How to fight the excessive power from Corporations

[The Backlash Cometh]

(Reposted from another thread)

This is going to take a little strategy. The Supreme Court ruling is a blow, yes, but we have known for a while that corporations have already taken over. To fight their extensive power, it would help to understand how they operate.

When I worked for a corporation, my boss told me to write all my letters to customers using "we" instead of "I." The all powerful "we." Well, I never abused the power of the "we," mostly because I left the corp. after four years and never learned how. However, there is power in the "we." You see, if you make a mistake, corporations usually bandy around the mistake rather than fess up to it. They assume that you won't go through hoops to figure out their policies, like a lawyer would, to find out where they are wrong. Well, City, State and Federal government, has become exactly like those corporations. You can't tell them apart now, because they have all been taken over by the corporate business method of using the "we."

That's actually in our favor, the fact that corporations have taken over government, because government has open law rules which can expose the shenanigans easier if you have organizations willing to do the paperwork. That's their vulnerability.

I'm dealing with that very problem right now. I have found an incredible breach, where my City basically was involved in a conspiracy. Now, the City didn't partake in the conspiracy -- individuals did. However, the City is now in the position of having to protect the actions of those individuals, because the liability for those actions will eventually have to be absorbed by them -- The City.

If this was all I was dealing with, it would be an easy matter to resolve through the courts, however, who controls the courts? Well, judges serve on the benches, and judges were once lawyers who worked for law firms which, often times, are involved with City matters. If a lawyer makes it as far as a judge in Florida, chances are they were involved in something very peppery and sensitive. (I'm going by my own experience and observation.) So, not only is it likely that you'll face a judge who is aware of the situation you're dealing with, but you'll meet a judge in the appellate court as well who has the same familiarity. And if experiences tells me something, it is that these people don't reveal their conflicts of interest. So, unless you understand every network in the local area and every face, let's scratch the courts off the list, cuz, you're just going to fall into a trap. Without the power of the ACLU, it's unlikely there will be enough shoulders available to climb out of that trap on your own. (Cue in music for light going on over the head -- yes, this is one of the Achilles Heels.)

What about the State Attorney's Office? Well, who controls the SAO? I don't know. I just know that they either are incredibly quiet about their investigations, or they are also affected by the power of the "we." How? Well the individuals who were involved in the original shenanigans are also members of other organizations. They network. So every network that they belong to that they can win over, becomes an ally in their fight to keep the truth from coming out to hurt them. That means, that the power of the "we," can extend into our agencies of remedies -- but we already knew that with what happened to the Justice Department.

In short people, you're not fighting something that is faceless. You're fighting people who are pushing policies, bad policies. So expose the faces who are behind those policies and decisions. Separate them from the herd and make them responsible for the decisions they make.

That's how you fight the "We" Monster. Begin with their "I"s. You can do that by exposing their names in the newspapers, or going after them individually in the courts (Well, assuming you have the money for lawyers). The key here is exposure. You do this enough times and soon the patterns will become obvious to the mainstream. And once the mainstream understands the issue as well as we do, it will be easier to revisit these court decisions and close up the loopholes that are now being enjoyed by the people who abuse the power of corporations.

[arcadian]

1. Gotta use their weight against them.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. We need to play a clever game of chess.

Every time we can fit the pattern to our local situations, the more the mainstream will open their eyes.

[T Wolf]

2. I would go even further. Do not allow individuals to hide behind the "we" of the

organization (gov or com or org).

When the corporate entities own the system, it is futile to attack the corporation using the system. The only weak link is the actual humans who perform the misdeeds. They must be made to feel the consequences of their actions. Personally. And extremely.

Publicizing their names is not enough. They have to be taken out. By any means necessary.

If the actual human beings become fearful of performing the actions dictated by the company, they can be stopped. If those in control of the corporation become fearful for their lives and livelihood and that of their families, they may be a little more hesitant to do what they can now do with impunity.

With virtually no one in government "on our side" in this war, it is up to individuals to take individual action against individuals from the enmy camp. Only by taking this more-direct path do we have any chance of effecting positive change.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Erm...

No. Violence is for the right-wing. I don't follow that path.

Frankly, if I knew that the left were taking that approach, I wouldn't have anything to do with them.

[T Wolf]

9. Using the term "them" for "the left" indicates that you do not share the values and positions

that the Democratic party used to stand for.

There is a time for violence. Or, if your child was attacked, would you stand there and plead with "someone" to stop the attack? Or would you step up and save her life?

Your choice.

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. Are you a plant?

I have never come across a DUer who has been this vocal about violence.

[T Wolf]

12. Not (a plant) by a long shot - just someone who has been awake for the last 50+ years and

have seen the success that being "more aggressive" can lead to.

Vietnam rolled along for many more years because they killed Jack. And Bobby.

Economic justice was defeated when they killed Martin, who was turning from the "on-the-way-to-success" civil rights justice focus to the economic issue.

At this point, I see no solution "within the system" that is so completely stacked against progress.

And please answer the hypothetical - if your child was threatened, would you passively stand back, start a petition to send to your Senator, or take direct action to save her life?

IMO, the situation is that dire. I have two daughters who are facing a far worse possible future because of the actions of the rulers and wealthy elite of this world, particularly this country. I refuse to cede any possible weapon simply because it may ruffle a few feathers among the IBTL (to use one of the apologist's pet phrases) crowd.

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. The rules of self-defense.

It's not a fair test that you present to me. If I moved against a physical and immediate harm to me or to anyone around me, the law would be firmly on my side.

I think the problem we're dealing with, is that the laws that rule over everything else have been slackened. Decisions made by committee, rules made by government bodies -- those laws which fall under Civil torts, are controlled by lawyers and judges -- the courts. Note that I'm not talking about trial lawyers. The ones who thought ahead have managed to shut down trial lawyers, because they are the ones who could uncover this kind of thing. The Erin Brokovitches(sp?) of the world. Corporate-municipal lawyers are the ones in control.

[T Wolf]

14. Personally, at this point, laws are meaningless. Results are what matters. Relying on laws,

which are created by those in power to protect that power, to define what is acceptable in a battle is the same thing as relying on the rigged system for justice. It ain't gonna happen.

The ends do justify the means - it is up to each individual to determine which means are acceptable to them, weighing the means against the ends. Would I shoot at someone who purposely bumped into my child, knocked them down, and was running away? No. Would I shoot at a person who purposely stabbed my child and was running away? Absolutely. Others would undoubtedly make different choices in each scenario.

We Dems can continue to naively "fight the good and fair fight" and continue to lose

OR

we can decide that winning this war is important enough to get our hands a little dirty.

Again, each person needs to decide for themselves.

What is clear is that "our" critters in government (for the most part) are not on our side in terms of goals. So why should we rely on them to do our work when, even if they "succeed" we will not get health care, peace, corporate regulation, environmental protection, marriage equality, etc...

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. The extent of playing dirty.

The rule-breaking that I can see happening, are the ones that fall under the realm of civil disobedience. For example, if you work in a law firm, and you know that the lawyers and/or their clients are breaking the law and you decide to let the tape run to capture their conversation, well, you're going to jail if you release that tape. You're whole life and career will be shot. However, if it protects the public safety, welfare and health, then there might be a loophole there somewhere once it goes to court. "Public interest" that's your loophole.

That's the only way I see it. Not through physical harm to others, but, through the self-sacrifice of civil disobedience, by exposing something that can harm others -- knowing that the po-po are coming to take you to jail.

That said, I recognize that I'm too selfish to make that sacrifice or, that I don't have any information that would justify putting my family in the kind of upheaval that would occur.

[Rapanui1]

5. Most democrat senators are corporatives

Most democrat senators are corporatives Chris dod being the snake head. Democrat party has lost it now the Rethuglicans lost it long time back. Obama is the biggest corporative of all

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. Yes.

This may be the hardest revelation of all. The fact that the Democratic party has members within it who have taken the bait, hook, line and sinker. But that's the power of corporations.

However, within each individual, even with Republicans, there is a part of them that's still a boy scout. I could get into a long philosophical discussion about this, how the Republicans have separated themselves into a tribe, and they only care about how they're perceived positively within that tribe. It's where they get their power from if they manage to control the thinking of the tribe. However, this tribe is fickle. You show them how these people are dipping into their pockets, and they will turn. That's when the boyscout comes out and realizes he's done wrong. It's only at that point where you'll be able to reach them. Get them to see how what they've done has been an offense to all of us.

I bet it will be easier to connect with the boyscouts within the Democratic party, than it will be in the Republican one.

[galileoreloaded]

6. You deal with a bully that flattens your nose by cutting off his head....

and posting it on YouTube. (figuratively)

Your advice above, while thoughtful and well reasoned, is also completely ineffective in the current environment. Using corrupt institutions to fight corruption is futility at best and borderline derangement at worst.

Until you internalize the level of disinterest that you as an individual are held in, you'll never understand that utilizing corrupt institutions for reform is analogous to a homeless person writing a letter to the president bitching about the space program. All context of influence is lost.

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. I would like to hear more from you.

To understand your position better.

[galileoreloaded]

11. OK. My position is very simple....

what we lack in the US is commitment, as well as a fundamental delusion in regards to our common recent history (1945-present). While your sane and reasonable approach would be effective in a sane environment, we don't, nor have we ever lived in a sane environment.

Let me explain.

There is a common delusion about the last 50 years that many progressives like to wax nostalgic about. That is that there was some golden age of American labor, where you could make it on one income, and blue collar folks could make a decent livin' down at the plant, and by gawd Americans were the good guys. This is a great delusion of course, as the gains made in that time period domestically came at greats cost to countries and populations around the world. Read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" for a primer. Whole societies and environments were culturally and economically exterminated for resource extraction and the opening of new trade routes, so as to keep the illusion of American growth alive. While ole' Jerry was raising his 2.4 kids and buying his affordable house in Scranton, poor people in other places were balancing that effort by relinquishing their living standard many times over. Our golden age was balanced on the backs of the second and third world, by the same corporations that we complain about today.

Fast forward, today. Those same corporations that exploited on our behalf, are now our common antagonist. The difference though is that they have had literally DECADES to hone their predatory skills in regards to effective exploitation. Their level of commitment is very high, and they are playing very much for keeps. They have amassed resources and economies of scale on par with many nations. The retain their own private armies, their own state of the art methods of transport, communications, and logistics.

So I guess the best way to put it is this, to win a battle (much less a war) with these amorphous, faceless organizations you have to get very down and dirty, shockingly so, because I guarantee they are. They have, by nature of the way internal operations are organized, the ability to shape and act outside of the purvey of government at will. Laws mean very little to them, as long as they have a willing customer, and often government and citizens are both willing customers.

So, to summarize, my position is that without commitment to do whatever is necessary, to starve them, and by doing that, starve ourselves, we can't win. The status quo can't change, as it has become institutionalized, and turned into a cancer. You beat cancer not by feeding it, but by starving it, and then cutting it out, completely removing all vestiges, so it may never return. Hopefully you don't kill the host.

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Before you can remove cancer from the body,

you first most isolate it. Ergo, expose it.

That's the problem with these things. A community is easy to corrupt. This cancer spreads the way we always envisioned evil would spread in a community if the devil came to town. The City buys people through their economic development policies. They call them inducements, when what they're doing is basically looking the other way as their City cronies are allowed to commit Civil torts against their neighbors. You're screwed when you realize that one third of your small community has become a member of the local business networks which control the City government. You'll never get control of your homeowner's board to expose them because among their networks are lawyers who will scare you off. That's the cancer we're dealing with. It's right there in your own neighborhood. Not just in some monolithic building called a corporation. The same kind of intimidation is occurring in there. Worse because they got you easily because of your salary.

The only thing I know for sure is that there are civil torts and criminal laws. You don't make your situation better resolving a civil tort (even though it has criminal elements in it) by committing a criminal offense. You do that and they have you right where they want you. "LOOK here," they'll tell the bland faced mainstream. "This is a kook and everything she's told you is a lie." How will you ever get the upper hand with that kind of thing hanging over your head?

Believe me. No one knows better than I do that the cards are stacked against us. But, in the same light, if they want to call themselves a symbol of America, then it is a house of cards they have created to hide in. We just have to figure out which card to pull in order to topple them all down.