constitutional rights did not necessarily apply. Thus, common law also permitted measures of enforcement that were unacceptable in other social realms… This is the atmosphere in which feudal practices were being carried over into modern age of nominal capitalism and democracy…

    [​IMG]

    Few political systems have shown the adaptiveness and longevity of feudalism. The system that was based on personal relationships, local administration and defined hierarchies, touched several continents for more than 1,500 years. Feudalism grew out of practice, precedent and code of values and aesthetics that developed into ‘chivalry’ in the West and ‘bushido’ in the East… According to Lynn Nelson; feudalism has transcended many centuries that even in the modern society there are institutions that have retained strong feudal elements… Keep in mind the basic characteristics of feudalism, one can easily observe, is what has passed on to society in modern times…

    According to Victor Baines; modern life seems to have ‘de-evolved’ into a strange and difficult to define state of economic existence; if you are wealthy person and or successful business owner, you might be doing well (in economic sense) but, if you are a ‘former member of the working middle class’– it should be easy for you to relate to questions that I raise: What the F%#K happened to all the jobs? Where the F@*k did they all go to? How the h#$L am I suppose to make a living these days? These are the questions that many people are asking! So much for saving for retirement– people are simply trying to make it week-to-week, and month-to-month! This is the unspoken state of economic existence… its modern-day feudalism…

    http://bizshifts-trends.com/2014/08...alism-rise-neofeudalism-corporate-governance/
     
    rockey 71 likes this.
  2.  
  3. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
  4. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    32,890
    Likes Received:
    18,846
    Location:
    EST, USA
    No need to end the thread title with triple dots. The ellipsis has a different purpose.
     
  5. Screambowl

    Screambowl Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    5,884
    Likes Received:
    5,049
    Location:
    N/A
    One may call it neofeudalism, capitalism, socialism, anarchy .. the only point which holds among hundreds of definition is , might is right.

    There is no difference between Capitalism and Feudalism . Just some fancy words given to edit the constitution. Because even in Capitalism, the order is fixed. Capitalist will not allow others to rise , that's monopoly.

    To maintain the market a feudal or capitalist will invest accordingly and will ask government to turn policies in such a way that he is profited. Depending on what business he is doing.
     
  6. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    Yes, because heads on pikes in the feudal raj and making you work overtime in your AC office are pretty much the same thing.

    Feudalism still exists in some capacity or other in UP, Bihar and Northern MP. Author will need a healthy stock of adult diapers to visit those places and then he/she is free to compare it with the posh corporate offices.

    @Rashna , lady where do you find these things?

    This reminds me of the morons who compare Gujarat 2002 with the Holocaust.:scared2:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2015
  7. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    I found this on the telegraph...This isn't about the traditional type of feudalism... What this article is talking about is that corporate feudalism has replaced traditional feudalism but that it is by far the most resilient.
    Not too long ago we had a buzz that the BJP victory was a victory of Corporate India, and a lot of the government's new plans like 'make in India', land acquisition etc are centered around what corporates want. I think you need to read this in its entirety and then make some comment. I am not a socialist but this article does raise some important questions about our system of governance and how serfdom still exists in another form.


     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2015
  8. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    @Rashna , only the people unfamiliar with sheer brutality (rarely but still) that came with the feudalism will compare it to any kind corporate grievances. It's just stupid.
     
    TrueSpirit2 likes this.
  9. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    A lot of people who are on the internet are unfamiliar with brutality. But in a country where huge number of people can barely feed themselves we ought to be questioning why our social inequalities have yet to end.
    We want to take people out of agriculture and bring them towards productive employment.The question remains can we provide employment to all these people who are struggling to make ends meet even in their current occupation.


     
  10. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    If you want to discuss the "gareeb kisan" start a different thread and we can do that. I am just here to point out the absurdity of the article. Here's another example but its comedy so they get a pass.

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    Its Kisan v/s corporate in the context of the land acquisition bill. So this topic is an apt place to discuss neo feudalism.. There is nothing absurd in this article, you need to stop watching hitler didi and come back with better repartees.



     
  12. Ancient Indian

    Ancient Indian p = np :) Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2014
    Messages:
    2,955
    Likes Received:
    3,089
    Location:
    Everywhere
    There is nothing to discuss about this.

    I always get an headache after reading these over defined articles.

    Th westards need to be primitive and be simple when writing some thing.

    There are things which exist irrespective of time.

    But Indian Constitution is one of the greatest things I ever come across. GOI is much more powerful than people give credit.

    So STFU before accusing modi government of any stupid thing.
     
  13. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    It is not even remotely as complicated as the political correctness and vote bank politics has made it out to be. I have farm land of my own and will sell it the moment I get good prices from either the govt or the corporate. Same cannot be said of the barely literate emotional fools that are your Kisans.

    Your average (emphasis on average) Kisan is a thick headed fool who has no concept of money management, modern farming techniques and is a firm believer of status quo.

    My cousin is about to start a green house and will earn multiple times than the Kisan who sold him the land 3 months back. To whom will you chalk up this injustice of rich getting richer and poor getting poorer?

    Whatever you say didi.
     
    TrueSpirit2 and alphacentury like this.
  14. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    And what do you have to say about "rich" farmers? Where do they fit in to your grand plan of intelligent money makers?They are the ones who are opposing the land acquisition bill, the poorest of the poor do not even know anything about this bill yet. Rich farmers don't need the government's money, its the poor farmers who can barely eke out a living that need it.
    What you seem to be saying is that an illiterate poor farmer with no means (and dependent on nature's vagaries) is to be blamed for his condition.
    In China the govt. controls farming and agriculture. You think the chinese peasants and farmers are having mensa level iq?

    Below you can read what China did long ago to change their agricultural landscape and in China too industrialization has led to people moving out agriculture, but before they ventured in to this they made jobs available to the displaced population. Even then the situation is far from perfect.

    I am not against land acquisition but i am against taking away livelihood from people who are not skilled to take up any other occupation. The govt. should have focused on turning agriculture in to a structured industry like China did, or closer to home look at the Amul revolution, although in the dairy farming context but that exercise brought dairy farmers under one umbrella and brought about a revolution in India.


    Beginning in 1978, as part of the Four Modernizations campaign, the Family Production Responsibility System was created, dismantling communes and giving agricultural production responsibility back to individual households. Households are now given crop quotas that they were required to provide to their collective unit in return for tools, draft animals, seeds, and other essentials. Households, which now lease land from their collectives, are free to use their farmland however they see fit as long as they meet these quotas. This freedom has given more power to individual families to meet their individual needs. In addition to these structural changes, the Chinese government also engages in irrigation projects (such as the Three Gorges Dam), runs large state farms, and encourages mechanization and fertilizeruse.

    By 1984, when about 99% of farm production teams had adopted the Family Production Responsibility System, the government began further economic reforms, aimed primarily at liberalizing agricultural pricing and marketing. In 1984, the government replaced mandatory procurement with voluntary contracts between farmers and the government. Later, in 1993, the government abolished the 40-year-old grain rationing system, leading to more than 90 percent of all annual agricultural produce to be sold at market-determined prices.

    [​IMG]
    Lotus seeds and roots are a major crop in Hubei, Hunan,Fujian, and Jiangxi provinces

    Since 1994, the government has instituted a number of policy changes aimed at limiting grain importation and increasing economic stability. Among these policy changes was the artificial increase of grain prices above market levels. This has led to increased grain production, while placing the heavy burden of maintaining these prices on the government. In 1995, the "Governor’s Grain Bag Responsibility System" was instituted, holding provincial governors responsible for balancing grain supply and demand and stabilizing grain prices in their provinces. Later, in 1997, the "Four Separations and One Perfection" program was implemented to relieve some of the monetary burdens placed on the government by its grain policy.

    As China continues to industrialize, vast swaths of agricultural land is being converted into industrial land. Farmers displaced by such urban expansion often become migrant labor for factories, but other farmers feel disenfranchised and cheated by the encroachment of industry and the growing disparity between urban and rural wealth and income.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_China

     
  15. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    480
    Likes Received:
    361
    Location:
    Nothingness
    Sorry , but I couldn't find definition of "neo-feudalism" , in the above article.

    So please define it, and also compare it with "feudalism" , as it existed before.
     
  16. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    480
    Likes Received:
    361
    Location:
    Nothingness
    @Rashna, seriously are you going to compare China's land holding pattern with India's ?

    The "community ownership" and the private ownership is the difference , between the two.
     
    TrueSpirit2 and blueblood like this.
  17. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    This ownership did not happen in a vacuum did it? We did away with zamindari and feudalism long back but never treated agriculture as an industry which needed as much attention as any other sector, more so because it employs such a large part of our working population.
    We missed an important step in the middle and directly want to get in to acquiring lands. Its nice to say we want land for industrialization and now take ownership of land, but where is the back up plan for this displaced population.
    Our cities are already bursting at the seams, what kind of tidal wave will this trigger?

     
  18. Rowdy

    Rowdy Co ja kurwa czytam! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    3,256
    Likes Received:
    3,003
    Location:
    Milky Bar
    You mean like JAM trilogy and direct transfer subsidies and skill india and Digital India?
     
    TrueSpirit2 and blueblood like this.
  19. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    You are so massively unqualified for this conversation that its not even funny.

    Rich farmers are rich for plenty of reasons, hardwork, intelligence, exploitation of labour or just plain old luck. If I am rich farmer who is making more money than what the govt. is offering, I too will protest the bill. How can this simple economics be too tough for you to understand?

    OTOH if I am a poor farmer with little land i.e. less than 5 acres I have limited options.

    So, farmers doubling down as migrant labourers is news to you. As I said, massively unqualified.

    Comparing Indian and Chinese agriculture is like comparing rotis and noodles. For the love of God, don't do it again.

    But if you still insist, you can also add that farmers in US have farms spanning kilometers. Let's ponder over their plight too.
     
    TrueSpirit2 likes this.
  20. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    You forgot DD kisan.. Talk of confusion and mixed signals.
     
  21. Rashna

    Rashna Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    695
    Location:
    India
    You should bother about being a feudal who scoffs down on the lowly masses. Leave my qualification out of this.
    You are obviously entranced by being rich and do not understand the subject as you have never seen the "brutality" of life in India as a poor person.

     

Share This Page