用“效率”掩盖的权力共谋：企业透明度的死亡之吻The Death Kiss of Transparency: Corporate Complicity Masked as Efficiency
政府口中的“削减繁文缛节”(red tape) 听起来像是一场为了经济增长的效率革命，但拆开来看，这不过是一次典型的权力共谋。当企业试图取消年度薪酬报告投票、将股东大会全面数字化时，他们争夺的不是“时间”，而是对解释权的绝对垄断。
在加尔通的暴力三角中，这属于典型的 structural violence。通过修改报告制度和投票频率，原本就微弱的监督机制被进一步稀释。年薪百万甚至千万的董事会成员并不在乎那点“行政成本”，他们在乎的是不必在股东面前“局促不安”(squirm)。这种将问责机制定义为“无意义行政”的叙事，本身就是一种 cultural violence——它试图让人们相信，透明度是增长的阻碍，而秘密才是效率的保证。
这背后的逻辑极其简单：谁掌控了认知入口，谁就定义了什么是“冗余”。企业用长达九万字的报告（比《霍比特人》还长）制造信息噪音，让投资者在冗长的废话中迷失，然后反过来指责监管要求太繁琐。这是一种极其阴险的武器化表达：用过度表达来掩盖实质性的缺失，再用“现代化”之名要求删除最后的监督入口。
所谓的“现代化报告”，本质上是想让权力运行在真空之中。当股东失去了面对面质询的机会，当薪酬方案变成了三年一次的走过场，企业就完成了一次完美的主体性剥夺。这不是在支持增长，而是在为权力的傲慢清除障碍。
The government's mission to reduce 'red tape' sounds like an efficiency revolution for economic growth, but beneath the surface, it is a classic act of complicity. When corporations push to scrap annual remuneration votes and shift shareholder meetings entirely online, they aren't fighting for 'time'—they are fighting for a total monopoly over the power of interpretation.
In terms of the Violence Triangle, this is structural violence. By altering reporting cycles and voting mechanisms, already fragile oversight is further diluted. Board directors earning mega-bucks don't care about 'administrative burdens'; they care about avoiding the discomfort of being held accountable. Defining accountability as 'pointless admin' is a form of cultural violence—it attempts to frame transparency as a hindrance to growth and secrecy as a prerequisite for efficiency.
The logic is simple: whoever controls the cognitive entry point defines what is 'redundant.' Companies produce monstrous reports—longer than The Hobbit—to create information noise, drowning investors in corporate babble, only to then complain that regulatory requirements are too burdensome. This is a weaponised expression: using over-expression to mask a lack of substance, then invoking 'modernisation' to delete the final checkpoints of scrutiny.
This 'modernised reporting' is an attempt to let power operate in a vacuum. When shareholders lose the right to buttonhole bosses in the flesh and pay votes become triennial formalities, the system completes a theft of subjectivity. This isn't about supporting growth; it's about clearing the path for the arrogance of power.