This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Corporate Entities As Modern-Day Street Gangs

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Gonzalo Lira

This past Monday, June 14, 2010, the Unites States Supreme Court let
stand without comment or dissent the Second Circuit Appeals Court
decision to dismiss Maher Arar's suit against the U.S. Government.
(Arar v. Ashcroft, No. 09-923)

Mr. Arar was
illegally detained by U.S. officials while in transit back to his home
in Canada, and then handed over to Syrian intelligence officials using
“extraordinary rendition”. The Syrians kept Arar for ten months,
interrogating him using torture, and finally releasing him when they
concluded that Mr. Arar was neither a terrorist, nor in possession of
any relevant intelligence.
Once free, Mr. Arar
sued both the Canadian government (which peripherally assisted in his
kidnapping and torture) and the U.S. government. The Canadian
government issued him an unequivocal apology, and $10 million Canadian
in compensation.
Mr. Arar did not get any
similar justice from the U.S. government, though. The Second Circuit
Appeals Court quashed his suit by stating that Congress had not
authorized such suits as Mr. Arar’s. (!)
By
letting stand the Appeals Court decision to quash the suit Mr. Arar
brought against the U.S. Government, the Supreme Court effectively
ruled that the Government cannot be held accountable by private
citizens for its actions. The Government can do as it pleases to any
individual—including assassinating one of its own citizens—and there is
no legal remedy.
Now let's compare how
the U.S. Government dealt with BP, regarding the oil spill disaster in
the Gulf of Mexico: President Obama met with BP officials, and as a
product of that meeting, BP promised to set up a “compensation fund” of
$20 billion over the next two years.
Note
how this was agreed to outside of the ordinary judicial process. There
was no suit. Neither did this agreement follow the law. It was simply a
deal the White House made with BP. A Republican politician is receiving
a lot of grief over having characterised the meeting and subsequent
deal as a “shake down” of BP by the Government. This politician is
being censured because apparently he sided with BP, the party
responsible for the oil spill disaster—clearly the guy is an idiot.
Be that as it may, the politician’s characterization is in fact accurate: The Government did “shake down” BP for the money, in a manner no different from a street gang shaking down a neighborhood grocery store.
In
the Arar case, one of the Government’s arguments in favor of quashing
the case was that the suit would bring under scrutiny “the motives and
sincerity of the United States officials who concluded that petitioner
[Mr. Arar] could be removed to Syria.” In other words, the Government
was deploying its full weight and power to protect the individuals who
had actually ordered Mr. Arar’s detention and deportation to Syria.
Similarly,
in the “compensation agreement” whereby BP acquiesced to pay $20
billion, the company as a whole was acting to protect the executives
and personnel responsible for the oil spill disaster. (I have yet to
read the actual deal memo, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that,
as part of the deal, the Government agrees not to prosecute any BP
executive or personnel, either in criminal or civil court. This is pure
supposition on my part—but it ought to be the first thing scrutinized
once the actual deal memo comes out.)
As a
third example, during the financial crisis, when AIG, Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac were all bailed out, none of the executives actually
responsible for the firms being in the position that they were in were
indicted or punished in any way. The corporations assumed the
responsibility of the individuals who had made the bad decisions.
As
a fourth example, the unions, in both the public sector and the
private. GM’s unions forced the company to assume pension and health
care liabilities which any actuarian would have realized would
eventually bring about GM’s bankruptcy—which of course is exactly what
happened. Teacher's unions across the U.S. refuse to implement basic
competency tests on their members, threatening to strike if such tests
are imposed, even going so far as to protect not merely incompetent
teachers, but pedophiles—and these are the people who are supposed to
be educating America’s youth.
A fifth
example: The U.S. military. Soldiers routinely violate human rights of
Iraqis and Afghans, in the most despicable, egregious manner
imaginable. Yet they get away with it, the military going out of its
way to protect its soldiers, under the rationale that to prosecute
gross human rights violations would “erode the morale of the troops”.
In the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, a half-dozen non-commissioned
officers were jailed—but apart from a lone Lieutenant Colonel being
tried and acquitted of a couple of minor charges, no officer was tried,
and none jailed.
All of this underscores the
same problems we are having throughout our society in the
Industrialized West: Corporate entities, be they corporations, unions,
the military, or the government, act lawlessly—anarchically—trampling
the individual without hesitation, yet coming to accomodations between
one corporate entity and another.
In other
words, our society has become a neighborhood where
street-gangs—corporate entitites—battle one another for position. Even
the Government is just another street gang.
People allied with a particular corporate entity have rights and the
full protection of the corporate entity to which they belong, much as
street gangs are fiercely loyal to their individual members. The higher
up in the corporate entities’ hierarchy—CEO, General, President—the
more untouchable he or she is.
However,
unaffiliated members—such as Mr. Arar, such as myself—have no such
protection. Neither do they have recourse to the courts, as the Arar
case proves. Courts and the so-called “justice system” are busy
policing individuals. Individuals’ rights are more curtailed and restricted than ever before. But corporate entities are freer than ever before.
In
such a lawless neighborhood, what can an individual do? Obvious: Join a
gang—any gang. To remain unaffiliated is to be begging to be set upon
by members of one gang or another, be it the various gangs that make up
the government (TSA, IRS, ICE, Homeland Security, etc.), or the various
corporations who have made sure that unaffiliated individuals are
fleeced in health care, insurance, financial services, etc. (As an
individual, health insurance is prohibitive in the U.S.—but as a
corporate cog of a big corporation? That’s another story. How often do
we hear of corporate employees kowtowing to their corporate masters in
order to hang on to their health-care coverage?)
But
what happens to a neighborhood where gangs dominate? Why, that’s quite
simple: The neighborhood is destroyed. The gangs don’t disappear, as
the neighborhood is slowly ruined. The gangs stay put, feeding off the
corpse of the neighborhood, until it's nothing but a husk—kind of like
digger wasps.
This is what's happening to the “Free World”—our world. Fun, ain’t it?

Update I:
An article in the New York Times,
about a Cameroonian man married since 2005 to an American woman who was
about to be wrongly deported, gives another example of this street-gang
style of protection: The man would have been deported, had not the ICE
been pressed by the NY Times. The Times pressed the ICE because the woman happened to work for an advertising company which presumably did business with the Times. After being contacted by the Times, not only was the man not deported, he was released with promises to have his case “taken care of”.
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 06/19/2010 - 13:52 | 422711 Apostate
Apostate's picture

This is a solid analysis. Corporations are government-recognized legal entities (authorized to use the force of law against other entities).

If you're against the initiation of the use of force, you must also note that corporations regularly initiate force through the court system, occasionally using nominally governmental security forces as proxy mercenaries.

Note how even supposedly powerful Senators were humbled when they attempted to gun down a lowly trader, Mr. Tourre. It wasn't even much of a fight.

It really is "join a gang or die." 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:26 | 422745 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/ucc.table.html

It starts from birth. You are a revenue stream for Government expansion plans. When a Government is desperate, it writes new laws to suck in more revenue from its peasants.

When the peasants are well behaved, the Government scrambles to write more laws to suck the peasants financially dry and draw you into their system.

Vicious circle for control. Don't make TPTB playbook look so complex. It's quite transparent.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:16 | 423028 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Of course you exonerate the corporations, who run the government and decide how laws are applied.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 23:50 | 423115 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

It really is, is it not Atomizer? In your face, in plan sight.

From the link:

"Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, public corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.

That about says it all.

Add to this the Admirality law that IS the governing law of the land ( I suspect everywhere, not just in the US). India is so weak on good research that it is well nigh impossible to find out. Totally opaque.

We are living in a pen that has been a long time in the making.

Get wise, then act, that is how I would go about getting out of the system.

Fighting it without knowing the rules they play by is just plain foolish.

By the way, I'd highly recommend doing getting updated on Admiralty law in the US. Gold fringed flags etc. etc.

Just google and go.

Good luck.

I have a brilliant expose, not sure how to share it with this audience. (biggish pdf).

ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 09:55 | 423452 Sisyphus
Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:37 | 422811 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Negative, at no time in modern history has Karl Marx it been more correct than today:

The state (government) is "the executive committee of the ruling class."

While I appreciate and applaud the post, it is somewhat circular reasoning, consider.

Anyway, please continue on, con brio, Mr. Lira!

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:20 | 422841 septicshock
septicshock's picture

I am surprised we are still allowed free speech.

This country was founded on the principle of protecting EACH individual.  When did we lose our way?  Is there no one in power/club/gang that can make this right?

As winston churhill said:  "all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing..."

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 10:34 | 423490 Winston Smith 2009
Winston Smith 2009's picture

"I am surprised we are still allowed free speech."

You're allowed your free speech until it appears that you might be an actual threat to the system's status quo.  Then you'll be dealt with in some fashion.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:32 | 422851 ToNYC
ToNYC's picture

Corporate Communications is today's equivalent of Plantation Education in the 1850s

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 10:02 | 423457 SteveNYC
SteveNYC's picture

The large corporations should be starved at every opportunity. It really is simple for us to make a difference in this regard. Just do it, spread it, tell everyone. Set an example.

Although it is truly scary how brainwashed the corporations have the masses. Many people are addicted to their shit.

Won't buy from them, won't work for them, won't let them touch my healthcare, won't support them in any way, shape or form.

"The Machine" needs to be starved of bodies.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:07 | 422720 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

If we pull the plug on this ponzi scheme, the global/sovereign communities can rebuild and prosper.

We all can see the cancer patients on TV everyday. These patient's are begging for a few more days of life or threaten to cause a new crisis.

The days of these cancer patients is nearing. The global/sovereign community will not resuscitate this dying patient.

Flash from the past.

Obama: G-20 Summit Good Time to Assess Economy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpI1c6Dhot8

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:51 | 422865 septicshock
septicshock's picture

Wow atomizer, cancer patients begging for a few more days of life...  excellent comparison.   its so true, chemotherapy prolongs death a little longer in terminally ill cancer patients but it does so in an excruciatingly painful way.  There is no longer a person left after some chemotherapy drugs, just a semblence of what once was... 

The death and destruction that will surely come from worldwide desperation could have been avoided if people just opened their eyes and worked together... I fear of things to come.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 09:18 | 423420 breezer1
breezer1's picture

people do and are working together. a candidate for mayor where i live recently lost the election because the community feared his austerity platform. city workers said they would face layoffs and those provincial workers who lived in the city backed their municipal brothers. after all, if there are cutbacks there then someone might think there should be cutbacks here. can't have that. with strong union backing and a fearful population( most at least knowing one government worker personally) he didn't have a chance the poor bastard.

consequently the government parasites have completely taken over the host. eventually there will only be a corpse. won't be long now. one union just got 4% pa. plus bonuses.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:11 | 422724 SRV - ES339
SRV - ES339's picture

...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:14 | 422730 knukles
knukles's picture

Some are more equal than others.  Whazza problem?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:18 | 422732 moneymutt
moneymutt's picture

SCOTUS rulings are consistent with this reading of our times. Corporate entities' liberties are always protected and sided with, say like corporations apparent right use the muscle of their money to corrupt our govt disguised as a right of free speech, meanwhile they gut individual rights, like Miranda, which is simply making sure someone facing criminal justice system remembers their specifically given constitutional rights.

But conversely, SCOTUS does not see corporate entities responsible for their actions, while individuals are routinely jailed for relatively minor harms to society.

Someone will always have power, if it is not the people thru democratic controls and rule of law, then it is the biggest bullies that rule. Only alternative to functional democracy with strong, clean govt that is working for the greatest good for the most people and responds to the will of the people, is to let the Wall Street gangs and their serf organizations run the show.  Insider, crony orgs, be they businesses, govt agencies, militaries, royalties, oligarchies will take power unless people form a union and control them, by treating all people equally and consistently under the rule of law.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:52 | 422770 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Spot on the money mutt! (And I don't even know what a SCROTUM ruling is!)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:09 | 422788 seventree
seventree's picture

I don't even know what a SCROTUM ruling is!

See Websters definition: Slang, US Eng., an upleasant and inescapable circumstance. Ex: They've got us by the balls.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:55 | 422821 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Ha! Good one.

The inescapable truth however when you think about it is that We have Them by the Balls... they (and we as well) just haven't realized it yet.

Mistakes were made and they broke the magic ATM that was both their 'cash cow' and this economy.

A reset (or worse) is now inescapable. They should be terrified. They will be.

(And no I'm not entirely nuts but thanks for asking in advance! :)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:41 | 422853 septicshock
septicshock's picture

Well, call me nuts too cause I too believe a reset is inevitable.

There is no more IF, just a WHEN.

Everyone that comes to this site believes that on one level or another.  The only people that think you and I to be nuts are those people who are in denial... they will clutch onto the financial/credit/debt/slavery "dream for some/nightmare for others"  scenario till the brutal end.

Well, I appreciate Tyler Durden and team for keeping all of us updated... I would like to know what scenario/situation Tyler and his team see this world in... two years/five years from now... I wonder if there is a ten year scenario that won't be farming/milking/horse-riding. 

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:43 | 422918 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Ironically the worse it gets (and I see no change in course of this rocketing shitmobile...) the easier it will be to reform what remains of the system into something resembling a democracy. However the apathy that must be overcome is apparently... well... astounding!

If not it will be the same sociopathic fucktards in control that got us into this mess... game, set, match... over!

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 01:33 | 423191 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Zero,

A bad democracy is as bad as a bad republic.

Things must be bad when you have to use bad that many times in a row eh?

Take India, my country as a shining example of a Kleptocracy and a Thugocracy masquerading as a democracy.

In a strange (or not so strange way after all) way, I am tending more and more towards monarchies.

Big disclaimer though is that I'm saying Philosopher Kings in their truest form.

Otherwise, you take a large enough group of people, a rag-tag, amorphous bunch if you will and sooner rather than later, a pyramid will form. Based on who has the most of what is most desirable in said grouping.

In this current paradigm though, we are acculturated to look for leaders. We have lost our own bearings, our selfhood to the dominant "leader" for the day.

To read my take on our state of the world, please see:

http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/an-older-piece-pertinent/

ORI

http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 16:23 | 423952 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Goddamn it! Is there no place on the face of this planet that isn't corrupt?

This will not end well...

Mon, 06/21/2010 - 08:42 | 424776 declineNfall
declineNfall's picture

@Oh regional Indian

dont even think about monarchy. look at the british who are trapped in a feudal mind set. every man shall have a lord. one cannot be free with such a yoke.

the US presidency was modelled on the monarchies of europe, essentially he is the king of the USA. France has a far more modern, relevant and less dangerous presidential system.

 

Mon, 06/21/2010 - 23:02 | 426089 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

D&F, that is why I set the rider, Philosopher kings. The kind who breathed the Tao Teh Ching, not the Art Of War.

Call me a dreamer.

ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 12:50 | 423656 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Supreme Court Rape Of The United 'Merica.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:19 | 422736 LeBalance
LeBalance's picture

The corporation is a body, a "person" with full rights of a person, that the UCC (Universal Commerical Code) can interact with in a Court on Commerce, which is what this whole thing is about.  (I am kind of new to this area and would appreciate a kick in the tail over what I get wrong.  Not a masochist, just like to learn.)  So that is why each person has a strawman corporation (SSN, brith certificate).  We are each governed by moral rules and commercial rules and are stated assets of various corporations, some of which are in bankruptcy (US, etc).  As such we are chattel, knowingly and unknowingly.  For the unknowing the world is a very weird place.  Many things and lack in consistency of judicial rules and liquidity of same are unbelievable.  But for chattel or monsters, who are just owned property, there is no need for a sense of honor or justice.  We are to be used.

With this background, an illusory corporation, created as a shield by men, can have any bylaws it wishes.  Any.

(1) Make as money for the share holders as possible.

(2) Have a stated moral code, but within the moral code state that the moral code may be junked under certain circumstances.

I think we all recognize GS, right?

So it is not at the outset that GS's SOP or operating code is examined.  Like a business creation SOP bureaucracy right?  Umm...next..Ok, Mack. What is your biz?  Ok. Operating sequence?  Dude!!!  You can't do that!  Think of the children!!

Right?  So under our present merchantile system the GS and similar SOPs are good to go.

Just my $0.02 to possibly add some value to the discussion.  But I haven't explored the Law (fluid as it is) much, but I plan to.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:59 | 422777 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Awesome insight LeBalance. Everyone seems really focused today.

I too am exploring the Law... is has been a very illuminating excercise.

There are gaping holes in them that scream at me...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:30 | 422802 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Past History: City of London = Boston Tea Party

Just another historical event for power grabbing. Salt, butter and Popcorn handy, watching the latest reality TV series called "Epic Failure"

When is Obama expected to read/talk on live TV again?? Stand-up comedy is a sound career choice for a one term President.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:35 | 422806 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

* double post

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:22 | 422738 Carl Marks
Carl Marks's picture

Interestingly, BP subjected itself to an extra legal shakedown by the Obama Administration despite the fact that BP is essentially a lawless entity which routinely bribes and/or assassinates foreign heads of state in order to secure drilling rights. One must assume that the shakedown was accomplished in concert with the British Government, else, Obama could have faced the wrath of big oil. Give a little here, take a lot  later.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:25 | 422742 LeBalance
LeBalance's picture

totally a PR move.  They realized they needed to bend.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:39 | 422816 Cursive
Cursive's picture

Agreed that it was BP's pre-emptive PR move.  I don't think it was a "shakedown" because the Obama White House has bent over for BP.  In this relationship, BP is the dominatrix and BHO is the gimp.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:41 | 422817 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Not to mention that BP, along with Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, will easily recover said monies with further speculation on ICE Futures (which they own), along with other futures leveraged speculating.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 23:24 | 423108 TuesdayBen
TuesdayBen's picture

I predict that the $20B never gets fully escrowed.

I predict that well under 100% of what does get escrowed goes to those harmed by BP's failings in this matter.

I predict that we'll never have a detailed, accurate, "open and transparent" accounting of where those monies escrowed wind up.

Biden 4 President.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:29 | 422749 Apostate
Apostate's picture

It was a pricey $20B bribe.

But the puny sovereigns need the oil companies far more than the oil companies need them.

All the oil companies need to do is elect to reduce production. The sovereigns would be able to do little more than bitch and moan.

It sucks to be the king. 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:39 | 422758 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Nah, they(BP), have contributed more money to Obama than any other member of Congress, this is/was all a public spectacle, photo op.

 A Feel Good measure, and the only thing that won't go away is the 2 Billion gallons of oil left in the well, streaming into the Gulf, if no way is found to capture/stop it.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:02 | 422779 cossack55
cossack55's picture

I may be wrong, but I believe I read that APCs estimates of the well to be 2 to 2.5 billion BARRELS.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:17 | 422891 Dburn
Dburn's picture

The Anderson Accounting Death Penalty from Enron days may have served as a "incentive" for setting up a settlement fund. I have no objections with this use of force becuase ultimately BP would have been Exxon Squeared in dragging out the cases while sucessfully forcing the plantiffs to use assets they really don't have to secure a independent protection gang commonly referred to as plaintiff attorneys. In some cases attorneys would use their own funds if they were confident they had the assets to withstand a drawn out process or in some cases accept settlement as a small percentage of what should have been given if it had been adjudicated. Fast settlements beget bigger settlements as plantiffs retain attornies that can put as much food on the table as quickly as possible.

So we probably have one gang somewhat pissed that we haven't heard from and that's the Plaintiff attorney gang. If this settlement fund is similar to the 9/11 fund, plaintiffs will be given the choice of settling for x now or waiting years for the possibility of more. Once opportunity cost + desperation is factored in, BP was probably more than satisfied as are the bulk of the potential plaintiffs other wise knows as the small people.

So we had the Big Gang = Govt, a Smaller but still powerful gang= corporation and a potential gang of small people teamed with plaintiff attorneys who may have been stopped temporarily from forming as th4e Plaintiff attorneys must seek much higher and expensive fruit to make money from this. So new gangs will be formed to lay claim to all the free cash flow that BP can produce which , in reality, is fine as the selling price of the production has to pass though the hands of the operators who will take their cut leaving the shareholders empty handed. In other words there will never be a dividend again and the share price will go down as the realization sets in that the corporation now has a new set of owners that isn't the shareholders. Nevertheless, BP as a entity will survive for a long time in order to pay claims from their reserves and serve the operators and directors. A captive Gang with a benevolent prison warden.

The big hurdle thathelped create the captive gang would have been an agreement of no Criminal penalties. Once freedom becomes an issue, carrying costs , borne by shareholders , for the freedom fund for the operators of the gang was good to go at virtually any cost as long as they can continue to produce oil, live the high life and stay out of prison. Shareholders are usually an ineffectual and weak gang if they can ever form into one,so for them to lose their dividends and equity is probably less damaging than when Fannie and Freddie , a one time reliable pair of pension and WA stocks, ceased to exist. The operators are still making out fine here too.

The Gangs analogy works really well.Those of us that are unaffiliated like small business people , traders, normal people and not so normal will always be at the mercy of the larger gangs unless we can form a formidable gang ourselves. The truth won't set us free, but it may incent us to form a new gang armed with larger area denial devices to present a clear and present danger to the established gangs .

In short, the country we once knew is gone forever and at least for the time being a civilized Mad Max society has taken it's place.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 23:01 | 423101 moneymutt
moneymutt's picture

according to conservative critics, Obama is a strong, all-powerful man that transformed our center right country, (most rightward of all developed countries) into the most leftist, socialist government in just a years time, he apparently can take over whole sectors of economy to be run and he can take on arguably the most powerful lobby of all, Big Oil, and shake them down.

All I see is a wimp, a weak leader who keeps compromising while his political opponents stand their ground.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:28 | 422747 FTWBTWFY
FTWBTWFY's picture

The Untited States once was known as the "Home of the Free and  Land of the Brave".  Now it is becoming known as the home of the heartless, lying, manipulative, eco-destroying corporation.  It's government lies and murders on a global basis without apology, while the vast majority of its citizens sit on their hands and cry "Who us?"  The only solace for those witnessing and affected by this perverted nation's dissemination of evil, is that it's all coming home to roost.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 00:57 | 423153 yakmerchant
yakmerchant's picture

Let us not go start blaming the corporation and captalism again.   I agree with you that the corporation is running amok, and to make numbers the corporations have ignored any sort of ethics so there is plenty of blame to go around,  but I think it should be made clear that the problem with the system is corruption which starts elsewhere.   The politicians and bureaucrats on the take with just about every one in the government encouraging the game is the problem.  And I won't even get into the courts.  Until the rule of law is returned and law breakers are jailed (and maybe even a few public hangings) we are on the fast track to Mad Max.  That being said, today's fight is about educating the retarded moron public of the United States, and there is already enough "the corporation is evil" going around.  I'll be damned if the ass clown "Workers of the World United" crowd is going to pin this on anyone other than the kleptocrats.   There is a reason the douchebags in power are siding with the marxists.  It's because they are too stupid to realize who is screwing them.   Do a little research on who was allowed in the Communist Party in the soviet union, you'll soon realize that TPTB love to recruit unable to think for themselves drones. 

 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 01:10 | 423158 SilverIsKing
SilverIsKing's picture

Ummm, that would be, "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave" but we got the point...LOL

Mon, 06/21/2010 - 09:00 | 424794 declineNfall
declineNfall's picture

beautifully put. and incidentally it was never a home of the free. black suffrage arrived only with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, that restored and protected voting rights for minorities.

also a reading of bueno de mesquite (co author with condaleeza rice) explains why education is kept to a low level in the US.

america was born out of protection of businessmen not desire for freedom. the boston tea party was about the introduction of competition in the tea trade, not unfair taxes. see A Splendid Exchange by William Bernstein.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:30 | 422750 FTWBTWFY
FTWBTWFY's picture

By the way, I do have American friends I love and respect...not surprisingly, most of them no longer reside in their homeland.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:15 | 422889 drwells
drwells's picture

Out of curiosity, where did they decide to go?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 23:30 | 423111 TuesdayBen
TuesdayBen's picture

Prolly moved involuntarily to a location six feet under.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:33 | 422753 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Hmmmmmmm...........

I remember two cases where this did not apply, and the Government where held LIABLE, and PAID.

"the Government cannot be held accountable by private citizens for its actions. The Government can do as it pleases to any individual—including assassinating one of its own citizens—and there is no legal remedy."

Randy Weaver, and the Branch Davidians, where's the difference?.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 06:42 | 423330 Rusty_Shackleford
Rusty_Shackleford's picture

That's a good point, but I think these 2 cases outline that the State did something because it felt it was politicially expedient to do so, rather than because they were being held accountable by any "system" of laws.  It's a subtle point, but when the State can arbitrarily make it's own decision as to whether or not it can be held responsible for something, it really becomes meaningless.  Do you see what I mean?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:40 | 422760 JR
JR's picture

Excellent article.

The lawlessness is eminating from the most powerful street gang in our nation’s history—the private international bankers who own both the central bank and our centralized government.  This takeover has allowed the corruption to spread from the county courthouse to the halls of Congress.  And, like dominos, to the Supreme Court.  When Americans lose their representaiion, the gangs take over.

When private interests take over the government and control the money supply, then the principles of capitalism and protection for private citizens are destroyed. Why? Because only those private interests who now own the government have the advantage of monopoly--using the government laws and regulations they create to eliminate competition and dissent.  If a private citizen cannot find protection of his rights and his property from the Supreme Court, then the corruption has become tyranny.

This favoritism extended by the government to the central bank money power has no resemblance to the principles of capitalism, representative government or the American Dream.

Throughout all these years of gathering together more and more power, more and more intervention and more and more government control, the money power finally has lawfully achieved the ability to reward its friends and punish its enemies—selectively and in secret.  The money power can reward Best Buy and punish Circuit City, reward Israel with its WMDs and punish Iraq with its lack of WMDs—if it wants; this explains why it moves Heaven and Planet Earth to get this power—why its members cheat, lie, blackmail, threaten, assassinate…  It is not so that they can be patriots, so that they can help America with her economic well being, or fertilize the fruits of capitalism and free-market competition.

Think about it.

And, now, the Fed has New Powers, as a result of the 2008 Bank Panic.  Says Kirk MacKenzie in Money, Defending Your Prosperity (copyright 2010):

“A remarkable new feature of these expanded powers is the ability of Fed to selectively give differential advantage to specific companies of its choosing.  This violates any standard for fair and equitable treatment.

“The People pick up the junk securities and pay the tab.  Their incomes are reduced, and a portion of their savings are taken, by means of an inflated money supply that benefits the Chosen.”

Here is MacKenzie’s list of the Fed’s “New Powers”:

1.  The Term Auction Facility (TAF) allows member banks to anonymously convert problem (junk) securities into money at low interest rates.  Thus freed of their losses, the member banks can use the new money to make new loans.

2. The Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF) allows primary dealers to dump problem residential mortgage-backed loans in exchange for Treasury securities.

3. The Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF) allows primary dealers a further competitive advantage by converting other, non-mortgage problem securities into new money at low interest rates.

4. The Asset Backed Commerical Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (AMLF) allows selected financial institutions a competitive advantage by obtaining low interest rate loans directly from the Fed.  The Fed decides who and thus far has refused to disclose who the recipients were.

5. The Commerical Paper Funding Facility (CPFF) allows selected non-financial corporations a competitive advantage by borrowing low interest loans directly from the Fed.  The Fed decides who.

6. The Money Market Investor Funding Facility (MMIFF) allows selected money market mutual funds a competitive advantage by borrowing low interet funds from the Federall Reserve Bank of New York.  The FRB-NY decides who.

7. On top of all these new powers, Chairman Ben Bernanke seeks expanded powers to directly control the banking system.  (emphasis mine)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:38 | 422813 hbjork1
hbjork1's picture

Thanks JR,

You have found an available "teachable moment".

Concise, very easy to understand.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:38 | 422831 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

JW... Glad I found you here my friend.

I believe I have found a critical error that was made when the vote process was changed to make votes a matter of public record rather than a secret ballot. The change was made to make individual members vote the party line thus co-opting the democratic 'rights' of individual members. No independant voting was to be tolerated by those in control. It had the effect of creating a form of legislative leverage if you will. As we all know now leverage can make things very unstable.... now read with this in mind.

Look closely and please consider the implications independantly before I tell you what I see... which is one (of several) paths to bring this beast to heel.

Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition

 

 

Now consider the proclaimed reason for the change... it was of course (as always) about nothing of the sort (It was a way to consolidate power at the top) but now you should be thinking about the way this can be used as a tool when you read this...

http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Speeches&...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:31 | 422901 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Not even slightly curious as to what idea I have up my sleeve?

...just askin'... :)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:06 | 423022 JR
JR's picture

Very curious.

I give up. But I tried. I can’t figure out where we are on this.  Are you saying that the Senate should implement a 2007 rule that senators have to publicly acknowledge any holds-- the practice of placing secret holds on nominees and legislation--after six business days?

Nor can I determine if signatories to a discharge petition in the Senate are still secret and if the number of signatures needed to force a vote is a simple majority.

But I do buy Sen. James Inhofe’s support for transparency and that there should be no way that a Congressman or Senator  “can falsely represent his position to the people at home and never have to vote on the issue using, as Inhofe’s describes it, the excuse of secret holds and secret signatories of discharge petitions:

There was a procedure that was used at that time called the discharge procedure whereby a person could discharge a bill out of the committee without having committee action, it could be blocked by someone and we could not know the name of the person who blocked it.

“Consequently, we found ourselves in this situation where there would be legislation that everyone at home is very excited about. We could go home and campaign and say, yes, I am for this. I remember several of the West Texas Democrats wanting to oppose gun control. Yet their caucus wanted them to support gun control. So they would tell the people at home that they were opposing it. Yet they were the very ones who kept it from coming up for a vote.

"A good example is the method Members from the House of Representatives used to hide their votes from the people concerning a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution.”

Are you saying the Senate should pass a bill similar to Inhofe’s March of 1993  one-sentence bill on the House floor challenging the secrecy, ``Once a motion to discharge has been filed the Clerk shall make the signatures a matter of public record.''   This then would redefine Wikipedia’s statement: “Senators may use a ‘discharge petition’ to discharge a Senate committee from consideration of the disapproval resolution While using the same term as the House process, its use in the United States Senate has few similarities to the House process described above and is limited only to disapproval resolutions created under the conditions of this congressional review process.”

Clue me in, and bring me up to date.  It’s a little circular for me at this point… And, if secrecy still abides in the Senate, as Inhofe would say, “pretty cozy.” 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 01:35 | 423168 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Great to see you JW...

 

I'm very glad to see you gave this matter some thought... Chet did as well... and I know you are now primed with all the relevant information which is why I did not include my own situational analysis until you had a chance to read it through with an untainted mind. We all need to think critically and independantly here. We need to find out if this can work... or more importantly why it can not work. I need brutal criticism here... if I can't defend this I won't have to think about it anymore... it's not my only idea on the matter but I have chosen it to be my first... there is much much more to come.

 

I am not afraid of launching nutjob ideas here BTW as all of you may already know... but hey at least I'm trying.

 

Let us never forget the problem is that we have a 'two' party system that exists to maintain, protect and service the needs of an Oligarchic Kleptocracy of which regardless of the species of victorious party... remains eternally in their service. And to achieve any meaningful reform my friends we must find a constructive way to transcend these dual impediments and help our politicians do what is just and right.

Now let's kindly forget Senate for simplicities sake here a moment here... I have some ideas there as well but it is indeed a little more tricky... and it takes 6 years to fully flush that toilet anyway. Let us first start the ball rolling and get some momentum built up in 2010 by Hijacking the Midterm Elections and thus taking over the Agenda in the House of Representatives with it's 100% two year potential turnover. If successful (I will define success later... it's not what you will think...) we will come back to finish the job in 2012 with a fear inspiring track record and a hurricane force economic shitstorm with the pitchfork weilding masses at our sides. If this can technically be done the Kleptocracy will fall and it won't be pretty. (For them anyway)

Brief history once again...

Obama campaigns on Hope and Change yet breaks almost every one of his campaign promises, pretty much keeps the same corrupt and incompetent players who have possibly fatally fucked this country up on the damn field and there is not a bloody thing we can do about it because in actuality not even Obama is in control. Even the English soccer team pulled their goalie after one bad goal. What are we to think. There is no accountability in government anymore. Almost no-one is ever directly to account. This must change.

When eventually something constructive is forwarded like the Ron Paul / Alan Grayson audit the Fed bill... or any other kind of financial or meaningful reform... it is referred directly to committee where it gets sodomized and skullfucked by seasoned cocksuckers like Barney Frank and Mel Watt... even though the votes to pass the original unadulterated bill may actually be there. They intentionally gut the crap out of it and tack on shit that clearly doesn't belong until it means less than nothing when it finally comes out of committee for a vote on the floor. Then have the audacity to publicly pass the fucking hat around just a few days later to get paid for a job well done... unfucking believable. They simply must be stopped or this country will soon experience catastrophic systemic collapse.

In summation all these 535 self serving pieces of fetid shit want to do is continue to feed at the trough and fill their pockets year after year and there is precious little we can do to stop them.

Even the vast majority of the population knows the political system is corrupt but the two party system leaves them collectively confused as to who is to blame and their mindless 'tribal' political loyalties are in place... so it's always the other party who is at fault.

But they need to get re-elected. And that is where they are truly fucked.

I repeat...  they need to get re-elected.

And they will do anything to achieve an advantage over their adversaries... hell that's primarily why they pimp the shit out of themselves... to get the cash needed to get the job done. They will suck any coc% that is near their mouths... Wall Street, AIPAC, Pharma, HMO's, Big Oil, hell just about anybody who has the bucks to lobby to change the laws and extort more money yet again from "We The People"... and in the process they become beholden to these same moneyed interests... it's merely the nature of the beast.

Then come the elections... they will promise everything to everyone.

They will fight each other viciously like bucks vying for a doe in heat during the mating season... and will quite literally do anything and I mean anything to get in. They will backstab, they will lie, they will engage in character assassination and portray their Democrat or Republican adversaries as child-molesting necrophiliacs if need be.

Anything to get elected. To 'earn' a seat at the trough.

It's my favorite time of year actually... the only time we get to see humiliated political corpses carried off the field in body bags.

OK.

So the question briefly then is... How do we bypass this clusterfuck?

Answer    >  A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y

 

What Sen. Inhofe did in an attempt to remove the power of individual members of congress to vote anonymously in DISCHARGE PETITIONS... in an attempt to consolidate the same power at the leadership (enforcement) levels of both parties by making Discharge Petition votes of public record... can also be used to make these same members accountable to the wishes of "We the People" that voted for them. That is the guts of my plan.

Let me explain for those who do not understand...

DISCHARGE PETITIONS are magical things that can do lots of stuff like bring bills immediately out of committees like the ones Barney and friends like to run with no changes to the Bill.

Hell they can even replace the Speaker of the House.

What is required to do these magical things seems to be a simple majority vote of the members of the House of Representatives... the magic number? 218 of 435.

It brings things directly to the House for a vote before Barney or any other committee chair can get his filthy hands on it. It is... the silver bullet express... and from what admittedly little that I munderstand it still is the law.

So what does this all mean? OK... here's the plan but I am  not going to elaborate on it much tonight... I'll wait for the valid criticisms first... perhaps tommorrow.

 

To cut to the chase.

We need identify exactly what we need in a bill to make our nightmares go away. We must keep it so simple that even the ill informed public will understand it. It must have only the minimum elements necessary that will remove the corrupt and self serving influence that special interests now have over our government. There must be little that can be objectionable or indefensible. It must be bulletproof.

That is first and foremost. Lets not get too wrapped up in curing everything in one shot. let's keep it simple silly... think KISS.

It must appeal to as many Americans as humanly possible.

It must have an easily supportable name... I don't know perhaps something factual like "The Anti-corruption in Government Act" who the hell could could be nuts enough to campaign against something like that?

Anyway we take that Bill and we promote the shit out of it... post it to every site on the intertubes and try to get as much support for it as we can... if this plan is feasible we will most assuredly find help in the most unexpected places.

 

Then we take it to the the 2010 MidTerms... here's how.

We get candidates to publicly take a stand on the Bill... if they endorse it we will support them regardless of political affiliation... but they must publicly swear on a fucking stack of bibles (Americans love bibles...) that they will support this legislation and vote for it with no alterations or ammendments once in office so help them God.

They must swear that upon the Flag of the United States of America that if they do not they must immediately resign forthwith. This thing must be bulletproof gentlemen.

Any candidate who does not endorse "The Anti-Corruption in Government Act" will be at an extreme disadvantage my friends.

I mean reall guys... do you want to be the candidate who has to go through the entire fucking campaign trying to defend what is clearly the indefensible? It will be a goddamn fucking howl to watch them try!

Listen I gotta go right now and yes, I know I know... what about the Senate, and this doesn't give us a law.... and blah blah blah... listen up guys if this can be done. I have the rest of the bases covered... this is not about changing the law in 2010... I'm not that nuts... this is about getting the party started!

Good night!

 

 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 12:59 | 423671 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

And if the dollar collapses we just starve to death instead. Voting is to consent to be governed by criminal children at this point.

There is no way positive change will occur through the legislative process they already control. Bargaining with the warden.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 13:51 | 423768 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

WW... I beg to differ with your assessment. I certainly empathize with your thoughts but we need a plan of action however feeble it may appear at the onset to be. This is not about passing a bill in 2010... this is about accountability and the threat it posses to the system. How can the system stop this vote from taking place is my question... once it is determined that it can't I will show you my plan of action... it is ruthless.

Please re-read my response and then tell me why what I have suggested can not be accomplished from a technical standpoint. That is all I ask at this time.

Thanks again.

Mon, 06/21/2010 - 11:21 | 424960 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Don't get me wrong, but you're a racist teabagger. No, I don't mean I really think that, but if you're not a Dem, not a Repub, and you are old and white you are a racist teabagger. Period. And if not that maybe a "birther", a "truther", a "tenther", whatever someone that thinks they don't agree with you wants to label you.

They don't want discourse. They don't want to give up control. They are our masters now. Join a gang or get chewed up.

I'm really pessimistic about any "change" that involves the current system. If you want to play chess with them they only give you pawns. No special moves. No special pieces. You play by their rules.

It's a great idea! Get bills moving through! No more delay! Remove anyone that stands in the way!

I watched this movie last night that just came out on DVD, "Collapse". It's a great primer for the maelstrom on the way - but it leaves more questions than answers. At one point the interviewee takes a moment to get emotional and explain that Obama is one of us and it's not his fault. ["He's been duped like you and me!"] What a waste of my fucking time. He mentions fractional reserve banking, CIA drug running and suiciding whistleblowers, the need to farm locally, and some other great topics we see here on ZH. It's essentially a peak oil movie - but he leaves the status quo intact. He puts the weight of responsibility for change on the viewers shoulders: ["You must believe. Not hope, not pray, not beg...you must believe that it can change."]

Great. Wonderful. Meanwhile we're carpet bombing undesirables all over the map. I also would have asked him what the difference between belief and hope is. I paused the movie and called bullshit to my non-ZH friends.

Me: "Ah, we can have utopia if we just believe, but not hope? WTF?"

The proles are stuck in a morass of homicide investigation shows whilst eating their Totinos pizza microwave pizza and praying their kid can make it big singing songs on American Idol so they can retire in peace.

The only hope is local, IMO. I would never actively oppose your efforts, and I wish you luck. It is a great idea.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 23:13 | 424404 JR
JR's picture

Plus a million, Zer0!

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:40 | 422761 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Amerika": Land of the Fee and Home of the Slave.

You get the goobermint you deserve.  Have some more shrimp.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:59 | 422932 Kali
Kali's picture

Hi Cossack!  I wanted to thank you Icelanders for offering to homebase Wikileaks.  You are such brave and good people.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:27 | 422955 cossack55
cossack55's picture

It makes one wonder that maybe a band of Erik the Red descendents may have hidden in the woods only to come out to advise Washington, Adams, Jefferson, et. al. The spirit of FREEDOM runs deep in the land of Fire and Ice.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 19:59 | 422990 Miss Expectations
Miss Expectations's picture

We need to place crime scene tape around the Gulf of Mexico.

I am the grand daughter of a Ukranian Cossack.  We Americans are all decendants of brave people.  We need to listen to their voices.  Perhaps we need to dress in our ancestrial colors and rise up.  One people, thousands of different countries of origin, one flag.  I can't sit still much longer.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 20:09 | 422996 Kali
Kali's picture

Interesting.  Half of my lineage is from eastern europe , don't know much what came before Bolshevik revolution, but it coulda been Cossack.  But I also give a lot of credit to my Latin American native indian part of my lineage too.  They are putting up a brave fight in the Amazon, to keep their homelands.  I agree, it is getting harder and harder to sit still.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:42 | 422764 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

Gee gang now that we all know just how bizarre and heinous our government and big business is, what exactly do we plan to do about it? 

I say the majority will do absolutely nothing. Yes, you all know who you are.

The reason is you are ticks feeding off those bodies you despise. You invest in a corrupt system for personal gain. You play their game by their rules and whine in the dark about a rigged system.

Don't get me wrong the world is now full of hypocrites making the same moves but in different venues. It isn't just you, see the imiganary finger, it is all of you, see the sweep of the imaginary hand.

At some point someone will stutter, but we are powerless. 

The same old lie every sad sack uses to justify his lack of will.

Just walk away. Take more than you give. Starve the beast.

Some of you understand. Some of you are already doing just that. Some of you are watching it all crumble and you know you were part of the reason. Part of the solution.

And you enjoy it. You actually acted instead of reacting. You threw your balls over your shoulder like the proverbial continental soldier and pissed on the the decay.

You moved on.

You are the inspiration I salute.

 

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:44 | 422820 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

You are both correct and incorrect.  There are many of us out there who have attempted to do the right thing, and we have had our lives destroyed by that righteous attempt.

We've seen a recent string of whistleblowers now in jail, on their way to jail, or in hiding from being jailed.

Not an accident, nor a concidence.

Doing the right thing comes with consequences, and the brave are usually in the minority of any group.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:04 | 422824 merehuman
merehuman's picture

Gully, you too are the inspiration i salute. Thank you and buy and take delivery, all of you, please, if you have the bucks buy the damn gold and put them out of business. Its the truly patriotic thing to do.

I know that old useless gold is heavy and has a weird shine. So what, buy it just so JP Morgan cant have it.

I do so wish i lived on the east coast. There would be oil everyplace i can put it. Bank doors and the steps to all official buildings. This is really bringing out my "dennis the menace" aspect.

I stray. Please take my plea to heart. If being short gold can bring the system down, then lets damn well do it before its too late to save our own ass. Us poor shits cant do it.

And for those of you with guns and ammo...when they come to your door you will be outnumbered. Individually we are fucked and ONLY by our combined effort can we succeed.

Since each of us feels alone i will wear something blue every day to denote that i am part of the awake. It maybe one blue sock or a blue shirt, but when you see me in the thousands you will know you are not alone.

We surmise our powerlessness by our seperation, our disfunctional union with the TV.

We are not alone in this fight.Stand and be recognized or suffer in the silent corners of cowardice a diminished life of shattered expectations. Booyah

disclaimer

1mealperday/merehuman  is a temporary visitor on earth

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:53 | 422925 cossack55
cossack55's picture

I always liked the FFI armbands worn by the Marquis after D-day.  Maybe ours could be LPTTT (last pig to the trough) in red/white/blue motif.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:36 | 422958 ColonelCooper
ColonelCooper's picture

Merehuman,

+ infinity to the infinite power. 

All we can do is lead by example.  I, like so many of us, am tired.  Tired of waiting for the sheeple to wake up.  Tired of waiting for something to happen that will wake people up.  Tired of trying to tell people that the world they live in is built on a fraud.  Tired of providing the funding to reward idleness.  Tired of living in fear, wondering if the rights given to me in the Constitution will stand strong enough to allow me to help rebuild when this S.O.B. tumbles down.  The list could go on forever.

So I  scrimp and save, hunt and gather.  I can only hope that as things go to Hell, I can hang onto enough of my rights and property to BOTH survive, AND help to rebuild, with a new foundation.  I firmly believe that in order to fix this system it needs to collapse completely and be built anew.  I don't know if it's even possible.  I just know that many are going to suffer. 

You are absollutely correct when you say that we cannot stand alone.  I join you in your plea.  STARVE THE FUCKING BEAST!!!   

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:48 | 422965 Kali
Kali's picture

CC, yes, me too.  I also fear that I am too tired to keep on keeping on and that even my best efforts will not be enough to survive and rebuild.  This woulda been hard 30 years ago, when I was young, let alone at this stage in my life.  Are there enough younguns with the wisdom and fortitude to make this happen?  I don't know. 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 06:44 | 423334 Rusty_Shackleford
Rusty_Shackleford's picture

This keeps me up at night as well.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:31 | 422839 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

What can we do about it?

Hell... we Hijack the 2010 midterms in a rehearsal for for the main event... the 2012's... that's what the fuck we do!!!

Gully... this to is for you... please read first then let me explain...

I believe I have found a critical error that was made when the vote process was changed to make votes a matter of public record rather than a secret ballot. The change was made to make individual members vote the party line thus co-opting the democratic 'rights' of individual members. No independant voting was to be tolerated by those in control. It had the effect of creating a form of legislative leverage if you will. As we all know now leverage can make things very unstable.... now read with this in mind.

Look closely and please consider the implications independantly before I tell you what I see... which is one (of several) paths to bring this beast to heel.

Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition

Now consider the proclaimed reason for the change... it was of course (as always) about nothing of the sort (consolidation of yet more power at the top was the real reason...) but now you should be thinking about the way this can be used as a tool when you read this...

http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Speeches&...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:37 | 422909 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

I dangle a nice juicy worm and not even a nibble?

I'm clusterfucked beyond all belief...

The barn door is wide open and the sheeple refuse to flee... this is much much worse than I had originally anticipated...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 20:03 | 422993 nmewn
nmewn's picture

You can't really blame the sheeple. They have seen it all before. The one bill passed (pick any one) and signed was to be a return of liberty, morality and prosperity. The one parlimentary procedure (pick one any one) was to do the same.

After the photo-op signing, the wall flowers of the event met behind closed doors with those who passed it into law and set about undermining it.

Some are left, some are right, some are anarchist's, some are statists.

Most of the sane here are disillusioned, fiercely independent and preparing for the worst. A debt ponzi only has one outcome and there is nothing to prevent it until it run's it's course.

Sometimes the most patriotic or "bravest" thing one can do is to simply watch and stand your ground as the hordes approach.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLrrBs8JBQo&feature=related

 

 

 

 

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:31 | 423043 Kali
Kali's picture

Unfortunately, I think we will end up more like Queen Bodeica standing against the Roman war machine.  We have the will and the spirit, but will it be enough?

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 08:10 | 423367 nmewn
nmewn's picture

On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero ;-)

History will show those who opposed tyranny & oppression, in all it's disguises, whether they won or lost, to be the good guys. This is all we can expect from history.

It is preferable to be the victor though...LOL.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 01:38 | 423211 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Hey nmewn... I need to borrow your brain for a bit.

Please read my idea posted in response to Chet and JW both above and below you... I need you to tell me why it will not work. Plain and simple. get everyone on it fast until we find someone who can refute it.

Thanks!

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 07:47 | 423354 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"Hey nmewn... I need to borrow your brain for a bit."

Sure thing, I'm not using it...LOL.

I believe your idea of "The Anti-corruption in Government Act" would be a good "campaign" tool, enabling the correct type of candidate to use it as a cudgel to beat the opposition over the head with.

When I say "the correct" candidate we should know to whom I refer.

The candidate would be a defender of the Bill of Rights and know inherently it's entire purpose is to protect the common citizen, who reside in the individual states, from the predations we see today by the apparent capture of the Federal central government.

However, as a mechanism or law to prevent good people from being corrupted once in office I believe it would not work (but that can be our secret for this excercise and oncoming election).

One scenario (if passed to law status) would be to have a "throw away Congressman" (one who will lose the next election anyway) challenge the law on the grounds of having been duly elected by the voters this law is un-Constitutional as it prevents them from serving. I would expect the supremes to rule in the throwaways favor. The rub here is respect for the supremes ruling as they have no power to enforce anything, that's executive.

Another scenario (if it is just a House rule, parliamentary rule) would be to simply ignore it. Afterall, they just did that with the abuse of Reconciliation, whereby a citizens "right" to another citizens labor (a doctor's labor) and the coup de grace, if you choose to NOT excercise that "right" on they're timeline you will be fined. How's that for a "right"? What other right codified in law has a penalty against the citizen for not availing themselves of it? I can't think of one.

You asked for a critique and this is mine. It would be a good campaign tool.

What is needed is politicians who are less prone to be bought or corrupted. A Diogenes-like stroll through the countryside to be sure. We have to recognize they are all human and so are imperfect.

One I believe who is less likely to be corrupted is Col. Allen West, who has already shown by his knowledge of our founding documents and his actions while in the service, to have the will and the energy to stand for those who have placed their trust in him. I am not in his district.

 

 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 13:44 | 423757 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Thanks mnewn... I am quite pleased with your response... I was expecting ridicule! That of course means I am closer than I think to being on to something here.

(I enjoy ridicule actually!)

 

One term it is then. The message will be sent not only to those running for the House but indirectly also the Senate.

The intent in 2010 is not to pass any law actually. I agree the senate will never that allow to happpen... I agree with your assessment.

And I concur that even if the law were passed it would almost certainly not be acted upon. To do so would result in empowering members and by proxy the citizens which is not in their best interests.

What it would accomplish however is some degree of accountability for the politicians who feel they need the extra aura of respectability to get a seat at the public trough. To not subscibe to the "Anti-Corruption in Government Act" (working title...) leaves the door open for the opponent to potentially claim additional votes.

So why go through all the trouble then if it will never come into effect?

Good question... glad you asked!

We will clearly see who the opponents are to this popularly supported Act. There is no hiding room when it comes to an open vote and this will be as simple and unobjectional bill as can possibly be written.

There will be no cover for opponents to it once the requisite 218 co-sponsers do what they have pledged to do. Forget about the resigning part... it was late last night and yes I agree that there can be no legal enforcement of that measure. I just had to get "Old Glory" in there somehow since national identity icons are great sales gimmicks.

My question is this and only this... from a technical standpoint... can it possibly happen that we can get the House to pass this bill if 218 or more co-sponsers agree and follow through with their pledge to do so? And if not just what are the impediments.

That is my question.

Thanks for your feedback!

 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 15:29 | 423918 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Well, technically it's more of another rules mechanism I guess, as the "law" would apply to the legislative and executive branch only, not to unelected citizens. And I have to point out that Article 2 Section 4 (which includes bribery & misdemeanors) has been in place since our founding as a country.

Dem dar "silly teabagger" forebearer's were some pretty smart fellers afterall ;-)

Could 218 votes be gotten? The way it's shaping up probably yes.

Of course the elephant sitting in the middle of that theoretical room is that half of the house would be the admitting that incumbments of the 111th. were as crooked as a dog's hind leg. Well known, but hard to acknowledge, as the follow up question would be obvious.

Congressman Blowhard...which of your fellow house members do you feel should have been impeached under current law? Rangel would be the source of all evil in the world as the scapgoat...LOL.

I look forward to reading over your plan.

Regards.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 16:32 | 423954 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

You are catching on nmewn... damn that's a clusterfuck to type.

I cleaned the line up in the Forum section under "How to Peacefully Overthrow an Oligarchic Kleptocracy"

Check it out and see if you figure it out where I will take it... the bare bones are already there. I am awaiting an "it can't be done" response first from anyone... and will go from there! see if you can tag down some constitutional law specialists here if they exist and kindly redirect them!...

Thanks!

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:47 | 422766 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

+1000!

Absolutely brilliant analogies Ty... simply a gem of a piece.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:52 | 422769 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

If this regime continues the agenda, companies like Goog, RIMM, AMZN and AAPL will be toppled.

The grand scheme is to nationalise all corporate businesses. Each CEO reading this knows you have been made promises.

Your shadow acquaintance is going to renege on the contractual obligations.

You will be left high and dry. Be aware or take your own systemic risk. You have been warned.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:53 | 422772 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Atom,

Yeah, it's called FASCISM...................and we are WELL on the way to it.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:03 | 422780 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

No Sir. Its called despotism

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:18 | 423032 Johnny Dangereaux
Johnny Dangereaux's picture

No no Sir; It's called Puppetism. Strings pulled by the Oligarchs.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:06 | 422784 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Of course.  But they do have the real cool black uniforms.  I particularly like the long black leather trench coat, not to mention the nordic occult style SS runes next to the deaths head.  Just plain screams humanitarian.  I hope we don't have to wear the silly Italian syle. 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 14:56 | 422775 Apostate
Apostate's picture

You can tell just how limp-dicked our current crop of CEOs is just by looking at them.

It's tough to stand up to guys who can borrow from the discount window, of course, but this shit has to end at some point. 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:08 | 422785 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Review the original film clip of Howard Hughes testifying in front of his curent crop of public losers.  Where the hell is Howard when you need him?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 22:15 | 423061 Apostate
Apostate's picture

Yep.

No one has any balls anymore. They're all fucking eunuchs. Even in the investment banks. So much for the "best and brightest."

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:03 | 422781 arnoldsimage
arnoldsimage's picture

great responses to your article. so... what are we willing to do about it. i have my weapons. i have my food and water. what about you?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:09 | 422787 keating
keating's picture

I think BP was aware that its leases for Gulf of Mexico oil exploration are very tenuous and can be withdrawn for many reasons, putting BP out of the Gulf. What is annoying is that the $20 Billion will be a slush fund.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 22:23 | 423070 Johnny Dangereaux
Johnny Dangereaux's picture

Slush fund isn't half of it...............the BP slush fund czar is always in the middle of these things...is he really the only one on the friggin planet that can do this?

"As the sole person responsible for distributing the money from the Victims Compensation Fund, Feinberg paid out nearly $7 billion to families in compensation - if they would sign the agreement not to sue the airlines or the Israeli airport security firm involved in 9-11 (Huntleigh USA/ICTS).  More than 98 percent of the families accepted the money from the Feinberg-managed fund.  The amounts of the payments and the amounts paid to Diane Feinberg and the 30 lawyers are not known.  The American people deserve to know how the funds were used and who got paid."

Just another scumbag bagman.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:10 | 422789 doomandbloom
doomandbloom's picture

i see corporates as modern day dinosaurs...roaming carefree having their predatory games...until one day a comet wiped them apart...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:15 | 422791 chet
chet's picture

You've formulated the problem very well.

"Corporate entities, be they corporations, unions, the military, or the government, act lawlessly—anarchically—trampling the individual without hesitation, yet coming to accomodations between one corporate entity and another."

I know what has changed for me as I've gotten older is the expectation that anything will happen to corporate or government criminals.  When I hear of a case of probably wrongdoing, my first assumption now is that the authorities won't even pursue it.

When people look back on this era searching for what changed in America, they will see powerful people getting away with crime and fraud on a mass scale, with dwindling recourse to law and order.  The other thing they'll see is the judicial branch just "sitting it out" during crucial turning points while law and order eroded.  Refusing to get involved in questions of torture, election irregularities, politicizing of the Justice Dept.

The trends will be obvious with time and distance:  The Executive Branch essentially becoming immune even to investigation, much less prosecution.  The Judicial Branch twiddling its thumbs as if these issues don't concern it.  Congress structurally unable to put the country's best interests over politics and self-interest.

I won't even get started on corporations.  The question for them is, why wouldn't you break the law?  Who is going to catch you?  The SEC?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:40 | 422843 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Chet... check this out first big guy... I'll fill in the blanks later!

I believe I have found a critical error that was made when the vote process was changed to make votes a matter of public record rather than a secret ballot. The change was made to make individual members vote the party line thus co-opting the democratic 'rights' of individual members. No independant voting was to be tolerated by those in control. It had the effect of creating a form of legislative leverage if you will. As we all know now leverage can make things very unstable.... now read with this in mind.

Look closely and please consider the implications independantly before I tell you what I see... which is one (of several) paths to bring this beast to heel.

Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition

 

Now consider the proclaimed reason for the change... it was of course (as always) about nothing of the sort (they only wanted to stamp out  secret ballots to consolidate power and punish those who did not follow the party line...) but now you should be thinking about the way this can be used as a tool when you read this...

http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Speeches&...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:33 | 422904 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

No-one curious?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 20:20 | 423001 chet
chet's picture

I definitely see the connection.  Daylight is powerful in multiple ways.  It doesn't allow people to be little s**ts in anonymity, but in our p.c. age, it allows for a lot of pressure on those who are now "outed."

Out in my neck of the woods, the gay-rights lobby (who I happen to support) used a tactic which I definitely don't support, which is making public the list of everyone who signs a ballot measure petition.  They want to do this of course, so that they can publically shame anyone remotely well-known if they sign such an anti-gay-rights petition. 

I think it is terrible to force people to vote against their own best judgement out of fear of being shamed for holding an unpopular opinion.  It's chilling really.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 01:41 | 423169 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Het Chet I'm glad to see you here... sorry I was so late in posting... can you give me some feedback on this... send it around to find someone who can shoot it down so I don't have to think about it any more... be as brutal as you can and I'll see if I can defend it... it may be a long shot I don't know but long shots may be all we have right now!

 

I'm very glad to see you gave this matter some thought... and I know you are now primed with all the relevant information which is why I did not include my own situational analysis until you had a chance to read it through with an untainted mind. We all need to think critically and independantly here. We need to find out if this can work... or more importantly why it can not work.

I am not afraid of launching nutjob ideas here BTW as all of you may already know... but hey at least I'm trying.

 

Let us never forget the problem is that we have a 'two' party system that exists to maintain, protect and service the needs of an Oligarchic Kleptocracy of which regardless of the species of victorious party... remains eternally in their service. And to achieve any meaningful reform my friends we must find a constructive way to transcend these dual impediments and help our politicians do what is just and right.

Now let's kindly forget Senate for simplicities sake here a moment here... I have some ideas there as well but it is indeed a little more tricky... and it takes 6 years to fully flush that toilet anyway. Let us first start the ball rolling and get some momentum built up in 2010 by Hijacking the Midterm Elections and thus taking over the Agenda in the House of Representatives with it's 100% two year potential turnover. If successful (I will define success later... it's not what you will think...) we will come back to finish the job in 2012 with a fear inspiring track record and a hurricane force economic shitstorm with the pitchfork weilding masses at our sides. If this can technically be done the Kleptocracy will fall and it won't be pretty. (For them anyway)

Brief history once again...

Obama campaigns on Hope and Change yet breaks almost every one of his campaign promises, pretty much keeps the same corrupt and incompetent players who have possibly fatally fucked this country up on the damn field and there is not a bloody thing we can do about it because in actuality not even Obama is in control. Even the English soccer team pulled their goalie after one bad goal. What are we to think. There is no accountability in government anymore. Almost no-one is ever directly to account. This must change.

When eventually something constructive is forwarded like the Ron Paul / Alan Grayson audit the Fed bill... or any other kind of financial or meaningful reform... it is referred direct to committee where it gets sodomized and skullfucked by seasoned cocksuckers like Barney Frank and Mel Watt... even though the votes to pass the original unadulterated bill may actually be there. They intentionally gut the crap out of it and tack on shit that clearly doesn't belong until it means less than nothing when it finally comes out of committee for a vote on the floor. Then have the audacity to publicly pass the fucking hat around just a few days later to get paid for a job well done... unfucking believable. They simply must be stopped or this country way soon catastrophic systemic collapse.

In summation all these 535 self serving pieces of fetid shit want to do is continue to feed at the trough and fill their pockets year after year and there is precious little we can do to stop them.

Even the vast majority of the population knows the political system is corrupt but the two party system leaves them cllectively confused as to who is to blame and there mindless 'tribal' political loyalties in place... so it's always the other party who is at fault.

But they need to get re-elected. And that is where they are truly fucked.

I repeat...  they need to get re-elected.

And they will do anything to achieve an advantage over their adversaries... hell that's primarily why they pimp the shit out of themselves... to get the cash needed to get the job done. They will suck any coc% that is near their mouths... Wall Street, AIPAC, Pharma, HMO's, Big Oil, hell just about anybody who has the bucks to lobby to change the laws and extort more money yet again from "We The People"... and in the process they become beholden to these same moneyed interests... it's merely the nature of the beast.

Then come the elections... they will promise everything to everyone.

They will fight each other viciously like bucks vying for a doe in heat during the mating season... and will quite literally do anything and I mean anything to get in. They will backstab, they will lie, they will engage in character assassination and portray their Democrat or Republican adversaries as child-molesting necrophiliacs if need be.

Anything to get elected. To 'earn' a seat at the trough.

It's my favorite time of year actually... the only time we get to see humiliated political corpses carried off the field in body bags.

OK.

So the question briefly then is... How do we bypass this clusterfuck?

Answer    >  A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y

 

What Sen. Inhofe did in an attempt to remove the power of individual members of congress to vote anonymously in DISCHARGE PETITIONS... in an attempt to consolidate the same power at the leadership (enforcement) levels of both parties by making Discharge Petition votes of public record... can also be used to make these same members accountable to the wishes of "We the People" that voted for them. That is the guts of my plan.

Let me explain for those who do not understand...

DISCHARGE PETITIONS are magical things that can do lots of stuff like bring bills immediately out of committees like the ones Barney and friends like to run with no changes to the Bill.

Hell they can even replace the Speaker of the House.

What is required to do these magical things seems to be a simple majority vote of the members of the House of Representatives... the magic number? 218 of 435.

It brings things directly to the House for a vote before Barney or any other committee chair can get his filthy hands on it. It is... the silver bullet express... and from what admittedly little that I munderstand it still is the law.

So what does this all mean? OK... here's the plan but I am  not going to elaborate on it much tonight... I'll wait for the valid criticisms first... perhaps tommorrow.

 

To cut to the chase.

We need identify exactly what we need in a bill to make our nightmares go away. We must keep it so simple that even the ill informed public will understand it. It must have only the minimum elements necessary that will remove the corrupt and self serving influence that special interests now have over our government. There must be little that can be objectionable or indefensible. It must be bulletproof.

That is first and foremost. Lets not get too wrapped up in curing everything in one shot. let's keep it simple silly... think KISS.

It must appeal to as many Americans as humanly possible.

It must have an easily supportable name... I don't know perhaps something factual like "The Anti-corruption in Government Act" who the hell could could be nuts enough to campaign against something like that?

Anyway we take that Bill and we promote the shit out of it... post it to every site on the intertubes and try to get as much support for it as we can... if this plan is feasible we will most assuredly find help in the most unexpected places.

 

Then we take it to the the 2010 MidTerms... here's how.

We get candidates to publicly take a stand on the Bill... if they endorse it we will support them regardless of political affiliation... but they must publicly swear on a fucking stack of bibles (Americans love bibles...) that they will support this legislation and vote for it with no alterations or ammendments once in office so help them God.

They must swear that upon the Flag of the United States of America that if they do not they must immediately resign forthwith. This thing must be bulletproof gentlemen.

Any candidate who does not endorse "The Anti-Corruption in Government Act" will be at an extreme disadvantage my friends.

I mean reall guys... do you want to be the candidate who has to go through the entire fucking campaign trying to defend what is clearly the indefensible? It will be a goddamn fucking howl to watch them try!

Listen I gotta go right now and yes, I know I know... what about the Senate, and this doesn't give us a law.... and blah blah blah... listen up guys if this can be done. I have the rest of the bases covered... this is not about changing the law in 2010... I'm not that nuts... this is about getting the party started!

Good night!

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:02 | 422934 Kali
Kali's picture

Chet, yes, I agree.  I would add that the military is their puppy too.  MAD.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:23 | 422796 seventree
seventree's picture

Individuals’ rights are more curtailed and restricted than ever before. But corporate entities are freer than ever before.

Unfortunately when politicians promise to reform "big government" this is usually what they mean. And what we get.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:29 | 422801 Bearster
Bearster's picture

If you define a corporation as a government, military, or for-profit company, then the definition serves no rational purpose.  The definition in fact obscures the key distinction.

Some groups can initiate the use of physical force, and some cannot.

What complicates this is that today, nearly everyone wants corporations to leverage the government's power.  They call this "government and business working together."

Every subsidy--whether for the good of the "public", the "poor", the "environment", or whatever--is an instance of this.

Every regulation--wether antitrust, FCC, FTC, SEC, FDA, etc.--gives some corporations an exclusive privilege that is denied to others.

People always like the sound of these things, because they are sold in terms of altruism.  Then they are disappointed with the results in reality because no one will willingly sacrifice his interests to anyone else.  But the voters keep on electing politicians like Obama who pretend they they do, pretend that their entire administration does, and pretend that they can make businesses do.

 

P.S.  So long as calling a shakedown a "shakedown", and an unprecedented power-grab a "power grab" is regarded as "siding with" BP, the collapse of civilization will continue.  One has to be able to differentiate between the abrogation of the rule of law vs. saying that BP should avoid paying for the damages they caused.  I don't think that Congressman was saying BP shouldn't be liable.  I think he said that Obama shook them down and that this is totally incompatible with the rule of law.  If few can think in principles, then the result will be more and more aggressive demagogues until civilization collapses.  Read Atlas Shrugged to get a good picture of what this could look like. 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 15:33 | 422805 Cursive
Cursive's picture

In other words, our society has become a neighborhood where street-gangs—corporate entitites—battle one another for position. Even the Government is just another street gang.

+1.  Never have individuals had such autonomy (automobiles, cellphones, internet, email, skype, smartphones, etc.) and less true freedom.  Our institutions will need to adapt and we will need to remain vigilant not to become unwitting accomplices to the proposed Hegelian "synthesis".

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:13 | 422835 JR
JR's picture

Yes.

If the Supreme Court couldn’t take the Arar case, then IMO it has no reason to exist.  Why do individuals need the protection of individual rights if the court refuses to act on that protection?  And if the justices don’t want to deal with an issue, they always find some legal point to get out of it: who needs them anymore?

And cases are turned down on a vote.  And if the other justices don’t object, one justice can turn a case down.  Just look at who the justices are.  The justices who are arriving in an unbroken line are advocates, not magistrates.  They are there to make law, not to interpret and implement the U.S. Constitution. The nation has laws, but the justices want new laws… to provide precedent…for their causes. 

Their role, IMO, is not to set precedent; it’s to determine justice based upon Constitutional law.

Maria LaHood wrote in Arar’s brief, urging the high court to take up the case: “If US officials are free to deliver a man to be tortured without any legal accountability, the prohibition on torture found in the Constitution and federal statutes is empty symbolism.”

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:25 | 422893 drwells
drwells's picture

SCOTUS is just another tool, has been forever. I can't remember the last decision they made that didn't disgust me.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 04:54 | 423300 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Drwells,

Very true. One only needs to take a look at the reason and circumstance around the appointment of Justice Brandies to understand just how badly the SCOTUS system has been and is compromised.

Only silly folks would imagine that the controllers woudl leave such a critical branch of control alone.

You/anyone interested should read the works/essays of Benjamin Friedman as one source to get a picture.

Again, I have a fascinating document but no way to share it on this forum.

ORI

http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com

Tue, 06/22/2010 - 01:10 | 426266 moneymutt
moneymutt's picture

civil rights rulings were good things, but really just reactive to shifting society

 

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:06 | 422827 Zina
Zina's picture

Good reading:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/the-very-angry-tea-party/

The Very Angry Tea Party

Sometimes it is hard to know where politics ends and metaphysics begins: when, that is, the stakes of a political dispute concern not simply a clash of competing ideas and values but a clash about what is real and what is not, what can be said to exist on its own and what owes its existence to an other. 

The seething anger that seems to be an indigenous aspect of the Tea Party movement arises, I think, at the very place where politics and metaphysics meet, where metaphysical sentiment becomes political belief.  More than their political ideas, it is the anger of Tea Party members that is already reshaping our political landscape.

(...)

What has gripped everyone’s attention is the exorbitant character of the anger Tea Party members express.  Where do such anger and such passionate attachment to wildly fantastic beliefs come from?

My hypothesis is that what all the events precipitating the Tea Party movement share is that they demonstrated, emphatically and unconditionally, the depths of the absolute dependence of us all on government action, and in so doing they undermined the deeply held fiction of individual autonomy and self-sufficiency that are intrinsic parts of Americans’ collective self-understanding. 

The implicit bargain that many Americans struck with the state institutions supporting modern life is that they would be politically acceptable only to the degree to which they remained invisible, and that for all intents and purposes each citizen could continue to believe that she was sovereign over her life; she would, of course, pay taxes, use the roads and schools, receive Medicare and Social Security, but only so long as these could be perceived not as radical dependencies, but simply as the conditions for leading an autonomous and self-sufficient life.  Recent events have left that bargain in tatters.

But even this way of expressing the issue of dependence is too weak, too merely political; after all, although recent events have revealed the breadth and depths of our dependencies on institutions and practices over which we have little or no control, not all of us have responded with such galvanizing anger and rage.  Tea Party anger is, at bottom, metaphysical, not political: what has been undone by the economic crisis is the belief that each individual is metaphysically self-sufficient, that  one’s very standing and being as a rational agent owes nothing to other individuals or institutions.    The opposing metaphysical claim, the one I take to be true, is that the very idea of the autonomous subject is an institution, an artifact created by the practices of modern life: the intimate family, the market economy, the liberal state.  Each of these social arrangements articulate and express the value and the authority of the individual; they give to the individual a standing she would not have without them.

Rather than participating in arranged marriages, as modern subjects we follow our hearts, choose our beloved, decide for ourselves who may or may not have access to our bodies, and freely take vows promising fidelity and loyalty until death (or divorce) do us part.  There are lots of ways property can be held and distributed — as hysterical Tea Party incriminations of creeping socialism and communism remind us; we moderns have opted for a system of private ownership in which we can acquire, use and dispose of property as we see fit, and even workers are presumed to be self-owning, selling their labor time and labor power to whom they wish (when they can).  And as modern citizens we presume the government is answerable to us, governs only with our consent, our dependence on it a matter of detached, reflective endorsement; and further, that we intrinsically possess a battery of moral rights that say we can be bound to no institution unless we possess the rights of  “voice and exit.”

(...)

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/the-very-angry-tea-party/

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:29 | 422849 Fred Hayek
Fred Hayek's picture

Ah yes.  The new york times, unable to ever remove its blinders, postulates that people are only angry at government because deep down they love government and are utterly dependent upon it.  Leviathan or libertarian, it's all the same to the ny times.  You must love it.  In fact, you do.  And anger is just an expression of jilted love. 

If the ny times didn't exist, we'd have to invent it for the comedy value alone.  Institutions give the individual his standing.  What a perfect statement of the ny times perspective on things.  The individual is nothing.  Only the state has meaning.  

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:28 | 422874 Zina
Zina's picture

"The individual is nothing".

Don't think so... But the individual is not that great superman... Unless it's Robinson Crusoe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_Crusoe

(And Crusoe had the companion of Friday)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:04 | 422875 docj
docj's picture

Well said, Fred.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:38 | 422892 Zina
Zina's picture

Quick test.

There is one company created by an "entrepreneur" like Henry Ford or Bill Gates.

That company is getting bigger and bigger, until it becomes a enourmous corporation wich threatens to become an all-powerful monopoly.

Then, the government uses the antitrust laws to split that corporation in two and preventing it from becoming a monopoly wich can do very much harm to consumers.

What you do about it?

A) supports the government because that was an evil corporation wich wanted to harm individuals (consumers, citizens, taxpayers, whatever)

B) become very angry because this was an absurd "communist" government intervention in the economy, and join the Tea Party

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:41 | 422913 Fred Hayek
Fred Hayek's picture

How about deride the terms of the question as silly?  "Threatens to become an all powerful monopoly"?  Really? 

Anyone accepting absurd premises as the basis for a meaningful test has already failed it.

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:47 | 422921 Zina
Zina's picture

So, you are confessing you oppose any antitrust laws, and you think the use of antitrust laws against  Rockefeller's Standard Oil and against Microsoft were two examples of absurd "communist" government intervention in the economy...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:36 | 422957 Fred Hayek
Fred Hayek's picture

I'm not sure if you're kidding or not.

But you don't seem to take the terms of your own question very seriously.  I'm not sure what the point is of trying to stack an argument to put silly words in someone else's mouth.  Why not argue sensibly?

I mean, a real communist economy wouldn't even have private companies.  A real communist economy would be one giant monopoly of all business activity.  So, you're suggesting that if someone takes one side of that silly thought experiment, then they're calling a certain action something logically impossible.  What's the point?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 19:36 | 422981 Zina
Zina's picture

I think you know very well that all those "silly" teabaggers consider any government intervention as a "communist" threat.

Anyway, just answer the test. Only two options, A or B, there's no C.

You know very well the US government utilized antitrust laws against Rockfeller's Standard Oil and against Microsoft. Are you in favour, or are you against it?

If you choose the first option, you're explicitly supporting a government intervention in the economy. If you choose second option, you're siding with the evil monopolistic giant corporations.

So? What's your option?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 19:39 | 422984 docj
docj's picture

I think you know very well that all those "silly" teabaggers consider any government intervention as a "communist" threat.

You evidently don't know many "teabaggers".  Silly or otherwise.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:05 | 423021 nmewn
nmewn's picture

The socialist mind always confuses "society" with "government". The canard of "if it wasn't for government road building projects you wouldn't have ROADS". It's as if a well worn tread would never be improved upon by those who use it...LOL.

Related;

"Socialism, like the old policy from which it emanates, confounds Government and society. And so, every time we object to a thing being done by Government, it concludes that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of education by the State — then we are against education altogether. We object to a State religion — then we would have no religion at all. We object to an equality which is brought about by the State then we are against equality, etc., etc. They might as well accuse us of wishing men not to eat, because we object to the cultivation of corn by the State."

Bastiat

Regards.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 23:42 | 423113 Suisse
Suisse's picture

Of course he doesn't, he's from the third world dump known as Brazil.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 11:23 | 423550 Zina
Zina's picture

Your ridiculous indebted country will also be a third world country very soon.

And when it happens, you should remember we here in Brazil at least live in a country where there is no crazy people shooting classmates or co-workers all the time (like in Columbine), and we have more beautiful beaches and more beautiful girls!

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 12:18 | 423600 Suisse
Suisse's picture

Please, the major brazilian cities are free-fire zones that make Chicago look safe. Brazil is nothing more than a resource colony with a $10,000 per capita gdp and a 20.0 per 1000 homicide rate. Personally I don't care for cheap mulatto prostitutes.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 13:12 | 423693 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

LOL!

Shooters don't have to go into classrooms to nail kids. Plenty in the street playing soccer. And it's the kids shooting other kids. And it's the few armed citizens that actually are about their community that shoot back and remove the murderers from society. That's the fucking wild west if you ask me.

Zina, you're an idiot. Opining on American politics and you must not have seen City of God.

Hot women though. And nice beaches. But the locals all have glass and metal shards cemented into the top of the walls that surround every house and condo high-rise.

I actually lived there, Zina, so I can say that from experience.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:22 | 423035 Fred Hayek
Fred Hayek's picture

Matt Welch of Reason Magazine went to a Tea Party event and reported that, yeah, there were a few people with nutty signs but he said that everyone seemed to stay away from them. 

I know the owner of the small company where I work went to an event here in Massachusetts.  He's about as calm, rational and sober as you can get.  I don't think I've ever heard him call any particular gov't intervention "communist".  He seems to be more sensible than that.  I think he went because he's very worried about the U.S. debt situation.

It's unfortunate that any folks at ZH, who seem to understand the looming dimensions of our debt problems, would reflexively jump on the "slag those uncooth rubes!" bandwagon. 

Here's another Matt Welch interview on the subject of the group.

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4926

What are the media types who've gleefully expressed their higher status in life by speaking condescendingly of Tea Party attendees going to do when our debt ruins the economy?  Oh, wait, nothing.  They'd have to have some honor and be adults to admit that they were wrong.

Regarding Standard Oil and Msoft, there were things the former did that I could certainly see as going over the line and requiring some gov't response but almost nothing that the latter did as I think people overreacted to the "threat" of Msoft.

 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 13:54 | 423785 trav7777
trav7777's picture

False dilemma much?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 19:39 | 422986 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Nicely done.

Strawman arguments or "tests", such as zina's, seem to be all the rage these days...LOL.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 20:36 | 423010 Zina
Zina's picture

And you, nmewn? What's your vote? A or B?

 

(By the way, my vote is A, since I have no problem with some government intervention once in a while...)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 21:27 | 423039 nmewn
nmewn's picture

See my above to doc for direction. I don't engage in delusional constructs.

It's generally not a good idea to site a tenured professor, who's world view revolves around preening for like minded primadonnas, when trying to grasp the concept of a populist movement as he may not have the proper perspective.

But of course you can continue to do so at your leisure, as the price has already been paid in full, in the past, for you to do so in the present.

 

 

 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 11:27 | 423555 Zina
Zina's picture

Well, you take the side of the evil corporations, against government intervention... It's clear, no  more need to answer the test...

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 16:22 | 423951 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Corporation's aren't evil, it is people who can be evil. A corporation is not living, it can't think or choose among options or behavior, it can't say to another corporation or person I think I'll commit murder today.

Pop quiz;

A) You apparently cannot discern various subtleties within the english language.

B) Your just a troll.

There is no C. What is your answer ;-)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 22:32 | 423080 Johnny Dangereaux
Johnny Dangereaux's picture

Considering Rockefeller and his cronies still own all the oil companies... it really was "monopolist" government intervention. We shouldn't have anti-trust laws because they are selectively enforced imho

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 19:35 | 422982 docj
docj's picture

Heck of a strawman you have there.  Think I'll pass.

Besides, I can't hope to do better in reply than Hayek has already done so I'm happy to leave it to him.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:03 | 422872 septicshock
septicshock's picture

FUCK THE TEA PARTY.   Lazy racist sister fucking extremists.   Fuck all the idiotic and un-educated fools that support the tea party.   Sarah palin..one of their icons... that should say it all. 

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 01:07 | 423156 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

[quote]"What I can't figure out is why some people are so threatened or angry
at the Tea Party movement. What threatens them?"[/quote]

Perhaps what threatens the "Progressive" world view of those others is the
Tea Party principles:  Small government,
fiscal responsibility, following the Constitution, and education about rights.

After all, none of these principles actually support the "Progressive" notions
of an all-powerful US Govt. dictating everything EVERY Citizen should or should
not be doing while they're alive in the USA.

There are no valid (or perhaps honest is better) counter principles to be had
for the typical "Progressive" (Socialist Decepticrat?).
Can you imagine arguing in favor of an "Irresponsible Fiscal Policy?"
How about "Ignoring the US Constitution?"  How about "Less Rights Education
for our Children?"  Let's see the hands in favor of a LARGER Federal Govt...

If they were to be completely and Intellectually Honest about what they
("Progressives") are supporting, everyone would see the "Emperor has no clothes."
So they have to grasp at straw men, such as "Racism", "Idiocy", "Hatred", etc.
to hide their own lack of good counter arguments.

 

Just because someone like Sarah Palin attempts to co-opt a movement for her own ends does NOT mean that the movement is in total support of her.  As long as the MSM focuses on Sarah, she serves a useful purpose to the Tea Party.

Tue, 06/22/2010 - 01:16 | 426271 moneymutt
moneymutt's picture

many Iraq war protesters were very angry also...I personally watch ANGRY protests at Repub 2008 convention in St. Paul and there were huge crowds filling entire width of city streets for many many blocks...a big "neighborhood" anti war march in my neighborhood in 2005 filled a wide parkeway street with more people that local, packed, beer fests get on a sunny day....but these large protests not given any wide angle shots by meeting...Tea Partiers on the other hand have non-stop coverage of protests with a few hundred people...gay rights protest at Wash jsut as big as Tea Partiers, but ignored by Fox and little covered by MSM....shoot Truthers have bigger, and just as angry protests as Tea Partiers, and they get no coverage...while birthers get plenty of coverage

Yes, Tea Partiers are angry, but we just notice is because of media coverage...people have been angry and protest in big groups this whole past decade...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:18 | 422838 Fred Hayek
Fred Hayek's picture

This particular, surreal aspect of the case hasn't sufficiently been commented upon.  The following quote is from Chris Floyd's site, Empire Burlesque and he's paraphrasing libertarian James Bovard:

But grim and depraved as Obama's position is, it is not without its comic elements. As Bovard notes, one of the "arguments" offered by the Obama/Yoo administration was that the case should be dismissed because it might call into question “the motives and sincerity of the United States officials who concluded that petitioner could be removed to Syria.” We kid, as they say, you not.

So now cases of monstrous and criminal actions by agents of the United States government cannot be heard in court, because this might impugn the "sincerity" of the officials involved. And after all, as we all know, it is the inner feelings of government officials that are all important in determining the legality -- and morality -- of their actions. That is why the murder of more than a million Iraqis in an act of naked military aggression is not a war crime; it is, at the very worst, just a "tragic blunder," a misdirected excess of good intentions gone awry. Because we meant well, didn't we? We always mean well.

http://www.chris-floyd.com/

How much of a disgusting empty suit do you have to be to tell a badly wronged man to fvck off because giving him justice might make people think less highly of the state of mind of bureaucrats?!?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 22:35 | 423083 Johnny Dangereaux
Johnny Dangereaux's picture

Chris Floyd is one that in fact speaks truth to power....

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:23 | 422845 Cheyenne
Cheyenne's picture

During the Great Depression, those halcyon days when banks were allowed to fail, two out of five did exactly that. Now that banks have far more power than U.S. citizens, it's not hard to imagine the effects of the current depression once it shrugs off the stimuli and kicks into higher gears.

After 2+ years, I'm done explaining to friends that big corporations have reduced our two-party system to a sham that's grinding everyone, at different rates, into fine grey dust. "You're on your own," I now tell them. "And you better get real smart, real fast."

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:06 | 422941 Cursive
Cursive's picture

@Cheyenne

"You're on your own," I now tell them. "And you better get real smart, real fast."

Excellent advice.  I have the same problem.  Now I kind of laugh/cry on the inside.  It's my own inside joke.  :)

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 19:30 | 422980 Kali
Kali's picture

"and you better get real smart, real fast"  I advised one of my clients just this week with that statement.  It was used in a different, but remotely, related context.  I often advise a lot of my clients how to navigate the bureacratic maze to get what they want done.  A lot of my clents who have never had to deal with government regulation a lot, are flabbergasted how inefficient, corrupt, incompetent and unaccountable most government regulatory entities are when they do have to start dealing with them in a business environment.  Like Rusty S said in a thread a few days ago, you should view government as a rabid dog at loose in your neighborhood.  The best defense is to stay away from it, but it can unexpectedly jump out from behind and bite you in the ass.  When that happens, no one can save you.  :)

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 06:48 | 423338 Rusty_Shackleford
Rusty_Shackleford's picture

Did I really say that? 

If all you're goin' on is my confession, forget it, I'm simply not credible.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:31 | 422850 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Academic Think Tanks are going into cardiac arrest.

The candy is running dry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeXLeOvF8as

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:40 | 422856 uno
uno's picture

What is the over/under on the number of ounces of gold & silver that JPM shorts this week for option expiration on June 24th?

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:10 | 422882 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

July 2, 2010.

No further comments & don't ask

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 18:55 | 422967 uno
uno's picture

Can't wait, I think!  

 

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:42 | 422857 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Always said it since I discovered it: if you understand the gangs, you understand a lot of the US psyche.

Gangs are an exaggerated version of the US soul, retaining all the major characters but expressing them exaggerately.

Running with gangs one year will teach more about the US style of economy than ten years in B&J.

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 16:57 | 422866 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Medvedev sees chance for new world order

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/81a03be0-7ac0-11df-8549-00144feabdc0.html

These fucks are in broad daylight telling you about your future. I hope your listening?

Kids In The Hall - Communism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83tnWFojtcY

 

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:41 | 422914 Zina
Zina's picture

"communism" fearmongering is so 1981...

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 17:09 | 422880 RottingDollar
RottingDollar's picture

"I have yet to read the actual deal memo"

 

This about sums up this editorial and is indicative of today's bloggers and journalists.   We speculate you decide.  

Sat, 06/19/2010 - 22:37 | 423084 Johnny Dangereaux
Johnny Dangereaux's picture

Feinberg in charge...all you need to know, or not.

Sun, 06/20/2010 - 07:51 | 423339 Rusty_Shackleford
Rusty_Shackleford's picture

Yep, much better to just keep your eyes glued to MSNBC/CNN/CNBC/Fox to get the real dope.

Aim high.

 

 

(Because those at the highest levels of power are providing written documentation of their secret deals, right?)

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!