SOPA and PIPA

[Radiant]

Snarky,  I think many people have this same point of view and I have always wondered how they can trust government on somethings but not others.  Unaccountable power is always a danger to liberty, IMHO. 

I have always wondered how people that distrust the government (regardless of whether this distrust is justified) will still trust the kind of corporation that will stoop to any low as long as it makes a profit.

(of course, not all corporations are like that, but some of them are infamous for this)

[RickJ]

Corporations are not necessarily anymore trustworthy than governments but they are more accountable criminally, civilly, and mostly in the marketplace. 

If a corporation screws you over you can easily refuse to future business with them, if they have been negligent or cause damage they can be sued, and if they commit fraud or other crimes there officers and employees can go to jail.   

Try refusing to do business with your government and see who goes to jail.  You can't sue your government except when the government has given permission to do so in their prescribed time and manner. 

The proper role of government is to enforce the rules.  But when they break the rules who will enforce the rules?  How many policemen do you think ever give themselves a citation for having a burnt-out tail light or inadvertently going 5 mph over the speed limit?  In the words of Cesar "Who will guard the guards?".   

[Snarky]

Snarky,  I think many people have this same point of view and I have always wondered how they  can trust government on somethings but not others.  Unaccountable power is always a danger to liberty, IMHO. 

The point isn't that I trust the government more on some things, it's that I think certain exercises of government power (some of them decried by libertarians) are legitimate and benign. There should always be accountability.

And I would argue that a democratic government in a state with civil rights is often in practice more accountable than a corporation. For example, the government is divided into different branches, which are (when the system works) accountable to each other.

It's an inescapable fact that some people have power over others: the strong over the weak. Government is one expression of this fact, but not by far the only one (parents over their children, bosses over their workers, the rich over the poor, the armed over the unarmed, the smart over the stupid, the many over the few). The primary goal of the liberal project over the last several hundred years has been to equalize, regulate and balance these powers against each other (e.g. through the idea of divided government) in order to prevent or at least reduce abuses, which is one way to define liberty.

In the words of Cesar "Who will guard the guards?".   

That's actually the poet Juvenal.

[Radiant]

If a corporation screws you over you can easily refuse to future business with them, if they have been negligent or cause damage they can be sued, and if they commit fraud or other crimes there officers and employees can go to jail. 

That is definitely true for small companies, but it doesn't work so well for big ones with a multimillion dollar legal department.

[RickJ]

That's actually the poet Juvenal.

I stand corrected.    Thanks.  

The point isn't that I trust the government more on some things, it's that I think certain exercises of government power (some of them decried by libertarians) are legitimate and benign. There should always be accountability.

But governments are hardly ever accountable and almost always oppressive.  case in point:
http://www.cdapress.com/news/local_news/article_c17a5b7e-3aea-11e1-bcf0-001871e3ce6c.html

[edit]

That is definitely true for small companies, but it doesn't work so well for big ones with a multimillion dollar legal department.

I don't agree ...
Consumer: http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/boycotts/successfulboycotts.aspx
Civil:           http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants
Criminal:     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff

[Radiant]

But governments are hardly ever accountable and almost always oppressive.  case in point:

I think we all agree that accountability is good. Just as companies are accountable in court so are elected governments accountable to the voters (who can choose not to re-elect them), at least in theory. Unfortunately in both cases, this doesn't always work out in practice.

Given the Trias Politica, to hold anybody accountable a country would need a strong legislative and judicial branch of its government, at least - the first to set standards for entities to be accountable to, and the second to carry it out. These branches need sufficient power to perform their duties, or the whole accountability breaks down.

That is definitely true for small companies, but it doesn't work so well for big ones with a multimillion dollar legal department.

I don't agree ...
Consumer: http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/boycotts/successfulboycotts.aspx
Civil:           http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants
Criminal:     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff

While that's good to hear, it still comes down to two or three successes per year, and that's simply not a good track record.