Pretend you're running for president with intended policy to destroy corporatism

[graywarrior]

How would you run your campaign and what policies would you create? Who would be your biggest adversaries and how would you deal with them?

I just watched Bulworth (not the greatest film in the world). That movie was made at the end of an era when liberalism had strength in Hollywood. Now it is run by corporatists, as is everything else.

So, what would you do as president to deal with corporatism? Be as creative as possible.

[DJ13]

1. To end corporatism you have to start with their ability to buy influence

Publicly funded campaigns is the first thing that needs to be tackled, everything else can progress much easier after that.

[graywarrior]

2. How could you tackle that?

Bulworth started by telling the truth. They got him in the end.

[DJ13]

5. It would take a President with enormous speaking ability to rally

a grass roots groundswell to convince the bought and paid for Congress to even consider such an idea.

But (and heres where reality falls short of Hollywood) that President must believe wholeheartedly that the nation needs to end corporatism, and that his Presidency may become a single term in office as a result.

I really think that was the unspoken message the Obama campaign convinced people they were voting for, even if it was just an advertising campaign that ultimately was as meaningful as selling soap.

[graywarrior]

6. I doubt any president could, or would be able to destroy corporatism

The closest we came was the millions of Americans who contributed to Obama's campaign. I think we felt we had won that, if only until he was sworn in.

[DJ13]

7. You cant destroy it, but if they couldnt buy influence it would weaken them

Thats about the best that any one person could hope to accomplish.

[graywarrior]

8. You'd need to convince congress to pass your new bill

How in hell do you do that? Shame them?

[DJ13]

13. Thats where the 'groundswell of support from the base' is needed

I think its similar to the (unfulfilled) notion the liberal base had for how they wanted Obama to use the bully pulpit from his electoral mandate in the early part of his term to begin reversing the conservatism that has infected our country.

Suppose a President with Obama's natural ability to rally support had used the unique opportunity of a large electoral mandate to commit himself soon after taking office to confront Congress about changing the campaign finance issue thats destroying our country by rallying his millions of enthusiastic supporters to take up the cause?

It wouldnt be easy, but with the grass roots Obama had in his favor after the election the pressure could have been applied to make it possible.

We'll never know, unfortunately Obama doesnt seem to care about corporatism, and that opportunity is long gone now.

[graywarrior]

24. A shame, because corporatism is the most deadly disease and it's destroying us

Especially media corporatism.

[chill_wind]

3. This isn't especially creative, but

the first 3 offensives for starters that I think would be crucial would be massive campaign finance and lobby reform-
major reform of media ownership, and repealing the doctrine of corporate personhood.

[graywarrior]

4. Major reform of media ownership, indeed

That would be a blood battle.

I'm thinking Fight Club...shhhhh.

[chill_wind]

9. Aye. Very bloody. And not that I can think of anyone

who could get this done alone, but there's this, a bit of a starting framework:

MORA (Media Ownership Reform Act )

http://www.house.gov/hinchey/issues/mora.shtml

I wish somebody would dust it off (it's been laying around since the Bush admin, I think) and take a new look at it at least...

[graywarrior]

10. Very interesting.

I must spend time reading all of that.

[chill_wind]

11. It was introduced in '05--

Initial co-sponsors:


Rep DeFazio, Peter A. - 7/14/2005
Rep Filner, Bob - 7/14/2005
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. - 7/14/2005
Rep Kaptur, Marcy - 7/14/2005
Rep Lee, Barbara - 7/14/2005
Rep McDermott, Jim - 7/14/2005
Rep Moran, James P. - 7/14/2005
Rep Owens, Major R. - 7/14/2005
Rep Sanders, Bernard - 7/14/2005
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. - 7/22/2005
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh - 7/14/2005
Rep Solis, Hilda L. - 7/14/2005
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete - 7/14/2005
Rep Waters, Maxine - 7/14/2005
Rep Watson, Diane E. - 7/14/2005
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. - 7/14/2005

It has its problems, for those opposed to the Fairness Doctrine piece if it.
But it would be a starting place.

[graywarrior]

21. I want to spend some time today researching that

[chill_wind]

12. Oh- K & R :-)

[RandomThoughts]

14. First convince people it is needed.

Then take the biggest corporation, and break them in half. Rinse and repeat.

The more companies there are, the less efficient they are, and the more jobs are required to do the same thing. Also the top wages are smaller, limiting consolidation of wealth.

Entities that control massive amounts of wealth need to have much of that removed, since it is an imbalance in the system. So taxation on large entities, would break them up, or force race to the bottom as they moved over seas. So along with that would have to be either a global policy, or taxes on systems that are too big.


The arguments are easy, and not disputed, unless the goal is consolidation and control in the hands of a few.

A long range way to do such a thing is higher Estate Taxes, and regulations on monopoly control. Especially in areas of media. However in almost every sector things have been going the other direction giving more ability for companies to consolidate.


Why not have no corporation be allowed to have ownership of business that have conflict of interest, like advertising and media, or production or financial sector and media. Why not limit someone being able to sit on the board of directors of more then one company, if it creates a monopoly system.

And prosecute people that do price fixing in any of its forms within a sector.

Note that smaller corporations make price fixing much harder, since more people would have to get together to fix a price.

Basically its pretty easy, break the tenacles that connect the different sectors and multiple sectors in any one corporation.

Then since governments need is to regulate systems of money that are against societies purpose, as the corporations become smaller, government can then become smaller.


The simplest way, The largest corporation in any group or sector, pays X10 Taxes. Then there would be a profit motive to be smaller. However race to the bottom also has to be addressed. And the supporting of small buisness and local community buisness.

Its really easy to do, how to do it is not the question, it is do the people that write legislation want to do it.

[boppers]

16. The top corporations:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2010/snapshots/2255.html

1. Wal-Mart
2. Exxon Mobil
3. Chevron
4. General Electric
5. Bank of America
6. ConocoPhillips
7. AT&T
8. Ford Motor
9. J.P. Morgan Chase
10. Hewlett-Packard

I wouldn't miss the elimination of all of them.

[graywarrior]

17. The biggest question is how to get the average voter to understand it

[JVS]

15. I'd campaign on letting them collapse and not letting them loot the treasury.

Then when they're collapsing, I'd be a total dick and remind everyone that they're asking for the GOVERNMENT to help them and that I don't want to hear any fucking bullshit about me meddling with the economy if they want help. I nationalize vital industry.

Then I inflame the public against the plutocrats that caused the economic crisis, pointing out how badly they fucked us and how the rule of law unfortunately prevents me from extracting revenge. I also use all that unconstitutional stuff that Bush started up to secure the stability of my regime, but not necessarily the domestic tranquility. If questioned about that, I claim that the lower tax revenues of the economic crisis make it impossible for me to keep order for the convenience of a bunch of plutocrats.

Then I let the situation resolve itself.

[graywarrior]

18. LOL

Make corporations need to apply for corporate welfare every three months like they do with food stamps for low income. With suspicion, question every response and inflict guilt.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

19. I would run my campaign as a pro-corporate centrist

Because otherwise, I would have a chance of getting elected.

[graywarrior]

20. And that's the bottom line, isn't it?

Say what people want to hear to get elected then disappointed the hell out of them.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

22. Just so long as you're disappointing the right people

When Jimmy Carter ran for governor of Georgia, he ran what we might call today a "dog whistle" campaign to appeal to segregationists. After he was elected, he revealed himself to be the fair-minded person that we know today.

I'm sure the Lester Maddox wing of the Democratic (now Republican) Party was plenty disappointed.

[graywarrior]

23. That's a good point.

Either way, someone gets duped. Thing is, we all know what's going on. we just choose to ignore ciertain portions of it. Selective hearing.

[Dr Fate]

28. Do you think the public would oppose a candidate if he openly disagreed with corporate personhood?

For instance?

It shouldnt be too hard, unless we are just lazy & un-creative, to convince most people that Exxon is not an individual human being.

I'll bet you can get a sizable portion of the population to agree that the rich should pay more taxes than the middle class- Obama ran on that and did just fine. The next wave of DEM candidates could certainly push that meme even further to incluce some of the more easily scap-goated & unpopular corps..

I hear ya, but there are some anti-corporate buttons you can push that would not spell election death.

I'm looking at ways to speed up the process a little bit-as opposed to what we are already doing...

[Uzybone]

25. You'd have to lie to win the election

You'd have to deceive the media in every interview. You'd have to be deceptive in the debates and you'd have to deceive many fund raisers.

The biggest adversaries would be the American people, who at this point are completely wedded to corporatism.

[Dr Fate]

26. Suggest a law requring everyone in congress to disclose their top 3 donors....

...before they can speak on the floor.

Suggest new House & Senate Rules requiring that congress works with C-SPAN to show the names of their top 3 donors on the bottom of the screen while they are speaking.

Then let the public see just how hard congress fights & argues to keep that from happening.

When you deabte them, ask them to disclose their top 3 donors, and if they refuse, do it yourself.

In other words, start off by making people aware of the extent of corporate influence.

This might be a good way to get the ball rolling. I realize this is too creative & agressive for any DEM, but it would be cool.

[kentuck]

27. I would follow the example of Barack Obama

:-) By the way, good question.

Because, in today's sophisticated political world, a Democratic President is opposed from all angles, including his own Party, much of the time. Big Business owns our politicians. That is a political reality.

So, how to deal with it? Go thru the people. Go slowly and let your ideas simmer over time. Do not express radical ideas or ideas of great change, no matter how much it may be needed. Otherwise, you will be destroyed by the corporate media and your political enemies. You can only lay the groundwork. You cannot demand immediate change. You can only do what the people demand. The people can only demand thru their representatives.

This is how healthcare reform was passed. It was not what Barack Obama wanted. It was all that was possible to get, under the present political realities.

The same goes for Wall St reform. We all may believe that they need to be broken up. However, if you express that belief, you might be destroyed as a political figure? And you get nothing. It must be done at a slow pace, educating the masses, and then doing what is possible, not what is desired.

[Dr Fate]

29. Therse are good points- maybe Obama opened the door for a more aggressive approach.

I dont want future DEMS to follow his exact example so much as I think they need to take his ideas even further. The public percieved Obama campainging on the notion that billionares & millionares should pay their fair share, and he openly claimed to be for a public option-and he did just fine.

I'm guessing that as time wears on, we can lose the "centrist" approach.

[craigmatic]

30. I'd do what bush did use signing statements and get the congressional dems to put ammendments in

bills I sign that have nothing to do with corporatism like war funding bills. That's the means bush used to destroy this country. Why not use it as a way to fix it?

[harun]

31. Make Ralph Nader my Chief of Staff.

[graywarrior]

32. Whoa!

[chill_wind]

33. kick