Commonwealth Versus Private-wealth WWII Corporate Power Access to Water is Not a Right

A lot of people died fighting in WWII. Just what exactly were people fighting against? Was it the extermination of the Jews? Was it the protection of the aristocracy from the proletariat? I've always thought it was something else altogether. This quote has always haunted me:

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Benito Mussolini

So when I see how corporate power has gone from limited control to absolute total control over our government in my lifetime I begin to wonder who really won WWII. People died for the right to have publicly owned government. People died so we could have a not-for-profit government for the people by the people. And here 60 years later after WWII our entire government has been outsourced to private corporations.

Here is a good example:

"CEO Of Nestle BUYS OUT Public Water Sources: ‘Human Beings Don’t Have A Right To Water’"

bipartisanreport.com...

"While privatizing America’s public water sources, the CEO of Nestle has spoken out against a human’s right to free drinking water. The 2.5 billion dollar company has been making it’s way around America in order to bully small communities into giving up control of their water sources. Now that the mouthy CEO has people paying attention to the actions of the corporation, it is up to Americans alone to put an end to their power over the thirsty."

“at the World Water Forum in 2000, Nestlé successfully lobbied to stop water from being declared a universal right — declaring open hunting season on our local water resources by the multinational corporations looking to control them. For Nestlé, this means billions of dollars in profits. For us, it means paying up to 2,000 times more for drinking water because it comes from a plastic bottle.”

This is the very core of the idea of what I am trying to get at. From the CEOs perspective access to water is NOT a human right. In my opinion, the merger of corporations with our government where the CEOs decide which human rights people will have access to is what we were fighting against in WWII. And it seems to me this is exactly the government we now have in this country.

We've been conditioned relentlessly by the corporate propaganda to think Big government is our worst enemy. How can anyone argue against privatization not being a good thing?

Anyone who says that a living soul doesn't have a right to water should be imprisoned without a privilege to water until they beg. Then release them and they'll start advocating for the right. Easy solution... If only it was legal.

The people have been fighting a silent war against a thing they don't understand since the corporations were allowed back into the U.S. after the civil war.

The revolutionary war was against corporate entities, companies and the british banking system.

The people who would be familiar with this are twice removed, so nobody remembers anymore.

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
The people have been fighting a silent war against a thing they don't understand since the corporations were allowed back into the U.S. after the civil war.

The revolutionary war was against corporate entities, companies and the british banking system.

The people who would be familiar with this are twice removed, so nobody remembers anymore.

Wow, that is really insightful! I did not know that you could frame the revolutionary war in this way. The idea that the corporations were allowed back into this country after the civil war makes me think of this quote:

"During the Civil War (1861-1865), President Lincoln needed money to finance the War from the North. The Bankers were going to charge him 24% to 36% interest. Lincoln was horrified and went away greatly distressed, for he was a man of principle and would not think of plunging his beloved country into a debt that the country would find impossible to pay back."
"Eventually President Lincoln was advised to get Congress to pass a law authorizing the printing of full legal tender Treasury notes to pay for the War effort. Lincoln recognized the great benefits of this issue. At one point he wrote: "
"(we) gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they have ever had – their own paper money to pay their own debts..."
"The Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back, so the people called them "Greenbacks". "
"Lincoln printed 400 million dollars worth of Greenbacks (the exact amount being $449,338,902), money that he delegated to be created, a debt-free and interest-free money to finance the War. It served as legal tender for all debts, public and private. He printed it, paid it to the soldiers, to the U.S. Civil Service employees, and bought supplies for war.
Shortly after that happened, The London Times printed the following: "If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

I have heard it argued it was British bankers who arranged the Lincoln assassination because he created interest free legal tender. And this paved the way for banking reforms that were in favor of the world banks. Here's a really good history on banking in this country:

www.youtube.com...

It's 3.5 hours are very depressing but informative.

"Give me control of a nations money supply, and I care not who makes it’s laws". Mater Amschel Rothschild

Oy vey!

If there's were a Trump thread there would be 200 comments and 50+ flags. I don't understand it. It makes me think the most of the people posting here everyday are either paid sycophants or just so blinded by their fanatically partisanship they are incapable of making any opinions not in line with the corporate propaganda. Amazing!

Or people just think I'm a jackass and just don't like me. I'll take the silence as agreement.

a reply to: dfnj2015

The old saying " The Truth Will set You Free" is actually complete nonsense in this day and age.

...Only ignorance and good credit will set you free...

But you have to pay it back.

It is not just USA that suffers under the rule of corporatism. In the UK we are also being taken over by the elite class of multinational profiteerers. We have legislation that favours corporations over individuals, the revolving door from high-level politics to boardrooms, the silent transformation of public land into private, the huge growth of private security, the constant MSM harrassment of people to accept that private ownership of resources and even areas like education is not just best for us but also inevitable.

Nevermind, watch most people argue about politicians or religions until it is way too late and the repressive apparatus is all in place.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Silence implies acquiescence,...or maybe it is just that a lot of people don't want to participate in a conversation unless it can be turned into an ATS version of a Jerry Springer-esque nonsense spewing session.

Kinda hard to get into a nonsense spewing session if one has absolutely no concept of what the conversation is actually about.

Wait...Actually somebody will probably show up with something "constructive" to add...

a reply to: dfnj2015
This has been the way about ATS for a while now.

Half-way decent threads to excellent threads rarely go beyond one page and dies on the vine. If you want attention, stars, and or flags, post anything stupid, racist, or inflammatory, facts need not be included, and it will run for at least 4 pages and you will get plenty of stars and flags. Post nonsense and they will come.

Sorry.

Your post is appreciated. The lurkers can't give stars and flags.

a reply to: dfnj2015

...and it was done very deliberately.

SeeL

billmoyers.com...

Where is is discussed and sourced'.

Yet even before the Powell Memo there was:

The evangelical movement as outlined in:

One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America By Kevin Kruse


Where the author details the history of the 'making' of so-called 'christian america':

The assumption that America was, is, and always will be a Christian nation dates back no further than the 1930s, when a coalition of businessmen and religious leaders united in opposition to FDR’s New Deal. With the full support of Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s, these activists—the forerunners of the Religious Right—propelled religion into the public sphere. Church membership skyrocketed; Congress added the phrase “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance and made “In God We Trust” the country’s official motto. For the first time, America became a thoroughly religious nation.

Here's another interesting essay on State/Corporate/Religious 'fascism' a la Mussonlini:

netage.org...

The Fascist conception of life is a religious one, in which man is viewed in his immanent relation to a higher law, endowed with an objective will transcending the individual and raising him to conscious membership of a spiritual society. Those who perceive nothing beyond opportunistic considerations in the religious policy of the Fascist regime fail to realize that Fascism is not only a system of government but also and above all a system of thought.
Benito Mussolini

So it's not only the State (I would argue 'the State' is the least powerful of the troika) but religion as well supporting the ultimate power of Capital.

Capital is the ultimate modern religion. And a cursory reading of the Right's (for simplisity sake) God Adam Smith would show how the so-called free market that Smith wrote of was in fact a tightly regulated one where the 'commons' were protected from the ravages of Capital.

and on and on and on....

It's all a con job.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Ahhh - a good NY Times review of Kevin Kruse's, above referenced, book:

www.nytimes.com...

That concludes;

For that very reason, the presence of four little words of reverence on the currency is quite unremarkable. I doubt any of the long-dead white men whose portraits appear along with the words would have found them objectionable. They may, however, have wondered why they were necessary.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Privatisation, that is, the making of things corporate, which ought to be a matter for the state and the people to have power over, is one of the biggest problems faced by "free societies".

The corporations should be ejected from as many places on the world as possible, in my view. I consider them enemies of freedom.

a reply to: dfnj2015

For the Jews? It wasn't just for the Jews. It was about conquerors and murderers.
Those who don't read history will repeat. Google Nazi scientists. What you thinking of is not WW2. WW2 ended. Now its Corporate Warfare = WW3. Those who control most resources win. Americans had been brainwash to think Capitalism was the way forward. It was until it became out of control and taken over by the greedy rich. Why do you think we had Mafia and gang rise out of United States after WW2? America basically invited the enemy over because they couldn't tell which white race is evil or not, this is in fact Karma. They already sold you out for evil. It is already a mess now. Back to the Wild West with modern warfare.