I acknowledge that any human system has its bright side and its dark side. Capitalism is no different. The dark side of capitalism is that it often sees nothing but the bottom line.
That said, you’ve left out one very important element of the free-market system and capitalism: competition. Competition is the often unacknowledged (or acknowledged and resented) “soul” or “conscience” of the free-market system and capitalism.
IF there is competition, then a corporation, if it loses its “collective soul/conscience” and if it does so to the detriment or disapproval of its market, will lose its customer base and be driven out-of-business. Case in point, the recent Tiger Woods scandal.
The act of incorporating does not cast immorality on the people who run a business anymore than a man of strong moral foundation is necessarily converted into a rioter with the anonymity of a massive crowd.
If a type of business is wrong, pass a law against it. But whatever is legal should be allowed to stand. If the people do not support the business, it will fail. If the people are immoral, then they will support a legal, immoral business.
All of this changes, however, when an enterprise destroys its competition. In such a scenario, they CAN and often DO proceed illegally and immorally.
But I would point to politicians and governments as the greatest example of such monopolistic immorality, not corporations. Thus, I don’t consider it primarily a fault of the free-market system or of capitalism, but of collectivism, which is why I urge the use of the term “corporate socialist” rather than “corporatist,” which is another invented term that was invented to shift focus from the true, underlying cause to a straw man.
Beck recently spent time with a man of strong moral conviction, who is diligently working to die broke. He’s a wonderful exception, roughly three standard deviations above the average modern character.
All too much more typical are the Husseins (WH variety) and the Tigers who, striding boldly across the land, come to believe they are entitled to everything: not just some of everything, but all they want of anything they choose. Too many corporate leaders come to see power and more power as their right, and their bottom line as the gauge of their power. Yes, they then collude, bribe, intimidate, and monopolize — yech!
It won’t happen, but we’d be better off with partnerships, but no corporations. Empire builders would overextend, lose control of their empires, and collapse much more readily than they do now. Humbler men would choose to work within their abilities.
Regarding that, see my post just above on one allowable place the gov’t should intervene in the free market.