Talk:Interlocking directorate

POV-check
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)
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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101023130042/http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0624-25.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0624-25.htm

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

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