Maybe Soylent Green really should be people.

I was looking at a paint brush just now, and because paint brushes figure into my life, I was looking at it while thinking about the recent SCOTUS decision that decided that corporations have the rights of people.

The paint brush had natural bristles, which are really the best in a lot of applications. They come from pigs, traditionally.

I wondered whether the bristles came off the pigs while they were alive, or after.

Then I realized that basically, it was an economic decision. All the parts of the pig were going to be used, commercially, because that's what the pig was raised for, to make product.

And it made me think that humans are the exception, among animals, in that we generally don't contribute to the environment upon our death the way that decomposing plants in the forest do, or the way all of the parts of the food chain depend on each other. We either incinerate our remains, or bury them in such a fashion that they are isolated from becoming (frankly) fertilizer.

But now that corporations have the same rights as humans, I have to wonder: isn't there some value being wasted there?

Humans are well-fed, their toxin load (while not negligible) is generally not what killed them, and we have an extremely well developed system for processing the dead (and the pre-dead) in our health care system. Ambulances, hospitals, and support staff to track the expense of each subject. Heck, it's bar-coded and shovel ready. Except we should get beyond the shovel, and maximize the resources we have.

And by "we", I mean all American citizens. Along with the multinational corporations who are now free to compete on a level playing field with us, dollar wise. What could go wrong?


Thank you, Chief Justice Roberts, for seeing beyond settled law to something more expansive: the value of each human life.

I'm anxious to see what I'm worth in this new, free market.

Better pick it up.

We are nothing to them...

Other than the value of our product. Orwell had the pigs taking over the farm. In our case, we
are the pigs that form the foundation of the state...you know, the concrete stuff that holds the
whole thing up but that's not visible.

This is a great post. It strikes right at the heart of how we're seen and who are are to "them."

We have an out of control financial and political elite addled by nepotistic inbreeding, incapable
of functioning even in their interests. They have so little respect for the people, they don't
even try to fool us any more. They're getting ready to really drop the hammer and say, "Hey, the
party is over. Work till you drop and keep your f'ing mouth shut while you're at it."

Thank you Bleever!!!

in our food, water, and air.

Consumer protections, we are told, infringe on the principle of letting the free market decide what is and isn't acceptable. According to this model, consumers will choose products that are safer without involving the heavy hand of the government.

Of course, they also think that consumers don't have a right to know what's in a product or how it's made. Just look at the "controversy" about labeling milk as coming from cows raised without rBST. Milk producers argued that letting companies label their milk as rBST free would "deceive" consumers into thinking it was better.

This latest SCOTUS decision affirms the notion that the rights of humans to protect their physical persons is superseded by a corporation's rights over us as money-spending chattel.


Thanks for your kind words, auto! :hi:

grim reading though it makes:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1244824/Fears-grow-study-shows-genetically-modified-crops-cause-liver-kidney-damage.html

For your OP and for this info too.

K & R.

(from the article in the Telegraph, thank you)

What if I had something that Wal-Mart, or a property developer, could use better than I could? Like a liver, or a kidney.

Seems like the lines have gotten a little fuzzy now.

(Which may not be a bad thing! lol)

:applause:

:hug:

to keep your head down, here in our brave new world.

:hug:

Thanks, bleever.

We live in a time of monsters alas.

What did I miss?

Peace and goodwill to you.

one of those horror films called, When Monsters Roamed the Earth, but it just seems to be a phrase that's somehow entered into folklore. Though I thought I glimpsed a mention of it in one Google item about a film with dinosaurs and stuff.

Unfortunately, I missed the key significance of the Soylent Green reference, as I only caught the tail-end of the film, but you could hardly imagine a more pointed metaphor, could you?

Thank you for your blessing. Peace and goodwill to you, too.

And then we die and they make a profit selling us AS Soylent Green. It works out well for them. There's a certain elegance in there somewhere.

Does it really matter where that Hydrolyzed Animal Protein comes from?

you know the rest.

Is Soylent Green vegan?

Answer

So, if the people are vegan, I suppose you could argue that Soylent Green from them is vegan and so
forth.

Since the people who become Soylent Green voluntarily went home, they're not being exploited when they're turned into wafers. So...my stance is Soylent Green is vegan even though it is made from people.

Y'know, what might be entertaining, were one to have millions of dollars he didn't know what to do with, is to open a factory that made crispy organic whole wheat crackers with mixed greens-collards, turnip greens and spinach--in them. Make 'em about the same size as Triscuits. These light, tasty crackers would, of course, be called Soylent Green. Soylent Red would be spicy organic whole-wheat crackers with a mixture of red bell and red hot peppers, and Soylent Yellow would be flavorful organic whole wheat crackers with yellow squash. You'd have to put a disclaimer on the package: Soylent Green is no longer people.

must be property.

After all, corporations are owned. They are property.

As free men and women, we supposedly can't be owned. But now are citizenship and attendant rights are on equal footing with those of property.




Thanks, ump! When you said you'd call balls and strikes, I just didn't realize you meant that you would call for a strike against the rights of individual citizens.

Stevens said that the objectivity of the judges was called into question by the Bush v. Gore
decision. Now we see the product of that prophecy.

If corporations were people, we could put them in jail.

First, Bush v. Gore.

The prime example of activist judges, making law by overruling state laws, when state law explicitly has the power to determine elections?

Now, overruling the notion of stare decisis, after two of the justices explicitly swore under oath their fealty to that principle?


It seems to me that if you're playing against cheaters, and you don't want to call them on it, the word for you is: loser.

for 'enabler of fascism.' Hitler came to power through the "Enabling Acts." We won't have a Hitler,
but we now have the completed infrastructure for a fully functional fascist state, not just fascism-
lite. The only political force capable of opposing this is the minority of Democrats who know that
this is happening and actually care about it. However, among that cognescenti only a few are
willing to speak up and demand action. Kucinich is the most prominent. Conyers is a real fighter.
Grayson shows some promise but where is the Democrat that will enter five impeachment resolutions?
We'll see but I'm not holding my breath.