America the Oligarchy?

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Ill be glad when someone hits you with a truck
Think about it, democracy, very plainly, is a wolf a lion and a deer deciding what is for dinner. (game of thrones pun...)

Plato said democracy is a bad form of government, and I tend to agree.

An Oligarchy is not so bad. In an oligarchy, the risk of one person having all power and being a tyrant is diminished. A few people sharing power. You are assigning a negative connotation to it because "its rich people and rich people can't share my values and don't understand me."

That might be true. But rich people know how to get shit done.

But in reality we are still a republic. We have some trappings of democracy, and some trappings of oligarchy, and lately with executive power expansion (even before Obama) some trappings of a monarchy.

At the end of the day, every two years the polls are open and the people can get what they want.

The frustration arises when politicians (from both parties) get elected saying they will do one thing, and end up doing another. Both parties are guilty of this.

What recourse are we then left with?
 

Eye of Horus

Well-Known Member
Think about it, democracy, very plainly, is a wolf a lion and a deer deciding what is for dinner. (game of thrones pun...)


What recourse are we then left with?
We are left with the options of being passive and taking it or standing up and shoving our little winkies down their throats.
 

killemsoftly

Well-Known Member
I once saw a fromer secretary of state interviewed, can't recall which one. He said" "we need to be honest with ourselves and admit that this country is a plutocracy before anything will change" And that is from an insider. WOW. And he said it in public, on tv. That was over a decade ago. Murka is well on the road the Roman's travelled.
 

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Sounds like the natural progression.

no need to influence anything without a lot of power. Government grows steadily and starts to gain control, and only then is it worth having control of.

It's like you progs don't understand. The bigger and more powerful you make the government, the more incentives you give to entities to control or influence it.
 

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
Sounds like the natural progression.

no need to influence anything without a lot of power. Government grows steadily and starts to gain control, and only then is it worth having control of.

It's like you progs don't understand. The bigger and more powerful you make the government, the more incentives you give to entities to control or influence it.
The government is the only thing that is holding back the corporations from destroying the world. We need stronger labor unions to influence government more in our favor.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
The government is the only thing that is holding back the corporations from destroying the world. We need stronger labor unions to influence government more in our favor.
Really, I'd just like for individuals to have as many civil rights as corporations enjoy. I especially like that one about committing crime in a mass scale and just paying a fine, the cost of which just gets passed on to the customer. Nobody goes to jail. Neat!
 

killemsoftly

Well-Known Member
Really, I'd just like for individuals to have as many civil rights as corporations enjoy. I especially like that one about committing crime in a mass scale and just paying a fine, the cost of which just gets passed on to the customer. Nobody goes to jail. Neat!
It is a hella deal. love to get that for me and mine. sadly, we'd have to inocorporate, go public, bend over to wall street....we'd end up joining the dark side. not much point when i think about it. better to do what i say, be responsible, do my best not to harm and be happy in my choices. they can't say the same
 

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
Really, I'd just like for individuals to have as many civil rights as corporations enjoy. I especially like that one about committing crime in a mass scale and just paying a fine, the cost of which just gets passed on to the customer. Nobody goes to jail. Neat!
"On the night of December 2, 1984 a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India leaked methyl isocynate gas and other chemicals creating a dense toxic cloud over the region and killing more than 8,000 people in just the first few days."

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/toxics/justice-for-bhopal/

Yet Libertarians and conservatives think we need less regulations here so that we can have disasters similar to the ones in India and China.

"On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Bhopal disaster, a coalition of labor and environmental groups put out a call for safety at U.S. chemical plants.

Just 300 of the 6,000+ high-risk chemical sites across the U.S. put more than 100 million Americans at risk if attacked."

Thankfully we still have some liberal institutions in America that try to protect us from the idiocy of Libertarians and conservatives. If they had their way corporations could more easily put us all in harms way.
 

MidwesternGro

Well-Known Member
American labor unions, they've been great for China.
That was actually the free trade agreements that were passed because idiots weakened the unions to the point where they couldn't stop NAFTA and similar agreements that were made with China. Strong unions would have protected us from that.
 

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Really, I'd just like for individuals to have as many civil rights as corporations enjoy. I especially like that one about committing crime in a mass scale and just paying a fine, the cost of which just gets passed on to the customer. Nobody goes to jail. Neat!
Typically, these crimes of corporations you speak of have no criminal.

That sounds odd, but a lot of people can do something together, no one person does anything illegal, yet the result is something that would be criminal if done by an individual.

Just like baking a cake. .. All the ingredients have to come together for you to have a tasty snack. You can't really spread icing very well on butter, flour, or sugar. But if you combine them all and bake it, you can frost it.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Typically, these crimes of corporations you speak of have no criminal.

That sounds odd, but a lot of people can do something together, no one person does anything illegal, yet the result is something that would be criminal if done by an individual.

Just like baking a cake. .. All the ingredients have to come together for you to have a tasty snack. You can't really spread icing very well on butter, flour, or sugar. But if you combine them all and bake it, you can frost it.
Indeed, the very original purpose of a corporation was precisely to separate the doing of a thing from the responsibility for its consequences.
 

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Indeed, the very original purpose of a corporation was precisely to separate the doing of a thing from the responsibility for its consequences.
Besides, when people do something wrong, they go to jail, occasionally they have enough money to compensate and make whole their victim.

A corporation does something and people suffer, sure no one goes to jail always, even usually, but their victims are often made whole.

Pretty much every corporate entity has assets. And when they harm through negligence or malfeasance, they usually have to compensate the injured person.

So, two scenarios, which would you prefer?

A) a mad man with a sword runs up to me at the mall and hacks off my leg. He is swiftly arrested and sentenced to 30 years.

B) Acme Co is installing new windows. One falls and cuts off my leg as I walk by. It is discovered the board chose to ignore that their glass was likely to fall off. They wilfully ignored the poor safety aspects. None are sentenced to jail. A heard of attorneys surrounds my hospital bed to take my case. I choose one and I get a nice settlement.

In option A someone goes to jail, but I'm left with one leg and hospital bills to pay. Yay justice!

In option B, no justice! No one loses their freedom. I lost a leg and all I got was a few hundred thousand dollars.

I would argue the victims of corporate "crimes" are better off.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Besides, when people do something wrong, they go to jail, occasionally they have enough money to compensate and make whole their victim.

A corporation does something and people suffer, sure no one goes to jail always, even usually, but their victims are often made whole.

Pretty much every corporate entity has assets. And when they harm through negligence or malfeasance, they usually have to compensate the injured person.

So, two scenarios, which would you prefer?

A) a mad man with a sword runs up to me at the mall and hacks off my leg. He is swiftly arrested and sentenced to 30 years.

B) Acme Co is installing new windows. One falls and cuts off my leg as I walk by. It is discovered the board chose to ignore that their glass was likely to fall off. They wilfully ignored the poor safety aspects. None are sentenced to jail. A heard of attorneys surrounds my hospital bed to take my case. I choose one and I get a nice settlement.

In option A someone goes to jail, but I'm left with one leg and hospital bills to pay. Yay justice!

In option B, no justice! No one loses their freedom. I lost a leg and all I got was a few hundred thousand dollars.

I would argue the victims of corporate "crimes" are better off.
Sure. I'm sure that worked out really well for the victims of the drug cartels who laundered their BILLIONS through HSBC BANK, yet no one went to jail, and somehow it's okay?

Once you've convinced the families of those people, I'll go along with your argument. I'm not holding my breath.
 
Top