Corporatism the most insidious and malignant ism of all

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders
leaving only infrastructure maintenance and the preservation of the people's welfare within the responsibilities of government..

That seems like two very LARGE responsibilities too many. If you don't think only one or the other would require a big government, and both requiring a massive government, you're delusional or blind.

An excellent article titled: Colonialization of America by Our Own Corporatists. It explains the way that the corporatist who are supranational and not at all concerned for the safety and security of the USA or the liberty of the people have looted the world.

It is a good read and contains links to source material and some interesting comments below the article that are worth reading. The comments include information regarding the sinister application of the Hegelian Dialectic by these corporatist to divide and conquered each nation they infect.

Try and keep the conversation in the thread on topic. The topic is the impact world wide on people and institutions when the malignant corporatist infect them and consume their wealth.

Originally posted by Darkrunner
reply to post by wayouttheredude

 

Are you saying the worker trumps everything? Other societies that have tried that line of reasoning haven't worked out all that well.

I am not saying corporations don't need some regulation. I.e., not exporting jobs, punishing those companies that do etc..

I remember a VERY heated discussion I got into with my uncle who worked at GM, who saw absolutely nothing wrong with him getting paid to sit on his ass at home, and then was quizzically wondering how GM nearly collapsed.

Both sides have their share of problems, the corporations and the worker unions. That's not to say I know the answers to those problems however...

you mean like germany?

Originally posted by SpectreDC

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders
leaving only infrastructure maintenance and the preservation of the people's welfare within the responsibilities of government..

That seems like two very LARGE responsibilities too many. If you don't think only one or the other would require a big government, and both requiring a massive government, you're delusional or blind.

check out anarcho-syndicalism. That form of anarchy along with socialist libertarianism is the answer to these parasitic elite leeches. Stop playing in thier system and we create our own to play in. Tell them to go f--- themselves AND thier cheap china-ware and gmo Soybean/corn.

I thought I should have at least one post within this thread where I explain a little about the foundation of my own political philosophy. As it concerns my opposition to corporatism, and also explains my view very well if you are familiar with the philosophy of Adam Smith/.

For those who have no time to read the above linked online ebook here is the link to the 255MB zip archive of the 64kb mp3 audiobook of Adam Smith Wealth of Nations

Adam Smith was a distant relation from my mother's side of the family so I was exposed to his teaching by my parents. He was not taught as part of the formal curriculum but as part of my parents required reading list. My parents did not think much of public school but since they both worked they had to use the public schools to provide some of our education and give us some place to be while they were at work. They also gave their children reading assignments in the philosophy and sciences they felt were important to our development.

Smith was an important philosopher in the development of the ideas that paved the way for the United States founding documents.

reply to post by Stewie


You are not describing an inherent flaw of corporatism. You are describing a flaw inherent in capitalist corporatism. Under corporatism, the goal of the corporation can be anything. Charities are corporations, churches are corporations, et cetera. Under capitalism, the goal of the individual or the corporation is to maximize their own material gains. When capitalists buy favours from the corporation that is the Congress of the United States of America, that is when the US military goes into another country to rape, pillage and plunder in the name of private interests. You are lamenting the actions of capitalists, not corporatists.

It is called capitalism, and the beneficiaries are the few stockholders that control the private corporations.

Now, when the state and the capitalists really merge into one, we get state capitalism. In this system, the capitalist corporations and the State corporation have merged together into one entity that directs economic and political activity. State capitalism gave us the great welfare states of the twentieth century, best exemplified in the Socialist states. You will notice from the OP's links that capitalists hate state capitalism, because it undermines their ability to exploit and abuse the workers and the material resources.

Corporatism is, in and of itself, benign. Modern capitalism has no regard for universal human rights. Many modern corporations, such as the USA and UN, are concerned with universal human rights and actively pursue the well being of humanity in general.

My current philosophy influence differs my more traditional upbringing. While the work of Adam Smith was at the foundation of my personal economic philosophy it has become more inclined to the Hayek view of economics. This video which is pretty silly but understandable discusses the differing views of Hayek and Keynes.

Keynesian economics is the root of the reasoning used to justify these huge bailouts and stimulus and is favored by both Democrats and neo-conservative Republicans so it is relevant to this discussion since Keynesian economics is loved by all corporatists because it creates the boom and bust cycles which concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands.

"Fear the Boom and Bust" a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem

these corporations have and are making life much harder for private businesses because the smaller locally started businesses can't outsource most of their product like the corporations can...it's getting to the point where they outsource so much of their profit that any other business in the area can't even keep a competitive advantage in the area...

Most of these corporations even employ different means to which they can further beat out any of the smaller businesses in the area...they help the local community with cheaper stuff, but push out private business's which can't afford to outsource, thus increasing unemployment in the area should these smaller businesses get overrun, which happens often.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap

Your intent seems to be to cast capitalism in the most unfavorable light, but the true nature of capitalism is nothing like you describe.
You describe corruption, and label it capitalism.
By far, there are more businesses ("capitalists") that provide a fair service or a product at a fair price in exchange for money. It is possible sir to make a FAIR PROFIT, and most businesses are actually engaged in just that.
Now you seem to have a problem with profit. That is fine, just say it. But, you don't, you claim government should be quite large to solve the problems of the world...the opposite of individualism. Yet you offer no solution to the problems wrought by governments today, except to say we need a larger one(s).
Quite funny.
It is true that non-profit corporations exists, but you will also find that SELF-PERPETUATION of said non-profits are the unstated main goal more often than not, not the benevolent mission mentioned in its charter. I would trust these far less than an honest business that warns you they are striving to earn a profit.

Fellow ATS members who are interested in this thread and in educating themselves and others on the cancer that is corporatism should visit this link I found called "Must Watch Corporatism Documentaries."

This is one of the best resources I have found yet on the subject of Corporatism and the globalist agenda I have seen on the internet. This is a must review for those who care about the subject as I do.

Wow. Here is an incendiary nugget from the above link. Max Keiser Passionately Speaks Out Against Goldman Sachs it gave me goose bumps.

reply to post by wayouttheredude


Nice thread, I will enjoy following it.
Wayouttheredude, have you read any books by Edward Bernays (the father of public relations)?

This is another nugget from the Must Watch Corporatism Video Archive. This one I have watched and it is by far one of the best on the insidious neo-conservative corporatist cabal "The Carlyle Group" Watch Iron Triangle.

Google Video Link

Sorry folks when I posted this I was not thinking of the fact that most of you likely do not speak German. I was stationed in Berlin in the 80's and took German for 3 semesters in the Berlin Brigade Army Community College.

I hope some of you can follow this. It is pretty good. If you listen long enough it starts to become English. Germans are all taught English in grade school so it is no big deal for them.

reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE


I have watched a video set called "The Century of Self" and it covers Bernays. I also went on to watch many other videos related to his work. He was a Freudian I understand and his work was used by the big corporations and corporatist in government to manufacture consent. It is very important and valid to this discussion. Thanks for bringing up that point in the discussion. Here is the first in the 4 part series I watched. It is very telling.

Google Video Link

reply to post by Stewie


If it is possible for businesses to make a fair profit, then what is wrong with them working in collaboration with the government? If a business corporation that works with the government holds itself to the same high standards of justice and liberty, then what is wrong with corporatism?

I have heard this argument that big government inevitably leads to big corruption before. Nobody has ever explained it to me. What is this corruption that opponents of Big Government always talk about?

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap

The federal government should not be collaborating with business. The federal government should be doing what the federal government was empowered to do by its creators.
Governments at all levels are charged with providing a limited service at a reasonable cost. The FDA, for example, is charged with food and drug safety among other things, but not charged with ensuring that only certain companies can sell food or drugs (those that can contribute the most), or that the profits of certain food and drug suppliers are assured because they have the FDA as "collaborators".
Governments are not in the business of making a profit, period. The reality, however, is much different. They take tax money, forced collection not investor capital, and compete with the market, or CREATE a market as is the case in arm sales. They have an unfair advantage....they can outlaw the competition.
Justice and Liberty you will not ask a corporation to provide. The high standard of justice and liberty need only be enforced upon the unjust and those that would take your liberty. That is the role of government, and in the case of corporations, to make sure said corporations do not use their financial resources to avoid justice and the destruction of a workers liberty.
That is the crisis we have today, called "corporatism" fed by a criminal monetary system. The system will collapse, but "they" will still end up with the money. It is simply corruption from absolute power.

.

reply to post by Stewie


What are the services that the government should be charged with providing? Why should they provide the FDA when a private corporation could do the same job cheaper and more efficiently? Why not have multiple competing food and drug inspection firms, to ensure the highest efficiency? If the service is worthwhile, then these corporations should make a tidy profit without needing to extract it from the taxpayer.

If businesses can be trusted with making a profit without exploiting the consumer, then why shouldn't we privatize the entire government?

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap


I am wondering if you watched the video I linked in Iron Triangle? It shows what happens when big government is in bed with big business. War is a racket as General Smedley Butler details some of the basics of this.

War profiteers are corporatist. Bush Sr and Jr and the Carlyle group are an example. Here is an actor speaking to this in the General's name.



The difference is that now they no longer care if they win. They want war to last for ever so the profits will remain. Corporatism is the greatest evil of the 19th-20th-and 21st century.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap

The services that a government should provide are those that the free people ask the government to provide. If the people are asked if they feel like an independent governmental organization should inspect the food or drugs to make sure they are safe, and the matter is approved by the people, the resulting organization should do the absolute best job at their mission that they can do at a cost that is "reasonable".
The cost is passed on to business...the ultimate source of all funds for government, in that the cost of goods and services has just been taxed for the public good, authorized by the public that benefits.
This is the nature of government at a pure level, before government is hijacked by special interests.
And yes, business pays all taxes, because that is where the money comes from. Government, in free market capitalism, is charged with the fair application of laws to ensure equal opportunity and equal protection.
A labor union is simply an example of a response to a failed government, one that has already been stolen from the people. It is a natural response to organize against your oppressors, but that is the nature of "corporatism", and so in practice, the labor unions soon becomes the "enemy" of the people it was charged to protect.
And, so it goes.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap

One other point. exploitation does not have to be a bad word, it is only bad if the worker is compelled to work without a choice, in conditions that are inhumane. I am exploiting labor when I hire labor, how I treat them defines whether I ma a "good" employer or a "bad" employer. Some of my choices are dictated by the market that is now international in scope. This simply means that I have to compete with business that can exploit the worker in the worst possible ways. Fair, huh?
A workers "bill of rights" would be a good thing in my opinion, but it should not be necessary, that is my whole point. If the federal government did its job, it would protect the sovereign U.S.A. citizen INCLUDING the business owners from being forced to compete with FOREIGN businesses that can exploit the workers in the manner you are referring to. It is really not that difficult of a concept, we DON"T need to be competing with countries willing to have slave labor make our goods. By the same token, we can't have labor unions running our domestic policy either.

reply to post by Stewie


WHAT SERVICES THE STATE SHOULD PROVIDE
You should be careful not to confuse a democracy with a republic. In a democracy all legislating power resides in the Public Body. In a republic all legislating power resides in the hands of an electorate. As I explained in this post, each state in the Union is alloted a specific number of electoral votes, to cast as the legislatures decide is best. It is not necessary for them to cast their votes for the president that receives the greatest number of votes from the Republic. The Public has little input on the election of the President of the Republic.

The President of the Republic has executive political powers. This gives him legislative power equal to that of the popularly elected Congress. For example, this power is exercised through Executive Orders. The Constitution guarantees that the Executive branch has as much right to dictate the government as the Public has.

You may think that democracy is a better system of government, but the United States is governed by a republic. This means that the government effectively rules the country as it pleases and that it submits to take advice from the Public.

THE SOURCE OF TAXES
What does the government take away when it taxes you or a business? It does not take a share of the product of your labour. It takes away money. It takes away tokens which it had issued to the Public in the first place through the corporation of the Mint. It takes away a tool that is useful for negotiating exchange and trade. It takes away a standardized measure of wealth that is essential to investment of capital. Through corporate taxation, the government can restrict the growth of a business' power over other businesses. Through graded personal taxation, the government can restrict the growth of an individual's power over other individuals.

Income tax and the Federal Reserve were implemented as a product of the Progressive agenda. Teddy Roosevelt, the Progressive candidate of 1912, championed anti-trust legislation and led a political campaign against the growing gap between the rich and poor in America. This gap was increasingly transforming a once-egalitarian society into a new capitalist-feudal system. The graded tax rate was clearly meant to level the playing field between rich and poor, as demonstrated by the extremely high tax rates for the highest marginal tax bracket (shown here)

You should be able to see why people have believed that it is reasonable to say that the progressive tax system ensures equality between all men and guarantees their liberty from one another. It is a means of reducing the power of the rich to negatively exploit the poor. The welfare state is similarly meant to liberate the working poor from the industrial serfdom that they would otherwise endure. Redistribution of wealth is the key to preventing a capitalist version of feudalism in the industrial age.

The money that the government confiscates as taxes is the property of the mint in the first place. This is why it is illegal to deface legal tender; it is not your property to destroy. When they repossess it from the businesses and the public, the government is merely taking back the medallions and certificates that belong to them in the first place. Businesses are merely leasing these tokens from the mint; that is why they have to pay interest rates on the currency distributed by the Federal Reserve. They are borrowing the mint's money in order to measure their business transactions. They are expected to return what they have borrowed, plus a fee for the privilege. All money comes from the mint, but not all wealth.

FOREIGN COMPETITION
If the private corporations and the state collaborate, they can work together as a unitary entity and compete against other States. America can compete against India best when its government and businesses are working together to gain advantages in India. It is a mutually beneficial relationships. Businesses that do not collaborate with the government are the ones most likely to suffer as a result of globalization. If you collaborate, you can receive subsidies (funded by the wealthy corporations' taxes) that protect your business from foreign corporations. This is corporate welfare, and it works to protect small businesses if you bother to go through the application process. The sole reason the American Farmer is still around is that farmers have a traditionally strong lobby and can win enormous subsidies despite their relatively low profit margins.

Corporatism is actually the solution to all of the problems which you said it is the cause of.