[Cynus]

Old style conservatives, paleo-cons, were against bigness per se, big government and big business. However, in the face of communism, they were vehemently pro private property rights and this has allowed big business the opening to destroy their traditional antagonists on the right and replace them with the neo-cons’ subservience to international corporations. The traditional conservative’s ideal was the independent businessman, the shop owner of the traditional American Main Street. These people were the bastions of the middle class, and the pillars of the community not only in an economic sense, but those who provided much of what consider the virtues of community, shared values, interdependence and support, trust. Americans embrace of big business has wiped out these people and replaced the traditional Main Street with the big box stores that blight the American landscape today.
The traditional left found it greatest support among labor groups which required the existence of big business for their own existence. They might have been against management, but they were comfortable with big business as long as it played by certain rules. There is now a movement among the new left, the neo-libs, to emphasize community and localism, to shop local and support local businesses. The arguments given for this support are very similar to what you would hear a Republican circa 1955 espouse, i.e., the already mentioned facts that these people were the bastions of the middle class, and the pillars of the community not only in an economic sense, but those who provided much of what consider the virtues of community, shared values, interdependence and support, and trust. A vehement anti-corporatism is added by the new Left based on the offenses and crimes of corporations in the form of third world labor practices, environmental abuses, the fall in American standard of living, and the fact that profits of corporations go to the top rather than being reinvested in the community. The Democratic party still ignores these voices as it has become as enslaved by corporations as the Republicans have, but the voices are loud and growing. It is one of the interesting juxtapositions that has occurred over the decades where the Right and Left have switched positions.
Into the mix must be thrown Harvard researcher Robert Putnam’s recent findings that diversity is the enemy of community. But as the Left considers itself the champions of diversity, sometime in the future there will arise a conflict between their current infatuation with community and their allegiance to diversity. Just like the religious Right and corporate Right is the Republican coalition today, a coalition that has lasted decades and is currently coming apart, the alliance between racial groups and anti-corporate forces is basically the Liberal coalition today. But Putnam’s work shows that they are basically at odds and will come apart at some time in the future, perhaps decades from now.
It would be fascinating to see a new coalition between the anti-corporate Right and anti-corporate Left.

[Alcassin]

Cynus,

I want to dismiss your argument about origins of big business. Big business appeared as a fruit of industrial revolution, as an effect of great expansion of capital and growth of consumption. We have grown, industrialism needed people for widening scale of production.

Completely new situation occured, and many people made their sociologic, philosophic and economic analisys - Comte, Marx, Mill and so on
The conflict between left and right you describe is similar to the European conflict in 20's and 30's, I know situation in the US is different, but during that time the Right competed with the Left, and main support for fascism came from small business, as fascism secured the private property of means of prodution, and fascist parties were supported by big business during that time. On the second hand you had the Left opposing private property of means of production - supported by workers and excluded groups. They were opposing big business, and abolish the class and change the ownership of factories. They don't need big business to exist, but they still need factories As I said - mass production is an effect of industrial revolution, it's not the idea of shadow 'big business'.

Paleo-cons and the 'old right' don't understand the process of expansion of capital - that the new 'big business' class will emerge from the process of growth. So they will always fight 'with their enemy on the right', and try to revive the 'good old-times' or 'golden age'.

The old difference between right and left is meaningless Cynus. Core values counts. Calling Dems "left" is an exaggeration, really, in the two-party system in the US there is a party of no ideas and the party of bad ideas. There is a perfect definition od American political system - Plutocracy.

I'm not supporter of coalition between Right and Left, the goals are completely different. However it happenned during '60s.
Read: Murray Rothbard "Left and Right".

[lawnchair]

"Big business" is the result of energy. Energy in transport to de-localize. Energy to transport and tech to manage two places at once.

Every little manufacturer and every little merchant wants to grow. None of them knows when to stop. Genetic manifest destiny.

The problem is, big business *will be evil*. Every time that evil is more profitable than not-evil, it will be evil.

Take a small business. He is also a member of the community. He will support his school, because his children go to that school. He will support other businesses if they support him. Intangibles.

Eventually, he needs money to grow. He sells stock. Up to a point, his stockholders care about the same things he does. They want their kids to have good jobs at the factory or the river to be clean.

But, at some size, the owners become disconnected from the problems.

Eventually, you get to the public corporation with "fiduciary responsibility". The executive might have a twinge of remorse. He might say "we can build this in Ohio for a little more and still make a profit". But, the faceless shareholder pool says "you will move to China, because we don't have to pay workers' comp there or install pollution control". If he doesn't do anything and everything that is legal (or not punished adequately) to make as much money as possible, he will be sued by the faceless investment class. Period. It's against the law to support your community if it isn't the most profitable thing for your investors.

So. As a small business man, you can say no. You can say, "I'll be private. I won't grow". But, you'll be up against the Borg of corporations who are allowed no compunction about their externalized effects. Good luck.