Interjection: This is patently wrong. The misunderstanding comes from the fact that Capitalism, an economic system in which the state gives concessions to those with capital, is NOT THE SAME THING as Free Market, an economic system that does not require the state to function and gives no preference to any one group.
A Corporation, an artificial statist construct, is granted 'personhood' by the ruling fiat state. A truly free market (an agorist anarchy or an agorist democracy) would never allow such an abolishion of responsibility as a 'corporation'. Therefore CorporateGovernment cannot be a result, much less 'the inevitable result of a FreeMarket?'.
Quite the opposite: CorporateGovernment is the direct result of a corrupt government. Corporations, via lobbyists, bribe the staqte with hundreds of thousands of dollars, and receive billions of dollars in tax breaks, contracts, laws etc. ---
Corporations are not directly accountable to people. "Voting with your wallet" isn't sufficient to build a stable, plutocratic society: monopologies, demagoguery and a general lack of checks and balances skew it completely. What makes this system so fundamentally wrong is the inhumanity of it, as despite being composed of human beings, corporations don't act like one in the least: they prey on humans, manipulating them and controlling them through product placements and exclusionary contracts.
They maximize shareholder value. Nothing personal, Jack.
Eventually, the system becomes so twisted and so bizarre that the corporations put into place a system of CorporateWelfare.
This seems to be the main fault of Capitalism as well as CorporateGovernment. The company executives believe that they have to maximize profit, and therefore ignore humanitarian and environmental costs. -- anon
Factoid: As of the year 2000, the top 100 corporations own 33% of the world's wealth and employ 1% of the world's population.
One of the prime motivations behind the GlobalResistanceByUndergroundNetworkedTechnologists?