It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nader calls U. S. "corporate fascism"

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on May, 15 2008 @ 04:03 AM
reply to post by kosmicjack

Hence the statement:

Government is merely a shadow of business

The chafe has grown intertwined within the harvest.

To kill either would be the death of both.

Let them remain intertwined. Perhaps a new strain of reform is in need under a new party.

America will need to educated herself greatly to break free of this bond.


posted on May, 15 2008 @ 05:54 AM
Personally, I think electoral reform is needed in many countries, including my own.

We simply cannot afford to keep feeding the monster that takes us to war on the flimsiest of pretexts, just so the fatcats can get fatter.

2 and 3 party systems are all very well, but in reality, all we doing is voting for a different way to preserve the status quo.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 08:10 AM
Here is a scary report on the results of our apathy. I am quite sure many of the TSA agents are contract employees for some corporate fat cat in bed with the CorpGov:

Excerpt, but do read the entire account:

Sunday, this editor and his colleague faced the Chertoffian menace at Washington's Reagan National Airport while heading to the gate to board a flight to Houston.

It is now clear from a review of the events that unfolded that I was pre-selected for an intensive search and battery of questions even before arriving in line for the security screening. A Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screener was overheard saying, "the guy with the beard." Since I was the only person in line who also had a beard, it was evident that a red flag had earlier been raised.

What followed, was worse than anything I had previously encountered while leaving Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport, itself a revolting display of ingratitude to citizens of the country that bankrolls Israel, or the Israeli-run screening process at Amsterdam's Schipol Airport...

I am sure that many of you are familiar with Wayne Madsen. I guess dissidents can expect more and more of this. How much longer are we going to take this? Are we so complacent in our cushy suburban lives that we will turn a blind eye to these types of outrages? Until it happens to us...

[edit on 15/5/08 by kosmicjack]

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 08:32 AM

Originally posted by Shar_Chi

The real question is how do you fix it?

the Only way to start to fix it. ... Is to Vote Nader,

only when/if getting the office his administration can begin to De-construct
the corporate-fascist oligarchy, and the duopoly of political parties...

the first 8 years will only be the start of the constitution being rebuilt into the fabric of America

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:00 AM
Reforming "Corporate Personhood" laws would be a step away and in a new direction for our country, the direction the founders had originally intended.

One of the most severe blows to citizen authority
arose out of the 1886 Supreme Court case of
Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific
Railroad. Though the court did not make a ruling
on the question of “corporate personhood,”
thanks to misleading notes of a clerk, the decision
subsequently was used as precedent to hold
that a corporation was a "natural person."
From that point on, the
14th Amendment, enacted
to protect rights of freed
slaves, was used routinely
to grant corporations
Constitutional “personhood.”
Justices have since
struck down hundreds of
local, state and federal laws
enacted to protect people
from corporate harm based
on this illegitimate premise.
Armed with these “rights,”
corporations increased control
over resources, jobs,
commerce, politicians,
even judges and the law.
Over the next half century,
as a United States
Congressional committee concluded in 1941,
"The principal instrument of the concentration
of economic power and wealth has been the corporate
charter with unlimited power...."
Many U.S.-based corporations are now transnational,
but the corrupted charter remains the legal
basis for their existence. By rewriting the laws
governing corporations in such fundamental
ways as the following, we citizens can reassert
the convictions of those who struggled succesfully
to free us from corporate rule in the past:
* The corporation is an artificial creation and must
not enjoy the protections of the Bill of Rights
* No corporation should exist forever
* Corporate owners and officers must be liable
for any harms they may cause

There can be no
effective control of
corporations while
their political activity
remains. To put an
end to it will be
neither a short nor an
easy task, but it
can be done."
-President Theodore
Roosevelt, 1910 ”

[edit on 15-5-2008 by Leo Strauss]

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:01 AM
Nader is just making public what a number of people here have already known. It's just a mater of time before people catch on to this, and all hell will break lose. Geting ready for it is just about the only thing we can do.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:12 AM
I am very surprised that this thread has not attracted yet the crowd of anti-socialism and had tagged everybody here that agree with the OP as socialist pushers.

Corporate corruption is as old as our own nation,

Five hundred years ago the "corporation" was invented as a legal form to allow investors to engage in public works -- such as bridge or road building. Over the years, corporations gained the right to engage in any kind of business, but they were still nothing more than convenient "legal fictions" until 1886 when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that corporations are "persons" and gave them the same rights as living human beings -- and more. This makes it possible for corporations to make campaign contributions, for example, by claiming their right of free speech. If corporate personhood were abolished, it would be much easier for the people to control the harmful actions of corporations.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 11:24 AM
reply to post by marg6043

Great post marg - starred.

Thanks for the info

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 12:32 PM
I know how we can fix this problem: stop worrying about money so damn much. Think about it. What is the ONLY means of control corporate giants and etc. have over us? The same thing we bitch about them for... OUR love of money. Stop loving money and live how man was meant to live, leave the country, or start blowing # up.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 01:04 PM
reply to post by Torsten

Well I don't know about anyone else here, but money has never been my goalin life.

I always viewed it as a means to an end, and apart from the odd luxury item (like a TV and PC) have lived a pretty frugal life.

I'm not sure what I'd do if I came into a lot of money - but I know I wouldn't be buying the contents of my local electrical store, or buying a big car.

I've had very well paying jobs, and the money meant very little.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 01:16 PM
reply to post by budski

I am glad that you have the same viewpoints that I do; I did not mean to say that everyone is a money-whore, but a lot of people, unfortunately, are. Also, based on my experiences in the world, there are a lot more people who want more money than there are people who see it in the way it (in my humble opinion) should be seen.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 01:51 PM

Originally posted by sisyphus3
I dunno. I know Saddam was being allowed to more or less muddle along under very porous sanctions until he announced that he wanted to start pricing his oil in euros.

According the UN administrators in charge there has NEVER been sanctions anything like it and to give you some idea of how effective it was it killed anything between half a million and a million people for lack of medical supplies.

Iran not only is dumping the dollar, they're opening their own oil bourse. It's one thing to wave a red cape, it's another to trigger a pyrotechnic display sewn into it.

Not following. I don't know of the relevant international laws that prevents countries selling their resources to the bidder of their choice!


posted on May, 15 2008 @ 02:14 PM
reply to post by StellarX

I think the poster was referring to the fact that iran has chosen NOT to use the dollar anymore, and in doing so have set themselves up as targets for the US who are aggressively pursuing a policy of economic imperialism in the region and have done for the past 60 years or so.

They started getting upset with Iran when the revolution removed their puppet, the shah, and have been looking for a way to regain power ever since.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 02:28 PM
reply to post by budski

Absolutely correct.

See John Perkins - "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"

Michael Parenti

Google Video - "The Corporation"

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 02:30 PM
Money is not the problem, but greed is and we are all guilty of it to some extent. Some are more guilty than others. We often blame the corporations and corrupt government officials for problems of our own doing. This is not always the case but many times it is. For example, we over-extend our credit cards, want a big house, a luxury car, a two-week vacation, buy expensive watches, jewelry, designer clothes, dine at expensive restaurants, not work as hard as we should at work, etc.........

'Living within your means' equates to personal and/or family responsibility as much as it equates to social responsibility. If we all try to live extravagant lives with a mediocre salary then the system(which ever is present) will inevitably collapse and we will all be victimized. Then we will blame the "greedy bankers".

After saying this I really do think a lot of changes need to be made. The campaign system is extremely corrupt! Donations of any kind should be illegal and subject to maximum prosecution. I think all the candidates should be financed through government taxation as is the current status-quo in other countries. Also have a campaign cap, as pro athletes are subject to salary caps. This measure alone can go a long way to ensure there are no 'conflicts-of-interest' after an administration has sworn in.

Another big problem is health insurance. The rates are so high that most people cannot afford it. Not only that but they can and usually are very selective in who they choose to insure. If you have a troubled history, either your rate will be higher or they will not insure you at all. If you smoke or drink excessively this is also a red-flag. Sorry but I don't think this is acceptable!

Auto insurance rates are excessive. If you are eighteen or have a single accident the rate skyrockets, even if its not your fault. All private insurance companies have been allowed excessive leeway and it is about time they start getting regulated.

Marketing companies are allowed misleading advertising. Internet fraud is alarmingly high. I get about 20-30 spam emails a day just for owning a small business. Ban the #in mailing lists so they don't sell you targeted advertising. People make a living just gathering emails!

Start enforcing the anti-trust laws so we don't all choke to death. Clearly companies are consolidating into fewer and fewer hands. Efficiency? Yeah right! Whatever! In another decade the worlds wealth will be concentrated in a few hands and they will own us literaly Don't even think of starting a business because you will be in foreclosure before you realise it! For example, who wants to pay $10 for a hammer when you can go to home-depot and buy it for $6? We benefit as consumers but at the same time we encourage artificial monopolies. Think about this next time you try to save a few bucks.

[edit on 15-5-2008 by EarthCitizen07]

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 02:42 PM
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Could it not equally be said that money, by it's very nature creates greed, especially in a society where everything has to be bigger, better and costing more?

The major problem is that people have been conditioned for many years to believe that the acquisition of wealth is a worthy aspiration.

And who has created this conditioning?

The corporations, who now pretty much rule many countries.

The corporations are the new kingmakers - the power behind the throne.

[edit on 15/5/2008 by budski]

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 03:16 PM
Obviously, the choir needs no preaching to!

But corporations are not, despite there massive influence, impervious to attack. Bear in mind that they still play, for the time being, a little game amongst each other - competition. This can be quite effectively used against them, because not all corporation can be winners, and there are some who really do want to win regardless of some 'conglomerate master plan.'.

Also, being the equivalent of a 'natural citizen' of the United States, as we all know, has been further 'degraded' as of late, and those minor inconveniences have yet to be fully extended to our 'peers' the corporate citizens.

If we are to maintain the facade of 'equality under the law' eventually the language MUST be clarified to either render the corporation as a 'super' citizen with extended rights and privileges, or the language must acknowledge that 'citizen-employees' are a lesser category of individual. Tax-code has already been de facto accepted as ratifying this position, but then, tax-code is not actually 'law' is it?

There are a number of possibilities to address the devolution of the American Representative Democracy enforced upon us by the corporate junta or regime in place. They are masters at the game of 'the emperor has no clothes.' But we all know, reality has a way of catching up to the pretense, whether desired or not.

I suspect their time is coming on. They are victims of their own hubris and lust for power and wealth - and they have begun to learn they can no longer trust each other - not everyone feels the will to bow to another (a human constant.) We may all perish in the process, but their folly will catch up to them.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 03:43 PM
reply to post by budski

Man...take it easy with those tough questions!

There is no simple answer but money and power does not necessarily equate to happiness. You can be happy with less if you know what you want from life and have enough resources and/or freedom to make it a reality.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 03:47 PM
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

I just thought they were interesting

Money tends to bring more burdens than freedoms IMO.

My goal has always been self-actualization, which is part of maslows theory of the human "hierarchy of needs"

a link, scroll down for the diagram and an explanation.

It's more usually used in the business world, especially marketing, but is equally applicable to life in general.

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 04:16 PM
reply to post by budski

I believe in modesty and living 'within your means'. If you want more than you need to make more, etc. There is nothing wrong with being rich provided the accumulation of wealth was not made with unethical or illegal ways.

Whats the point of driving a mercedes if your a low income "blue collar" worker? Its silly, pointless, and an unnecessary burden on your budget.

IMO, people living beyond their means is irresponsible behavior.

my "dollars worth"...hate that 2 cent crap.

[edit on 15-5-2008 by EarthCitizen07]

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in