Mon Jan 5, 2015, 09:49 PM
aspirant (3,533 posts)
Are today's global corporations dictatorships?
Global corporations are too big to jail, too big to fail
Global corporations have their own judicial systems (investor-state tribunals) Global corporations own politicians and write their own laws Global corporations are pursuing "Free Markets" with no regulations or restrictions "Free Markets = "Lawless Markets" Global corporations are now people, only when they choose to be (murder convictions) AND THE BEAT GOES ON
|
17 replies, 1021 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
aspirant | Jan 2015 | OP |
Faryn Balyncd | Jan 2015 | #1 | |
aspirant | Jan 2015 | #3 | |
Faryn Balyncd | Jan 2015 | #6 | |
on point | Jan 2015 | #2 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Jan 2015 | #4 | |
Faryn Balyncd | Jan 2015 | #7 | |
marmar | Jan 2015 | #5 | |
1step | Jan 2015 | #8 | |
JEB | Jan 2015 | #9 | |
silverweb | Jan 2015 | #10 | |
aspirant | Jan 2015 | #11 | |
appalachiablue | Jan 2015 | #14 | |
Spitfire of ATJ | Jan 2015 | #12 | |
aspirant | Jan 2015 | #13 | |
Spitfire of ATJ | Jan 2015 | #15 | |
aspirant | Jan 2015 | #16 | |
Spitfire of ATJ | Jan 2015 | #17 |
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 09:57 PM
Faryn Balyncd (5,125 posts)
1. They are attempting to become "Too Big to Regulate" via Corporate Sovereignty "trade deals"
(which have almost nothing to do with eliminating tariffs or duties, and everything to do with extending intellectual property monopolies and eliminating the ability of governments to do their constitutional duties (to protect the general welfare, the environment, labor conditions, safety, food labeling all of which are castrated in closeted negotiations ans fraudulently peddled to citizens (and Congressmen) as a "trade deal".) ![]() |
Response to Faryn Balyncd (Reply #1)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:03 PM
aspirant (3,533 posts)
3. Without regulation do they become the supreme authority?
Response to aspirant (Reply #3)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:09 PM
Faryn Balyncd (5,125 posts)
6. Well, when they can sue pesky governments in tribunals exempt from the judicial system, that's
...getting a little closer. It at least puts them in a category of "personhood" shared by no real "persons" (a category of being able to sue for loss of profits and be exempt from the judicial system the founders set up. ![]() |
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:00 PM
on point (2,506 posts)
2. Yes. Just not organized along territory lines, more vertical along chain
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:06 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
4. Governments are the PR firms that corporations hire to give the impression of democracy.
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #4)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:10 PM
Faryn Balyncd (5,125 posts)
7. I think you nailed it.
![]() |
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:06 PM
marmar (74,128 posts)
5. Inverted Totalitarianism
“Inverted totalitarianism, unlike classical totalitarianism, does not revolve around a demagogue or charismatic leader. It finds expression in the anonymity of the Corporate State. It purports to cherish democracy, patriotism, and the Constitution while manipulating internal levers.” -- Chris Hedges |
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:13 PM
1step (380 posts)
8. That's an Insult to Dictatorships Everywhere!
![]() |
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 11:05 PM
JEB (4,748 posts)
9. Transnational fascism.
Response to JEB (Reply #9)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 11:39 PM
silverweb (16,390 posts)
10. Bingo!
[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]It's been their ultimate aim for decades and they're almost there.
|
Response to JEB (Reply #9)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 01:05 AM
aspirant (3,533 posts)
11. Global corporations = Dictatorships and Fascists
Response to JEB (Reply #9)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 01:32 AM
appalachiablue (36,133 posts)
14. That's it precisely, and there's a nice ring to it.
Response to aspirant (Original post)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 01:15 AM
Spitfire of ATJ (32,723 posts)
12. "Free Markets = "Lawless Markets"
![]() |
Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #12)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 01:17 AM
aspirant (3,533 posts)
13. Thanks for the help!
Response to aspirant (Reply #13)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 03:01 AM
Spitfire of ATJ (32,723 posts)
15. I'd LOVE it if Rachael Maddow picked it up.
Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #15)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 10:53 AM
aspirant (3,533 posts)
16. One step at a time
Response to aspirant (Reply #16)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 11:14 AM
Spitfire of ATJ (32,723 posts)
17. We know Hillary's not going to say it.