THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A COUNTRY IT IS A CORPORATION

Today, our law and culture concede our sovereignty to corporations. So do most of our own citizen organizations dedicated to justice and environmental protection and worker rights and human rights.

Folks relentlessly tally corporate assaults; study the regulatory agencies and try to strengthen them. We try to make corporate toxic chemicals and corporate radiation and corporate energy and corporate banking and corporate agriculture and corporate transportation and corporate buying of elections and corporate writing of legislation and corporate educating our judges and corporate distorting of our schools, a little less bad.



But we don't study who We the People are; how sovereign people should regard ourselves, how sovereign people should act. We need to realize what power and authority we possess, and how we can use it TO DEFINE THE NATURE OF CORPORATIONS, so that we don't have to mobilize around each and every corporate decision that affects our communities, our lives, the planet.

This is backwards. The reason corporations are so dominant and so destructive today is that a century ago corporations took rights and powers away from the people. For example, corporations made themselves into persons under the law BEFORE most human beings had won their civil and political rights. Corporations' 'right to manage' and 'free speech' are currently safeguarded by the US Constitution, thanks to legal doctrines concocted by the appointed judges of the federal judiciary.



Isn't it an old story? People create what looks to be a nifty machine, a robot, called the corporation. Over time the robots get together and overpower the people. They redesign themselves and reconstruct law and culture so that people don't remember they created the robots in the first place, that the robots are machines, are not alive.

For a century, the robots propagandize and indoctrinate each generation of people so they grow up believing that robots are people too, gifts of God and Mother Nature; that they are inevitable, and the source of all that is good.



Isn't it odd how gullible we've been, how docile, how obedient?

But in the face of what we experience about corporations, of what we know to be true, why are so many people so obedient?

Why do we hang on to the hope that the corporation can be made socially responsible? Isn't this an absurd notion? After all, organizations cannot be responsible. This is just not a relevant concept, because a principal purpose of corporations is to protect the managers and directors who run them from responsibility for their decisions.



But people can declare organizations criminal, or vile -- take a look at the Nuremberg Trials. And people can define organizations, business or government. Again, see the Nuremberg Trials.

The UNITED STATES government is basically a corporate instrument. This means YOU are owned by the corporation from birth to death. The corporate UNITED STATES also holds ownership of all your assets, your property, and even your children. Does this sound untrue? Think long and hard about all those bills you pay, all those various taxes and fines and licenses you must pay for. Yes, they've got you by the pockets. Actually, they've had you by the ass for as long as you've been alive. In your heart, you know it's true. Don't believe any of this? Read up on the 14th Amendment. Check out how "free" you really are.

Here is what is asked of us as sketched out by Tony Clark:

MECHANISMS OF CORPORATE RULE
Tony Clark

"The men who run global corporations are the first in history with the organisation, technology, money, and ideology to make a credible try at managing the world as an integrated economic unit."

-Richard J. Barnett and Ronald E. Mueller, Global Reach


In the twenty-odd years since these words were penned, transnational corporations (TNCs) have consolidated their power and control over the world. Today, 47 of the top 100 economies are actually transnational corporations, 70 percent of global trade is controlled by a just 500 corporations, and a mere one per cent of the TNCs on this planet own half the total stock of foreign direct investment. At the same time, the new free market and free trade regimes (eg. GATT, NAFTA) have created global conditions in which transnational corporations and banks can move their capital, technology, goods, services - freely throughout the world unfettered by the regulations of nation states or democratically elected governments.

In effect, what has taken place is a massive shift in power, out of the hands of nation states and democratic governments and into the hands of transnational corporations and banks. It is now the TNCs that effectively rule and govern the lives of the vast majority of the people on earth. Yet, these new world realities are seldom reflected in the strategies of citizen movements for democratic social change. All too often, strategies are primarily aimed at changing government policies while the real power being exercised by the TNCs behind the scenes is rarely challenged, let alone dismantled. And when the operations of TNCs become the prime target for citizen action campaigns, there is a tendency to employ a more or less piecemeal approach to what is a deeply systemic problem.

As we approach the 21st century, it is imperative that social movements in both the North and the South develop a new politics for challenging the dominant global rule of transnational enterprises.

....

New Bases for Social Action

The best hope for countering growing corporate domination lies in the building of social movements whereby people reclaim their sovereign rights over transnational corporations and banks.

Most people now feel that they have lost control over their economic, social, and ecological future. This is not only true among the poor majority in the South, following the damage done by massive structural adjustments, but increasingly amongst the majority of working, middle class peoples in the North. For many, the dream of securing a full time job, a relatively stable, crime free community, in a clean environment with a bright future for their children, has been shattered. In this climate, the politics of fear and the politics of insecurity have become rampant in most of our countries expressing itself sometimes as ethnic violence or, more recently, right wing militias . As we move towards the 21st century, not only do the postwar engines of economic growth seem to be petering out in their reach for global markets, thereby undermining effective demand and confidence in the new global order and its institutions, but a new set of class divisions and tensions is emerging in our economies and societies, both North and South. Underlying the politics of fear and insecurity is the fundamental question of democracy itself. These conditions, in turn, could create new political opportunities and space for building social movements to take democratic control over transnational corporations that are dominating people's economic, social, and ecological future.

Popular Sovereignty

In the building of social movements today, emphasis must be placed on the notion of popular sovereignty as a common base for action. Throughout this country alone, peoples all over the world have fought for the recognition of fundamental democratic and human rights - the right to adequate food, clothing and shelter; the right to employment, education and health care; the right to clean environment, social equality, and public services; - and the right to self determination and the ability to effectively participate in decisions affecting these rights. Together, these basic communal rights, which constitute the core of popular sovereignty, have been reflected and enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In the new age of corporate tyrant, however, these fundamental human and democratic rights of people have been largely stolen or hijacked. Today, the rights and freedoms of transnational corporations are not only enshrined but take precedence over the democratic rights of peoples, nations, and citizens. The time has come for citizens, through social movements, to reclaim their sovereign rights over transnational corporations.

...

http://www.converge.org.nz/pirm/mechcorp.htm

Know Thine Enemy

A Brief History of Corporations

by Joel Bleifuss


Corporations can't cast a ballot, but they do vote with their wallets. In the 1995-96 election cycle, corporations and corporate PACs contributed $147 million to candidates running for federal office. The United States is one of the few democracies where such donations are legal. The Supreme Court affirmed the right of corporations to pay for electoral campaigns in the 1978 case First National Bank v. Bellotti. Writing for the majority, Justice Lewis Powell explained that giving cash to influence the outcome of an election "is the type of speech indispensable to decision making in a democracy, and this is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation rather than an individual."

Indeed, under the prevailing interpretation of the Constitution, corporations have the same rights as individuals. This was not always the case: American corporations gained these protections in the 19th century, when the Supreme Court, in a series of rulings, defined the relationship between business and the state. Those rulings shielded companies from government regulation and thus allowed the corporation to become the dominant form of economic organization. the 21st century, the combined gross revenues of the 200 largest corporations exceed the GDP of all but the nine richest nations. In this context, it is important to know how corporations came to hold such sway over our everyday lives, and what can be done about it.

The first corporations appeared in 17th-century Europe, during capitalism's infancy. At the time, the government chartered all corporations-that is, it gave them a specific public mission in exchange for the formal right to exist. The United States was settled by one such corporation, the Massachusetts Bay Company, which King Charles I chartered in 1628 in order to colonize the New World. The practice of chartering companies was a crucial part of the mercantile economic system practiced by the epoch's great powers-Holland, Spain and England. By allowing investors to pool their capital, the monarch made it possible for companies to launch ventures that would have been beyond the means of one person. And in exchange for the charter, companies expanded their government's wealth and power by creating colonies that served both as sources of raw materials and as markets for exported goods.

But in the 18th century, the Enlightenment challenged this model of economic organization by putting forward the idea that people need not be subjects in feudal structures but could act as individuals. American revolutionaries, inspired by radical notions of "unalienable rights" to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," fought for independence not only from the Crown, but from the corporate bodies it had chartered. The Boston Tea Party, for example, was a protest against the British East India Company's monopoly of Eastern trade. Another critic was Adam Smith, whose Wealth of Nations was published in the same year as the Declaration of Independence. Influenced by John Calvin, Smith believed that human resourcefulness and industry were earthly signs of God's favor, and thus that wealth obtained in a market economy was an expression of "natural justice." Smith, however, did not think that corporations were a natural part of this order. Arguing that large business associations limit competition, he wrote, "The pretense that corporations are necessary to the better government of the trade is without foundation."

...

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/KnowEnemy_ITT.html

of course I don't depend on Corporations for a paycheck, if I did I would probably think differently.

I'm really starting to like the idea of corporate charter revocation. Basically, if they consistently act like felons and their business practices routinely include befouling local ecosystems, clear-cutting, releasing toxic chemicals into the water, air or ground, screwing the community out of legitimate taxes, laying off half its workforce and replacing them with H-1b visa holders, moving some or all of its operations overseas and so on... If they're going to claim the privileges of "personhood," then they should damn well be subject to the same legal sanctions and criminal penalties any other person would incur for such behavior.

I think it's long past time for people to begin harassing these unaccountable fiefdoms and either dissolve them entirely or cripple their ability to operate in secret and outside the laws and ethical constraints the rest of us are subject to.

Here's some background material. Unfortunately, successful revocation hasn't happened for decades, so there are no contemporary "how-to" case studies. But several of these links outline circumstances that could result in charter revocation, along with citing precedents and legal arguments. Others contain the processes and templates needed to create the proper paperwork and get it into the hands of the right (i.e., more sympathetic) government officials.

Fortunately, it's not as boring as it sounds.

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2002/02oct-nov/oct-no...

http://www.duhc.org/rethinking_revoking.html

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Controlling_Corporati...

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=1810

http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/news2003/1230-0...

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/de...

http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/corporatedeath103...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-drobny/the-best-u...

http://www.corporations.org/afd-paradigm-shift.html

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/cases/clcc.html?c...


wp

Smash the state..and send the churches away from theocracy trying to steal power away from people.

Thank you and a HUGE K&R and bookmark !!!!!

And we are only Subjects to this this Corporate Government.

As long as the rich and wealthy get to make as much money off the backs of the little people, all is well. But say anything about it, and you are a commie who wants to send people to a gulag..... LOL!

A criminal is a person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation.
–Howard Scott


Corporation: An ingenious device for obtaining profit without individual responsibility.
–Ambrose Bierce

The Pentagon? Every time I come upon a post about wealth I can't help myself from posting this link. It is to an on-line library that offers free downloads for out of print, or copyright expired books.
Here's the link: http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0303critic/0303socialcriticism.html

And Here's the book: Lundberg, Ferdinand. The Rich and the Super Rich. New York: Lyle Stewart, 1968.

Shows with overwhelming evidence who rules and specifically how they rule. Although decades have passed since this book was written and the individuals have changed, the families in power haven't changed. This book allows someone with perceptiveness to look through the news, peek behind distractions of current events and see what probably is really happening. OUT OF PRINT

Many of the people that I know who became liberals a generation before Height-Ashbury, became liberal because of reading this book. It's enough to make someone a revolutionary.

NOW is the time for a NEW system of government of the people.

Now that you've had your clever rant, maybe you could think about that.

Think about what?

Be specific.

...Wonder if s/he regrets saying that.

what are those goals.

Are they better, are they worse, are they interlocked and so on.

But I don't really know if the hit and run post can help us in any substantive way.

Why would one bother to make the effort if they were not ready to elaborate?

:hi:

in Boston -- that the malfeasance involved, which resulted in the death of a young mother when the roof caved in (not to mention the financial disasters) WAS a crime, but that there was no point in prosecuting it because under MA law, the only penalty that could be imposed on a corp. was a $1,000.00 fine.

No discussion of the possibility of changing the law???

But the key is, it really doesn't matter WHAT penalties you impose against the CORP.

The only thing that will make a difference is imposing meaningful, proportionate penalties against THOSE WHO RUN THE CORP. -- senior management and directors. Otherwise, they just let the corp. crater while the individuals responsible move on to a new one.

Not so sure about the DU masses these days,
but I think you will most certainly appreciate it-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ENG20080116&articleId=7813

Great post- thank you for that.
BHN

bhn

Think about it.

Bush was about half right when he said that "money trumps peace sometimes".

No it doesn't.

Money trumps peace all the time, every motherfucking time.

They owe no alligiance to any country. They are only concerned with one thing: Profit

Everybody talks about this stuff but nobody does anything to change it. Here's my best shot at some practical steps:

1) An amendment to the Constitution (or a new Constitution) stating that:
o All corporate charters exist strictly at the pleasure of the People and their duly constituted representatives, who may alter or revoke such charters at any time and for any reason.
o No corporation has any standing in a court of law, nor may a corporation lobby, donate to, or otherwise attempt to influence elected officials or persons seeking such election.

2) To help ensure that elections are free of corporate manipulation, all entities using public airwaves (radio, tv) will, as part of their charter, be required to provide plentiful free advertising slots for all major candidates during elections (in order to remove most of the money pressure from campaigns).

3) Large and monopolistic corporations being the source of the most damage done, the following laws are designed to prevent excessive size and monopoly control:
a) A punitively progressive tax based on capital value of the corporation, designed to make it impractical for any corporation to grow over a certain size.
b) Any corporation or cooperating group of corporations which gain control over more than 10% of any resource, service or other vital element of the economy, will immediately have its (their) governing board(s) disbanded and become temporary wards of the People's government, which may, at its discretion, sell off portions of the offending business to smaller groups, incorporate the business as a part of government, or take any other action it sees fit.

Edit to add: By the way, great post! Thank you!

As a Person:
Under the 5th amendment that no "person" shall be "deprived of life, liberty, and or property without due process of law."
Under the 14th amendment that no state shall "deny to any "person" within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
A corporation is also considered protected against unreasonable searches and seizures (4th amendment).
NOT a person under the 5th amendment--there is zero protection for self incrimination when involving a corporation

As a citizen:
NOT a citizen with regard to the 14th amendment ("No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.")--They are not covered by this statement

Is a citizen of its incorporated state and state of principal office for purposes of identification in lawsuits and federal court jurisdiction.

Essentially corporations are granted personhood to prevent assets from being seized and to ensure that corporations would be covered under US law. They do not have access to the so-called inalienable rights.

Citizenship was not bestowed on corporations in the normal sense--they were declared citizens of certain states to establish a framework in legal matters--they do not have the rights of a US citizen beyond this.

Awards for damages inflicted on a citizen by a Corporation?

I don't disagree with what you are saying, I just don't understand how Corporations, or any one citizen for that matter, be awarded special laws limiting their liability for damages they cause to a citizen.

Essentially speaking a "limited liability corporation" refers to the liability of the shareholders--i.e. you can not be held responsible for more than your stake in the company. The government is trying to say that limited liability covers the corporation itself, which is not true.

The Money Party. The're pretty good. If you break every rule, then you're bound to win more often than not; or a while at least until enough people wise up.

That's happening and in a big way. We lack a place to rally, a shared medium. But that's on the way
too or already here.

More later, after I iron my monogrammed Microsoft polo short;)

19% orphans. What will become of them.

at least I think so.

That is a great question. They certainly won't have fond memories of George Bush's America.

Corporations have stricter accounting rules.

I love your posts, Orwellian_ghost. And "The Corporation" was worth seeing.

Consider also looking hard at the interplay between corporatism and schooling -- not just the incursions of commercialism, but the historical roots and the intentional similarities in structure.

TWELVE years out of each person's life. While schools do teach the mechanics of reading for a couple of years, the main lesson that is taught is obedience to the system. It is a 12 year sentence in a factory or prison, and good inmates are rewarded with "A"s. Good inmates do what they are told WHEN they are told to do it. Want to spend the day studying geometry because you are captured and excited by it? Too bad, the bell has rung. Want to spend a couple of hours reading a book by Chomsky you checked out from the high school library? I doubt that you'll find him there, and whatever you're reading, you can't spend the morning doing it because the bell is ringing. How about a project to learn to build your own solar power generator? Maybe a good science teacher could help you through that on the installment plan -- 30 minutes a week for six or weeks..will you lose interest at that speed? Like conditioning a lab rat, the protocol of schools is to interrupt, interrupt, interrupt. Reminds me of my workplace. You know, a person who has free time to think..is dangerous.

Schools are judged today as factories are, with students as "products". The pretense that schools are creating citizens is gone. No useful skills are taught except those skills that are useful in a corporate office. Kids are equipped with laptops in the "better schools" on their way to their destinies as accountants and managers; they are given lots of busy work to get them used to having their entire day sucked up under someone else's direction, and their evening homework too.

Corporatism does not want students to be politically awakened.

H. L. Mencken wrote in The American Mercury for April 1924 that the aim of public education is not



John Taylor Gatto describes what we have as



Such a docile and incomplete citizenry prefers being spoonfed television entertainment to the intellectual satisfaction that comes from reading books and shaping your own world views. This docile and incomplete citizenry is interested in what it is told to be interested in, and votes for who it is told to vote for.

As an activist, I bet you sometimes find it frustrating how hard it is to wake people up. The People are waiting for instructions from the system.

And their parents are too tired from holding down multiple low paying jobs to spend quality time with them, consequently when kids are aren't doing masses of homework they are watching the boob tube or playing computer games. Add to that the horrible diets based on out-of-the-box prepared food and copious amounts of junk food plus the lack of good old fashioned play time activity makes them hyper and they are diagnosed with ADD problems. Then to add to the assault on them they are drugged up with ritalin.

Its a systemic problem, and it sure seems deliberate to me.

Thank you.


peace~

Global warming, oil dependence, wars in the Middle East, millions without health care, New Orleans levees, collapsing bridges, ...

Most of these didn't pop up overnight. They have been developing and worsening over decades. Government action should have been taken a long time ago to deal with them before they are big enough to swallow us whole. Corporations won't do it as their concern is making profits. Unfortunately over the years corporate influence has turned the government away from solving these kinds of big common problems to serving the private corporate weal.

We're screwed. Republicans are responsible for about 80% of it. Corporate-owned government is failed government.

:rant:

The corporation is a relative newcomer in human social development, concurrent with the world's greatest production of material things. Behind the corporations are individuals, but in the past hundred years in the U.S. the corporation has transcended individual rights and has achieved immortality as long as there is an accommodating society.

In this essay we inquire whether transnational corporations operating today are on a course of taking ultimate power, leaving no country or community unconquered. Will today's drab, foul-aired cubicle office environment one day be considered posh, as the growing population is fitted into work places that only serve the corporate masters' bottom line and social policies? How much more extremely must people be controlled and worked without their own land and freedom, before it can be agreed that the world population of humans has become a modern slave society?

With population growth, capitalist employers and corporations have profited from an ever-growing labor pool that cannot command high wages or serious changes in the relationship between owner/executive and worker (exploiter and exploited). As population grows, there is less and less space for working and for workers' homes, and nature areas for obtaining food are almost all corporate property devoid of much biological diversity. Corporate efficiency dictates that conditions everywhere must become only more ant-like or human-machine like, due to competition for profits. Meanwhile, the government already rubber-stamps whatever the corporations offer up.

With their wealth larger than many countries (e.g., Wal-Mart is bigger than Sweden's economy), and no opposing social force challenging the strength of corporations, it would seem reasonable to follow a trend-line into the future. Authorities on the modern corporation should be invited to speculate on the timing and circumstances of corporations' taking complete, tyrannical control of society and the economy. In examining the background for our current position in history, it appears these look like the early days of "Machine Rule" for the vast majority of humans.

...

http://www.culturechange.org/e-letter-corporateslaveworld.html

Not ONE WORD ABOUT TURNING THINGS AROUND. :( Amazing. Truly Amazing.

Of course, me being a relative newbie here, maybe I don't understand the protocol or decorum or whatever passes for "proper" here.

We've got lots of evidence here, so what do we do about it??? :think: Lesseeeeee..... OH! We have some potential prospects for the office of President. MAYBE we could weed thru them and choose one that's most likely to act as a catalyst for our desire to doff the many corporate yokes around our collective necks. WOW - what a novel idea!

So let's assess the choices. Hmmmm... there's two celebrity candidates who have MILLIONS in reserve to fatten the coffers of the advertizing outlets (you and my's airways) and who've promised us they'd sit down with corporations and hammer out a good compromise for us. SUCH A DEAL! And said corporations must REALLY like these two and the prospect of working with them because they've been VERY generous in contributing to the aforementioned "coffers". :hug: Sorta looks like a Love-Love relationship, don't it? :loveya: SURELY - since them evil corporations seem to favor these two - either of them would have the best chances of sitting down with the corps and asking them to recuse themselves from OUR doin's.... Right? Goshes, that sounds logical, don't it??? :crazy:

Oh, then there's that angry guy. You know, the one that can lavish $400 bucks on his own, pinney, little head. IF and WHEN you get a chance to hear him, he's tellin' us how we're slaves 'n all to those very same, loving donors (corporations) that keep bein' nice to them two celebrity hopefuls - the black 'n that "lady".

Who wants to see some coiffed, caucasian, Carolinian - with contempt for what corporations know is GOOD for us - in our Capitol residence??? Imagine the stir caused by pokin' a stick at the fat, sleepy landlord of Washington DC! That damned guy's just TRYIN' to rock the boat! We don't want nobody like THAT for our president! No sir! We want a president who'll TELL us they's a-changin' things, but really - is just gonna maintain the status quo. We want one of them celebrity aspirants what the corporate media's picked out for us to "choose" from. Don't we??? :silly:

I rest your case.

:applause: You think that the United States of Corporate America is gonna let the angry guy get the nom., let alone win the GE?

They won't even give him any air time without some negativity attached.

And a whole lot of people only believe what they hear and see on the boob toob. :shrug:

The corprats are the reason he isn't being heard from, the reason why his message isn't getting out.

You're right though, if people hear him, they believe in him.

which is why the corprats won't allow coverage of his campaign speeches.

It's all rigged.

Most of what I wrote was facetious and sarcastic. Such was evoked because in spite of all the detailed lamentations expressed - no one said anything about THE ONE HOPE there is for turning this giant ship around!

Yup, I'm aware of everything you say. And I DO believe he's DELIBERATELY over-looked because of what he represents. Fact is - with SO much at stake for corporations, if Edwards is tapped as the Dem candidate for the end race, there'd better be SUPER security around him because his life will be in danger.

"He's too angry" == "Oh no! He might upset the status quo that benefits us (the corporations) so much!"

"We CAN NOT have THAT! It SCARES us!"


Yes. John Edwards WILL change some things if he's President. And he will change some things that have LOooooooonnng needed changing.

And THAT is what the "he's too angry!" meme is about. They're afraid he'll do just that. They're afraid he'll upset the status quo - and - he will! :)

And Edwards is the only one talking about this....

is still a rat.

Watch the documentary The Corporation" on line at Youtube.

It is posted in 23 installments. Here is the link to all 23 episodes. http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=FA50FBC214A6CE87

From the website www.thecorporation.com:


Also, if you have a DSL or cable connection, check out the video documentary "Money as Debt" posted on Google video. Go to http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=money+as+debt&sitesearch= . (Click on the first video link at the top of the list). It explains how money is created through the issuance of debt by banks and financial institutions and how this debt created money compels us to keep exploiting the planet's resources in an effort to keep the economy expanding. It's all part of the bigger picture that provides the economic framework in which corporations operate.

that;s the law and that's crazy

As a Person:
Under the 5th amendment that no "person" shall be "deprived of life, liberty, and or property without due process of law."
Under the 14th amendment that no state shall "deny to any "person" within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
A corporation is also considered protected against unreasonable searches and seizures (4th amendment).
NOT a person under the 5th amendment--there is zero protection for self incrimination when involving a corporation

As a citizen:
NOT a citizen with regard to the 14th amendment ("No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.")--They are not covered by this statement

Is a citizen of its incorporated state and state of principal office for purposes of identification in lawsuits and federal court jurisdiction.

Essentially corporations are granted personhood to prevent assets from being seized and to ensure that corporations would be covered under US law. They do not have access to the so-called inalienable rights.

Citizenship was not bestowed on corporations in the normal sense--they were declared citizens of certain states to establish a framework in legal matters--they do not have the rights of a US citizen beyond this.

r

This is brilliant. The picture of the man on the world says it all. Though he's actually a reptile and the pyramid at the top is actually smaller than the one at the bottom, though having more power. It is fascinating how many overlook the role of corporations in the globalist scheme. Ron Paul fans have no clue. He champions ending the central bank rule over America and I agree. He has is moments, but is a wolf in sheeps clothing. He would lessen/eliminate the regulations keeping corporations in check, not allowing them to pollute anywhere, and demanding worker's rights. He'd eliminate minimum wage. War may be the racket the globalist bankers make the most money from, but corporations are the cat's paws.

I work for a non-profit, and like other small business, these are not corporations that do the Devil's work (and I DO mean Devil, money IS the root of ALL evil). We cannnot of course dismantle or disable major corporations. They are too much a part of everything to do so without anarchy and total collapse of a system they are at the top of (but not totally in control of). Who is in control of it? Well, what / who do they work for? Money. Whoever controls money, controls everything. It does not matter who is elected. They do the bidding of coprorate lobbyists. But why? What do they give them, money. Until the system of currency and money is fixed, this problem won't be. Public financing of elections, no more lobbying with money involved. And of course, no more central bank.

This isn't tinfoil hat stuff. Who was the last president to pay off the national debt entirely? Andrew Jackson (a Democrat). Why? He issued all currency direct from the govt. and not from a private bank, the way it is now. Made from air, and then LENT to us with interest. How can we ever pay down a debt if we get the money from them to pay it down. It's not designed for that. It is a system designed for almost continual war (they finally have it down with the 'war against terror' thing, now it never has to stop) to make the most debt. They finance all sides, so it goes on forever and so does the debt. Smaller banks own people for their increasing debt.

You can see where this is all going. An overworked, underpaid people, with inadequate health care and no time to excercize, learn healthy foods to eat, afford healthy foods (garbage is far more affordable), learn what's really going on, and protest when and if they found out. Houses jammed with 'stuff' corporations sell. Stuff that is overpriced, even at WalMart, and usless to do anything but further put them in fantasy lands of Sports, Video Games, and fictional media. Stuff they can't sell on E-Bay for more than 1/10th of what they paid for it, if they ever needed to, they'd be left with less than one months payment on the mortgage they are behind on.

And sadly, the only candidate who can beat all of the corporate-owned GOP is the one who's never taken their lobbyist money, and has an anti-corporate message (John Edwards). That's why the corporate media hides him behind a major squabble to make damned sure the ignorant bigots in America KNOW it's a woman and black man running that many won't vote for, for only those reasons. And it's President Romney or McCain in 2009 to give us more of Bush on steroids and a govt doing the bidding of corporations and AIPAC. While the elite who pull THEIR strings laugh from afar.

Not much can be done about it without total mayhem...We the People were sleeping 100 years ago when these rights were handed to the Corporations.

And now the numbers of people who are awake are too small, poor, not connected and spread to thin to make change, IMO. I am feeling a bit pessimistic today...

Peace.

Thanks for the thread, Orwellian_Ghost.

Corporations are a tool, a method for the few to dominate the many. It is merely the latest variation on an age old theme for which there are tried and true political remedies.

The danger in seeing corporations as the enemy rather than as merely a tool on the hands of the few used to oppress and exploit the many is that we wander off into sci fi Hollywood drama land, where we can imagine secret cabals with secret protocols and think of ourselves as living in "the Matrix" or up against some mysterious and elusive "PTB."

We are the peasants, they are the new aristocracy. It is that simple. The methods by which we are oppressed are not important, and if we take one tool away from them (not that we can do that without a life and death struggle anyway) they will find new tools and methods. The battle is for power, and the goal is always to win a share of power for the peasants. It is not a battle over which tools are being used to keep the peasants in misery.

Nothing will spare us from the necessity of taking on the same challenge and fighting the same fight that our ancestors fought time and again.

When will people get a clue what has happened to this country?!

This country was NOT founded upon rights "by and for the corporations"!

It was founded upon rights "BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE"!

People need to read some history books that's for damn sure! :argh:

The wealthy and powerful, the financiers, the few - they already have a political party defending and promoting their interests - relentlessly, aggressively, effectively.

What party represents our interests - the other 90% of the people who are losing ground every day?

I was wallowing in a funk leading to similar thoughts just this afternoon. Thank you for crystallizing it.

peace~

go back and read American Society, Inc....

and other works.....

talked about the rise of corporate power and its effects on the american class structure years ago

well said

:banghead:

The true terrorists are the few Power Corporations that own the government. The fight is in US streets, stores and office buildings.

Once more for the fine content and the hope that Edwards ends up in the oval office!

I'd forgotten about this.

What made you think of this?

I prefer to hang out on page 20 and help the cream rise back to the top. I enjoy your thread and kick um when I see um:patriot:

I wouldn't have seen it if you hadn't kicked it.

and kick the cream to the top:kick:

In our Third Civil War we will put the corporation in it's place. But they already know that. Hencefourth corporate armies like Blackwater. They are prepared for the fight. But we're not.

"Corporatism" is not an aberration of Capitalism, it is the fulfillment of Capitalism. Thus there is no reforming it, the basic motivations of it's abusiveness are untouched by such criticism. To try to separate the two is futile and useless hairsplitting.

Sooner or later we must get to the meat of the matter.

Nail meet hammer.