They are one of the most conspicuous -- and frightening -- examples of a system that puts profits over people.
Monsanto is merely doing a better job of maximizing profit, in keeping with its fiduciary mandate.

Our system rewards sociopaths. If you have the misfortune of possessing a conscience, you will ultimately end up as roadkill.

What's ironic is that while we're constantly comparing upstart countries and their despots to the legendary tyrants of the 20th century, the truly dangerous and frightening entities are companies like Monsanto, who are simply doing what they were designed to do.

I like the comparison of corporations to sharks. Sharks aren't evil. They're eating machines. That's what they do. In the same way, corporations are profit machines. Good and evil don't really enter into the picture. They're efficiently and dispassionately fulfilling their reason for being and in so doing, it isn't an exaggeration to state that they are destroying the world.

Moral judgments are completely irrelevant to corporations. There's no place for them on balance sheets.

If you demonize a company like Monsanto by calling it evil, you miss a fundamental point. Also, you force people to choose what is good and what is evil. And I daresay because that's a moral argument, you are going to see huge disagreement.

A person who kills dozens in a theater is considered evil. Yet a person in the uniform of our country who kills dozens in the theater of battle is considered good. In fact, he's frequently lauded as a hero. What's the difference? The difference is that from our standpoint, the victims of a theater shooting are innocent, thus "good," whereas the enemy in a battle is considered "evil." By us, of course.

We have to frame things in terms of our survival, not moralistic arguments that are going to create divisions among people with differing prejudices and world views.

Sorry, but that takes us down a very slippery slope. Are you suggesting your religion/spiritual perspective applies to everyone? Even people who don't share it? If so, what gives your religious/spiritual views supremacy above all others?

Make no mistake. Our ultimate conclusion the same. I'm just suggesting that you're taking a troublesome path in order to reach it.

There is no right or wrong, only All That Is.

We get to choose the direction where we focus our energy.

That's where Reality lies, and only there.

Moral relativity creates huge gaps for bad actors to walk through.

Monsato and other companies could choose to make a helpful, wonderful product that everyone buys. Lots of profit and no one calls them "evil". Instead, Monsato has created a product that consumers don't want, so instead of shelving it, they are manipulating governments, including our own, to pass shady laws and guarantee the sale of their harmful products in trade deals.

Corporations that choose shortcuts (such as not recalling a car when you know people will die or selling a drug you know will kill people), creating harmful products, negligent use or care of equipment (BP oil spill, water contamination, etc.), paying the bare minimum and pushing your employees onto federal programs, etc. are done purposely to make maximum profit for shareholders. This is a new business model that we have seen grow in the last 50 years. And it is craven greed. Greed used to be called one of the seven deadly sins.

It is only since the rise of Reagan that open greed was considered good. That in fact, the very argument you are making, that corporations cannot be judged by moral standards is a rather new phenomena. Greed is not neutral. Corporations are run by people, people who make the decisions that create harm. If the management of a company decides that harm to people or the environment is worth it so they can collect more money, then those people are, in fact, evil.

politicians and MSM. Our gov't was NOT designed to allow for a plutocracy. We have to understand corruption when we witness it, not excuse it away as business as usual, and to further understand corruption in gov't plays out this way.

When these tactics are global, it is no exaggeration to say destruction is going global, profiteering is plundering and pillaging people and the planet.

Is that evil?

Is that what corporations are designed to do?

I am complete agreement with you concerns about Monsanto, and I oppose them unequivocally.

I guess my argument is too subtle.

I'm just expanding the scope of the wrong-doing to include the entire system, not simply one company.

Are you knowingly adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere despite the realization that it is endangering the planet? Do you buy consumer products and devices even though you realize that there's a good chance they're produced by sweatshop labor? (Assuming you typed your OP on a computer, the answer is almost certainly "yes.&quot Do you buy meat, milk, or eggs produced by animals that are kept in utterly inhumane conditions?

Are you evil?

I definitely don't think so.

I'm not making excuses for anybody, and certainly not for Monsanto.

I'm just suggesting that they are a particularly nasty symptom of a much, much bigger problem.

We can't have a system where companies are rewarded for making profits, no matter the consequences.

That is what's wrong.

scope, and then comment about minimizing the fossil footprint. We are all shades of grey in what little power we hold, you are correct in that it is a problem of far greater magnitude. Predatory capitalism is corporate fascism, it has power that is out of control, not just in this country, but globally.

TY for making us realize it is an issue far bigger than Monsanto. Knowledge is powerful.

They are run by people. People who are there to extract as much money for themselves as possible at the expense of the public and shareholders.
It's a money making club and corporations are the engine that feeds it.

Do you think a farmer who grows tobacco is evil? I sincerely doubt it.

I'm going to give up here, and wish everyone good luck.

It's clear that my well-intentioned answers/arguments are being misunderstood.

I'm sorry for that, but I understand.

Corporations in and of themselves are not good or evil, what they do, however can be considered 'evil,' 'immoral,' or whatever.
Their actions are the product of the people who run the companies in question.

...yes.

- They are the epitome of the banality and ubiquity of evil, in its worst metastasized-corporate form. Spreading its death everywhere it goes as it masquerades under the aegis of agricultural science with the purported mission to save mankind -- while coincidentally making a profit.

The good 'ol Amurikun way.

K&R

They are so brilliantly evil, they have put the onus on the public to prove that GMOs are harmful, rather than prove they are safe. Then they squelch all study of their product to prove that it is harmful. So we take our chances with health until the evidence is so overwhelming and perhaps the harm to the environment is so far gone it may not be repaired. And their minions run around shouting woo at anyone who wishes further study. All so some already rich people can make more money. Evil genius smart.

I couldn't agree more.

The more you know...the more you understand the illusions.

Key in at 3:14.


Important documentary link:
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-world-according-to-monsanto/

It's all about crafting the best appearance for maximizing profits.

You don't have to do good. You just have to appear to be good. And if you're doing something really nasty, you try to divert the public's attention away from this fact. If that doesn't work, you marginalize or smear those people who are attempting to draw attention to your misdeeds. "It's nothing personal. It's just business."

Companies like Coca-Cola are doing atrocious things in South America. But they give a token amount of their profits to things like AIDS research in Africa (and make no mistake: it's real money that can do some good) in order to draw our attention away from their crimes. The primary purpose of gestures of that nature is not to help make the world a better place but to 1) shift the focus away from predatory practices and 2) further increase profits.

This is one of the many reasons why I can't get excited about feel-good commercials from voracious multi-nationals that pay lip service to civil rights and marriage equality while simultaneously destroying the planet. To me, the phrase "great commercial" will always be an oxymoron.

Aside from those companies run by religious fanatics, large multinationals don't really take a moral position regarding social justice issues. They will pander to whatever groups will yield the greatest financial benefits. And they will unwittingly use us as their viral marketers whenever they can.

It is so frustrating that (apparently unpaid) shills wish to shout down any discussion on GMO as anti-science. This video and plenty of articles show that GMOs were approved without thorough testing and that some studies were squashed by Monsato during the approvals process. If that isn't anti-science, I don't know what is.

The fact that they object to labeling because people are too dumb and superstitious to choose their food wisely is the last bastion of bastards. There are so many ties to nefarious practices that it seems rather clear that something bad is going on. It doesn't pass the smell test by a long mile. Of course it's linked to Bush/Reagan!

And those who object to GMOs object not only because they have not been tested in long-term independent studies, but for many other reasons as well. So far, all evidence points to the fact that they are bad for farmers, bad for the land, and most likely bad for those who ingest them.