Chuck Blakeman commented on Book Review – Threshold: The Crisis of Western Culture:

Hartmann is dead on with a lot of his analysis here including attributing “personhood” to corporations. But he misses the mark on one very essential thing – the issue is not with capitalism or free markets; the issue is “the problem of big”.

He rightly decries the wealth and decision-making being placed into the hands of .01% of the business population, then goes on to explain that by putting the decision-making into the hands of .01% of politicians, we can fix this. People aren’t different or better because they are in government. Business people are focused on preserving wealth and politicians are focused on preserving their power. And both are focused on their individual survival. None of that makes for good decision-making on either side.

The problem is size. Size of business, size of government and the resulting accumulation of power and decision-making into those few hands. The reason size is a problem is simple. The old adage is that “all politics is local.” That of course is an oversimplification but has a lot of truth to it. The same is true for problems – “All problems are local.” Again, with exceptions. Certainly most problems and most politics are local.

The problem with “big” is that both corporations and government make macro-decisions to solve micro-problems, and every time they do it, somebody gets left out, hurt or dismissed in order to make a macro-decision that is in the best interests of the greatest majority of their customers.

How much outcry is there about local government throughout our nation? Virtually none. How much outcry is there about small business and its deleterious effects on our nation? Virtually none. All of the ire is directed at either big business or big government. This is no surprise because with size comes the in-built inability to understand the problems at a local level. So the best of intentions in decision-making create more problems at the local level. And the worst of intentions at the macro-level have an exponentially bad effect locally.

All of us have the propensity to make decisions that focus on the good of others or on preserving our own position. A macro-capitalist focused on preserving their own wealth to the detriment of others can make macro-decisions that negatively impact a lot of people A macro-politician at the national level focused on preserving power will have the same negative effect.

The radical solution is to ensure decision-making in both government and business is not concentrated in the hands of the few, and that macro-decisions are not used to solve micro-problems. Push as many decisions down the food chain as possible. This is difficult for both national politicians and big business leaders because they lose some control over their own wealth or power.

In 2009 our economy was rated by the NSA as a higher threat to our national security than terrorism. Was this a problem of local government or small business? No. One side blames big government for demanding that mortgage companies allow everyone to buy a house whether they could afford it or not, and the other blames big business for doing that because they were greedy.

I would say that macro-solutions by both big government and big business that were made to accumulate both wealth (macro-business) and power (macro-government) worked together to create the problem.

As both of them grow bigger, we all suffer the consequences. The irony of focusing on big government to solve the problem of big business is that big business is more likely to self-regulate than big government. A greedy business eventually falls in on itself, but a power hungry government expands endlessly. How many greedy companies are still in business two hundred years later? Or even fifty? How much bigger is our government than it was 200 hundred years ago? A hundred years ago? Fifty years ago? Last year?

Both of them are the wrong place to look for solutions to most of our problems, which are usually more local. There is a place for big government and big business to solve macro problems with macro solutions. But most problems as with most politics are local. The less we allow for the accumulation of power and wealth into the few hands of macro-business and macro-government, the better we can find solutions to the problems around us. Capitalism would flourish with more and smaller competition, and societal problems would find much better solutions closer to home than in D.C.

“Big” is the problem for both government and business.

Chuck Blakeman is a business consultant and coach.  He shares his thoughts on business, growth, and success in his blog, http://blog.teamnimbuswest.com.