Fight the Corporatacracy!

How Popular Movements Can Confront Corporate Power and Win.


This is a good article by By Michael Marx and Marjorie Kelly, YES! Magazine. Posted August 29, 2007.

To sum it up it talks about the pervasive nature of corporate power, why its bad, and what can be done about it, and how.

"Dig beneath the surface of any major problem we face and you'll find unchecked corporate power.

Corporate power lies behind nearly every major problem we face--from stagnant wages and unaffordable health care to overconsumption and global warming. In some cases, it is the cause of the problem; in other cases, corporate power is a barrier to system-wide solutions. This dominance of corporate power is so pervasive, it has come to seem inevitable. We take it so much for granted, we fail to see it. Yet it is preventing solutions to some of the most pressing problems of our time."

Another good article to look at:

Winning the Class War.

Dictatorship in America?

After doing a lot of thinking about our current government, politics, and the overall SNAFU state of affairs, I've come to a very disturbing question. Whats to stop Bush from becoming a dictator? Or far that matter, any president?

Hear me out on this one. The Bush administration, and particularly Bush, has undermined the Constitution in so many ways its not even funny. The cabinet of officials he has surrounded himself with have garnished so much executive power for themselves that they could feasibly just take it for good. Why not? What do we have in place to stop it? The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, Congress, the Senate? Not likely. The power of the branches of government are dwindling under the pressure of the Bush administration, and those who still have some power are right in step with old Georgie Boy. When it comes right down to it, the Constitution and other important [coinciding] documents that were designed to prevent such a power take over are really just a piece of paper. Bush has already proven that. Heck, if he wanted to he could just set fire to the damn thing and be done with it. Loose ends could easily be tied up by his cronies in the Supreme Court, and everyone else could be controlled by acts he has already written into practice, such as the Patriot Act, Marshal Law, and the blatant disregard of the right to due process (fifth amendment). Bush has also sought out to destroy the Constitutional principle of keeping the powers separate. From "The constitution" by David Cole (an essay):

"The single constitutional principle most under attack, however, is the separation of powers. Time and time again, administration officials have sought to elevate the president above the law, arguing that, as commander in chief, he may choose to "engage the enemy" however he pleases, without regard to what the other branches of government have said. This notion first surfaced in an August 2002 Justice Department memo written by Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo for the White House Counsel Alberto Gonzalez. Yoo argued that the president could not be precluded from ordering the torture of enemy combatants merely because the United States had ratified an international treaty prohibiting torture under all circumstances, or because Congress had made torture a federal crime. "The president enjoys complete discretion in the exercise of his Commander-in-Chief authority and in conducting operations against hostile forces," Yoo wrote. "Congress can no more interfere with the president's conduct of the interrogation of enemy combatants than it can dictate strategic or tactical decisions on the battlefield." If the president decided to "engage the enemy" by ordering that the enemy be tortured, that was his prerogative, and literally nobody could stop him. [...]"

So I ask again, whats to stop him from taking complete power? Think about this, Hitler was able to rise to power, and have a massive following of people who did whatever he ordered them to do. Most, if not all of his ideas were completely insane, they were atrocities, yet the public went along willingly until it was too late to stop him. By the time folks tarted figuring it out, he had the military power and force to quell uprisings fairly quickly. In fact it took darn near teh entire world to bring him down. Even then, he had supporters in other countries too.

If a man can convince a nation that genocide is good, and torture is OK, or that torture wasn't really occurring, or that the people in the "work camps" weren't really experiencing torture (sound familiar?) why can't Bush, or one of his more eloquent cronies? He already had people believing there were WMD's as a justification for a war. He has people believing that enemy combatants being held without due process aren't really experiencing "torture". After all, they only pretended they were going to electrocute the prisoners...and parading them around in the nude, sexual abusive acts, and water boarding aren't really all that bad...right? Gee, I mean, it could be worse.....[/sarcasm].

When all is said and done, when push comes to shove, no matter if Bush takes over or has simply set the stage for someone even worse to take control of this nation, he has created a power vacuum that allows the opportunity for a dictator to take control.

What will we do then? How much does it take for a nation to wake up and smell the fascism? Will we be like Nazi Germany, and wait until its too late before we try and fight back?

If it comes down to that, we can call it "The American Revolution, episode II". And pray to whatever god you pray to that we can start fresh.

Stupid doesn't begin to explan it.

I've been keeping tabs on one of those pro-war pro-Bush groups that have their panties in a twist because the nation is screaming for peace and impeachment. I just can't stand it anymore. The mindset ranges from scary brainwashed Hitler's youth SS soldiers to just plain stooopid. If you know what I mean.

The rational behind their actions and words and justifications make no sense at all. Its clear that they have little knowledge of history outside of the US, or perhaps just an extremely limited historical and political viewpoint because no one bothered to teach them anything that might make America sound like a bad place, at any point in time. Or perhaps, much like the far right wing fundamentalist religious groups, they've got some wires loose somewhere and are incapable of understanding anything they haven't already been force fed by people of a like mind.

Whatever their problem is, its a problem. There is a difference in my opinion between supporting the current administration, the war, or whatever political view point one has - and quite another to go on a witch hunt for anyone who disagrees with you so you can have a "moonbat bashing party".

Of course, as time moves forward, and more and more people become discontented with the president, the administration, the war and everything in between, the more these right wing conservatives for violence feel the need to resort to typical ad hominem abusives to try and cripple the voices of the rest of the country. This tactic is not a new one, and was written about quite skillfully by Jack Hitt in an essay called "The Marketplace of Ideas"

"The one tactic that has yielded the best results though, is to enfeeble entire arguments by destroying the reputation of the most prominent person making them. The fallacy of the ad hominem argument has been around since before classical rhetoricians named it, but this administration has made it a mainstay of contemporary politics. Al Gore is now commonly known to have boasted that he "invented the internet," even though those words were artfully put in his mouth. By the exact same tactic, John Kerry went from Vietnam hero to wartime opportunist, while Howard Dean was branded mentally unbalanced on teh basis of a single phoneme. After Paul O'Neill published his tell-all book, allegations of treason began to float, claiming that documents he took with him were classified (they weren't). John Murtha is being described as "dotty." When Bill O'Reilly hears an argument he can't answer, he calls the person "kooky" and then announces he will not engage the position precisely because the speaker is nuts. [essay cont's...]"

These arguments are precisely what bother me so much when I read the message board forums and articles, and particularly the blog pages of those involved with these groups. It bothers me, but it also makes me laugh. The idea that they can't come up with anything better than a tired old "commie" insult, or some machismo war cry similar to a gorilla in heat tickles me to no end.

On the other hand, this is how hate groups are started. The sheer paranoia that oozes from these people about the "evil lefties" (those being anyone who doesn't agree lock-step with their positions). The comical rants about communism, socialism, anarchy and the group that really gets their goat, the black bloc, are made even funnier because the person ranting on about it is such an alarmist that they've gotten themselves all confused about who's who and what's what.

With confusion like that, no wonder they support a president like Bush. They have the same mentality. And I don't mean in a political sense.

Also, it should be noted that most (not all) of the members in said group have some sort of connection with a hard-line Christian church. They are conservative to a fault, intolerant to the extreme, and scared out of their minds. They don't like Gays, Liberals, Democrats, Pagans, Muslims, foreigners...basically anyone.

These are the type of people that would travel to a foreign country (OK, I'm pushing it here, I don't think many of them would actually want to travel outside of their blessed United States) and refuse to even try to speak the native language. Why? Because American is better. So everyone should speak American English. Thats is to say, even the type of English spoken abroad (you know, people with the "funny accents") isn't good enough. You gotta speak English! The way we do it here in America y'all!

Then there is the pro war aspect that bothers me. It isn't laughable, not even for a moment. I'm neither pro-war nor anti-war on general terms. I'm anti-this war. But generally speaking I can see that there is a time and place for war. I'm definitely not a "peacenik" by any stretch of the imagination. But I'm also not gung ho about war, should we get into one (that is justifiable).

Its not a football game, we're not standing in a stadium with beer and pretzels rooting for the home team to bomb the shit out of the other team. People are dying, on both sides. People who have nothing to do with the war in the first place. Civilians who get caught in the middle of some horrific war zone...

I certainly don't start rooting for another war before the first one is even done with yet, as some of the pro-war folks are doing. Its eerily Orwellian. Bin Laden is the enemy. Al Quieda is the enemy. Hussein is the enemy. Iraq is the enemy. Iran is the enemy.

I'm sorry, who are we fighting again, and whats the reason this time?

Back to the groups of people who disturb me...The other part that I simply don't get is these people hook up with law enforcement act like goody two shoes, but as soon as the police tur their back, they're assaulting people. And usually women, young girls, or old ladies.

Oh wait, how dumb am I? That makes perfect sense. Law enforcement has enough inherent problems that teaming up with groups like this seems so natural. Like perfectly matched dance partners. I'd wager a bet that these folks could get on with their assault right in front of the police, and the anti-war protester would be the one to get arrested for it anyway.

The blind nationalistic pride that tows he party line so well is abundant in these groups - so abundant in fact that it makes one wonder if they aren't being urged on quietly by our government, if not outright supported by it. All while the other groups are being hit with fines on a daily basis for organizing rallies.

“When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” Sinclair Lewis - corrected because I royally messed up the quote.

Sure sounds like the current administration and its ardent followers to me.

Fair prices are stupid

Well, OK thats not really how I feel about it. That is how I perceive how others feel about it though. For example, there are numerous grocery stores in my area. Having all of these stores around means competitive business, which should mean fair prices. Of course, thats not how it works. Most of the stores charge the same amount, save for a few items or offered discounts and raise their prices simultaneously when the market calls for it (or when the company decides they need a higher profit margin). Instead of one or more stores keeping prices low to keep all of them low and reasonable, they figure hey...if they can charge that much so can we.

Enter in the discount grocer. We had one open up a few months back. The prices aren't just a little bit less than the other stores, they're drastically less. I'm talking about a weekly grocery bill that has gone from $150-$250 to $50-$90. Thats massive. Of course, you don't get bags, unless you pay for them (3 cents a whack, oh my!) , and you might have to buy an off brand for certain items. Other than that though, they're pretty much the same as any grocer minus the meat and bakery departments.

So back to my point which is, if this store can make a profit selling items for sometimes less than half or more than it competitors, what does that say about the competitors? They're ripping you off, thats what. The line of bull that overhead is simply costing so much they must continuously increase their prices to magnanimous amounts is just that, a line of bull.

Here's the kicker though. Americans don't like saving a buck when it comes to corporately owned businesses. People who shop at said discount grocery stores are looked at like lepers. As if paying a reasonable amount of money for something we actually need (food) is indicative of an unhealthy lifestyle. Or that we're just too gosh darn poor to be able to shop at "real" grocery stores. Poor us, I just saved over $100 on items that will literally be gone before the end of the week. I must be an idiot! Why would I want to pay $14 for toilet paper when I can get the same thing for $1.99?

I'm literally flushing the product down the toilet.

But again, when it comes to products we need, and if its a corporation, Americans just look down on people who want fair, reasonable prices. They'll nickel and dime their neighbors at a yard sale for a $.25 mug...or haggle the local shop owner to get a discount on an already fairly priced item. A fair price is absolutely necessary when they are buying items they don't need (and can't afford anyway). But god forbid should they step foot into a discount grocery store. They would rather pay top dollar for items that will eventually be flushed down a toilet, shat out, or thrown away.

But thats just our country isn't it? Corporate is God, local business people and private citizens go to hell! We're shooting ourselves in the foot. We're creating corporate owned wage slaves. And for no reason at all.