I apologize if this post is not well structured.
I recently went down memory lane and saw some Gabe Newell clips. He seems like a decent guy (which is not an argument btw it’s just me pointing it out) and Valve seems like a decent place to work for (also not an argument).
Valve is a private company, with no stock to trade (no shareholders etc) and for most of its time existing it’s worked as a “company with no hierarchy” in the words of employes, as in you could work in a project this week and another project the next, without any upper management telling you what to do (although from what I could gather there’s still organization, just not in the way you’d expect).
While I do understand that private businesses are inherently exploitative and as a communist I seek to abolish such structures in favor of communal structures, am I wrong or misled to see companies like Valve Software as a major step up in comparison to others like Microsoft, Apple and the like? Of course it’d be amazing if it was a worker cooperative, for example, but Valve offers amazing services and products for customers all while not destroying its workers, even though it’s basically a monopoly in the PC market at this point. I also think most of this is due to Gabe Newell’s visions as well as employee feedback, but I have no evidence to back this.
Also, the biggest socialist experiment of the 21st century is China, and some similar company structures formed (like Huawei, for example, although it’s not 100% the same). At least in my naïve view this is a big step up from the big multinational corps, like Nestle, Coca Cola, Microsoft etc.
Anyways: I could always be wrong. Please share your thoughts on this.
Thank you for taking your time to read this and cheers from Brazil!
If you look at Valve’s Glassdoor reviews, you’ll quickly realize that the “work wherever you like policy” is a lie. It’s just another corporation that has a monopoly on selling games.
The interesting part, is that gamers often argue in favor of Valve’s monopoly. This is because it’s convenient to have all the games in one place, rather than having to cycle through multiple accounts and stores to play different games. It kind of defeats the liberal argument of competition is always better.
I mean the argument for Valve’s monopoly will inevitably die whenever it goes public and they start gouging.
It’s always funny to me when people argue for monopolies. The healthiest (capitalist) economies are the ones with the most regulation against them, but when convenience outweighs price and quality, it’s just “nice” to people lol
A nice parallel would be Netflix killing major internet piracy. I still got my free stuff, it’s just that most people didn’t anymore. Ironically piracy is making a comeback now due to convenience not being the focus anymore, with all the different streaming services.
People argue for monopolies because it replicates a style of market that would actually be good under communism. Basically, one main provider that has all the things you need, but doesn’t price gouge and only exists to provide those things to the people. None of that “shopping around” bullshit. You need a thing, you go get it.
it is kinda the dream, of course it just doesn’t go that way when the monopoly has to comply with the compound interest towards it’s stock owners.
A monopoly really is the most blatant display of the fundamentals of each society. One exists to serve the people and provide. The other to take the most advantage of people as is possible.