Talk:Interlocking directorate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Phrases line "They help the upper class maintain a class advantage, and gain more power over workers and consumers" along with a collection of citations that appear to overrepresent one political philosophy makes me question whether the article has a neutral point of view. Guy Macon (talk) 00:36, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

These are factual statements from a social science perspective e.g., critical theory, and should be accepted just like in any other encyclopedia. If someone wishes to include a non-academic or capitalist/opposing perspective, this can be done by adding that to the article.BRodriguez222 (talk) 16:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that they are factual or from a single perspective, but I do agree that they are commonly accepted by social theorists, and are coming from high-quality academic sources, so there is no reason that they should not be included. I also agree that perceived problems with NPOV are fixed by presenting and including alternative sources, rather than just complaining about it. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 17:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the tag based upon the above. I just wanted another set of eyes to look at it. Thanks! Guy Macon (talk) 21:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Critical Theory is hardly factual. But this marxist ideology does play a role in advancing the power of these councils. And that's not capitalism, it's crony capitalism. EyePhoenix (talk) 22:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
The way it works is that your buddies sit on your Board of Directors, and you sit on theirs, then you all vote each other sky-high raises. This can happen whether or not the company is doing well, and the ordinary workers - the people who get the job done - might be getting no increase, or a few extra peanuts thrown their way at the very most. So "help the upper class maintain a class advantage" seems like a pretty straightforward statement of fact.
Also, obviously this is detrimental to the shareholders, since the exorbitant CEO salaries could instead be going into dividends. Just wondering - has anyone challenged this arrangement in court on the grounds of conflict of interest? Afalbrig (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Interlocking directorate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:33, 20 January 2018 (UTC)