The Amorality Of Corporate Monopolies

The fear that monopolies will inevitably prove to be destructive forces, like the fear that certain forms of government will always result in tyranny, is rooted in mere assumptions about the nature of power and corporate-political ethics.  It follows that the owners of genuine monopolies or near-monopolies do not act selfishly or maliciously simply by preserving the status of their companies.  Consider a hypothetical scenario where Company A has an entrenched monopoly over its main market and Company B, a creative but small business, targets the same market.

Suppose Company A has maintained almost exclusive control over the primary market it caters to (or even absolute control).  Company B, a small but successful firm that has only recently formed, is identified as a potential threat.  Recognizing the influence Company B might acquire in several years, Company A drowns out the rival's marketing with a massive marketing campaign of its own, relying on its enormous pool of resources, some of them tangible (money) and some of them intangible (an established, positive reputation).

If an actual corporation handled a threatening company in such a manner, it would not have misused its power.  Company A (or any real corporation with a mammoth grip on its markets) only errs if it uses illicit methods to preserve its power--methods like slander, deception, murder, or threats of physical violence.  All other methods are legitimate, even if they are rooted in the extreme difference in the resources and influence of the two firms--things that would certainly not be equal.

Monopolies themselves are amoral, as there is no amount of power that is immoral; it is only how a monopoly firm uses its power that can be unethical.  Of course, it is easy to stir up anti-monopoly sentiments in some circles, as large companies and very focused concentrations of power are often seen as morally suspect even when there is no evidence of actual wrongdoing.  These sentiments are the result of emotionalistic biases against a particular company or business itself.

Some businesses might use illegitimate methods to obtain their power and then use illegitimate methods to preserve it, but that does not mean that larger companies should be baselessly treated as if they are built on corporate misdeeds.  No one has sinned by constructing or running a corporate empire that monopolizes in one or more markets.  As such, it is people who assume negative things about firms with the status of near-monopolies that are in error, not the companies themselves, even if they actively thwart competition using legitimate methods that the rival firms do not have access to.