Volatility

February 1, 2011

Corporatism’s Toxic Touch

Filed under: Climate Crisis, Corporatism, Disaster Capitalism — Russ @ 7:53 am

 

One of the many frauds Obama proffered in his Assault on the Union was his false paean to green energy. I know faith in such cherished ideals dies hard, but under kleptocracy “green energy” is a scam. Its only goal is to open up more corporate welfare ditches, help figure out ways for the elites to maintain their Sodomite lifestyles post-Peak Oil, and do it in a greenwashed way.
 
Cap-and-trade is a similar scam.
 
That’s just one example of corporatism’s corruption of everything it touches. Even Midas’ perverted touch merely turned things to inert, sterile gold. But corporatism’s touch turns everything to virulent, aggressive, communicable poison.
 
The same goes for every other neoliberal talking point. “Competitiveness” is one of the worst whips driving us along this death march. What human being still wants this hideous fascist competition? It’s been proven to bring nothing but murder, war, need, fear, despair, and devastation. It’s pure evil, and today the propaganda of it is simply the face of evil.
 
And how Orwellian is “government overregulation”? We know exactly what that means – strip all regulation and restraint from corporations and the rich, while imposing ever more totalitarian regulation on small economic actors and the people. Obama himself just signed the Food Tyranny bill, a major escalation of aggressive government regulation – but only of small producers and distributors, of course.
 
Yes, let’s get rid of ALL government regulation. That means all government assaults on our rights as citizens and human beings. And it means eradicating big corporations and all the regulations and taxes those corporations impose upon us.
 
1. Corporations are artificial creatures of the government. So by definition they are extensions of the government, and all corporate power is laundered government power. Every regulation and tax a big corporation inflicts upon us is really a government regulation and tax.
 
2. Corporations directly write or implicitly dictate all government laws, regulations, and taxes anyway. So any direct government regulation or tax is being imposed upon us by the big corporations.
 
So however you look at it, whether you approach it from the “left” or the “right”, whether one’s preferred mode of thought and expression is anti-corporate or anti-government, either way it comes down to the same thing.
 
This is one tyrannical nexus of regulation and taxation, corporate and government, all of it purely predatory and parasitic. The only answer, the only way forward, is to rid ourselves of this evil nexus in all its manifestations. 
Advertisements

16 Comments

  1. Hey Russ,

    You seem in a good mood. I am happy to sit and watch the Arab revolution happening. But I think it will be six months before we know what will really be next for the Arabs, and how it will effect the US citizenry, and their view of democracy. It is possible the American citizenry will wake up, but from what I see, most are too distracted to get off their butts to do anything about it.

    But I must admit, I too find the current corporatist piss weak Obama leadership quite disappointing. I hear your plan, but there seem to be a lots of steps necessary to get to where you want to go?

    Comment by kcbill13 — February 1, 2011 @ 8:29 am

    • Hi kcbill. Yeah, it’ll probably be a long, hard fight. But witnessing these marvellous events in Egypt gives me new inspiration for it. So it sure does put me in a good mood.

      No matter how this turns out in the short run, nothing can gainsay the truth of what we’re seeing, what the people can do as soon as they put their will to it.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2011 @ 10:58 am

  2. The email blast of this post was just the name of the post, not the content itself. Ya might want to check it, or it might just be me.

    Have a good one!

    Comment by kcbill13 — February 1, 2011 @ 8:33 am

    • Sorry to hear that. This thing does have glitches sometimes. Let me know if it keeps happening.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2011 @ 10:59 am

  3. Cap and Trade would give rise to, according to CFTC chief, Bart Chilton, a $2 trillion carbon credit derivatives trading market. Point Carbon, a Norwegian environmental analysis firm, puts that number at $3 trillion by 2020. Goldman Sachs owns a good percentage of the CME, the CCX and the ECX. Goldman Sachs was Obama’s largest campaign contributor for four straight years. The Gold Men want their carbon trading market, and their boy in the White House, wants to give it to them.

    In 2002, I believe, Rothschild Australia bought the Australian Carbon Exchange, but it gets even better than that. For those who don’t believe that Rothschild is part of an international, neo-liberal cartel controlling the world, this might help to change there minds:

    http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=90090

    Comment by black swan — February 1, 2011 @ 8:57 am

  4. I would like to make a regular contribution to a fund that would pay one or more capable lawyers to challenge corporate charters- either the underlying constitutional reasoning, their transnational operation, or just to go after specific violations (like MERS or environmental violations) to argue that the involved corporations are incompetent to fulfill their charters, and have demonstrated that they do not intend to do so. I’d also be willing to contribute time to performing whatever research I could (no legal training, but I have institutional journal subscriptions and can slowly make my way through legalese with enough bourbon). Crowd sourcing research could be a way to lower costs.

    My main problem is that the only lawyer I know well enough to trust with such a project is Crown and does criminal prosecution, not corporate law. Secondary problem is that I don’t know if there’s enough interest to buy enough lawyer labour to get anything worthwhile done- I don’t know how plausible these kinds of actions would be under current judiciary conditions in North America or elsewhere.

    Comment by paper mac — February 1, 2011 @ 3:44 pm

    • That’s an interesting idea, but I don’t know about the particulars either.

      I guess my inclination is to organize and use resources to make a political argument to the people rather than try to effect reform within the system’s procedures. Especially since an arena where money and hired, credentialed expertise are the main weapons is bound to favor the enemy.

      Although, the kind of lawsuit you describe could be a supplement to the politics, and if there were lawyers who wanted to make such challenges that would be good.

      But I’d prefer to see them do something like organize to fight these anti-food enforcements. That’s a legalistic war being waged upon us as we speak.

      There we could couple a political argument about the domination of Big Ag (including the anti-corporate argument as such) with a legal and political battle against thuggish, tyrannical Big Government.

      And it would all tie in with the general economic critique and proposed Food Sovereignty solution.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2011 @ 4:15 pm

      • Yeah, I agree that anything like this probably has to be implemented in conjunction with a shift in public mood, higher levels of activism, etc. It doesn’t seem likely to go anywhere under the current political economic conditions in the region.

        I guess this brings me to something I’ve been thinking about- I keep thinking that democratic businesses will need to federate and compete locally, using their superior local knowledge, against larger corporations. It seems inevitable to me that we will be dealing with the corporate sphere for a long time, both economically and legally. So what’s the role of the “federal” judiciary system in this? Can we hope to hive off the local judiciary component of our anti-federal gov’ts by making appeals directly to its members? What if members of the federation want to administer justice internally? It seems preferable to me to have a judicial system that operates at least on a municipal scale, but that’s a lot of local officials who need to be convinced to challenge “federal” power.

        Comment by paper mac — February 1, 2011 @ 4:34 pm

      • I agree that a critical part of relocalization is taking over, achieving the assistance of, or at least the benevolent neutrality of lower-level governments and courts.

        This, I think, is at least an essential stage toward a real transformation, and I suppose could even be part of the goal in some places. (True town-hall government worked well for a period in some parts of Europe and North America. Knowing what we know now, as we return to the non-fossil fuel economy, this form of government, while not fully direct council government, could still be an option for people who wanted to choose it.)

        I’m not sure how to appeal to the state and municipal courts to nullify federal tyranny. In the end the courts follow the political trend. (That today’s SCOTUS and increasingly the federal system in general are aggressively anti-democratic is becasue they follow the trend, not of the people but of the elites. The SCOTUS is the elites’ court, not America’s.)

        I’d love to figure out a viable way for democratic federations external to the system to take responsibility for justice the way the Egyptians are taking their security and street cleaning into their hands as we speak.

        Comment by Russ — February 2, 2011 @ 3:49 am

  5. Russ, as with Simon Johnson, Michael Hudson and William Black, I have a hard time finding anything you write that I disagree with.

    I haven’t seen it written yet, but couldn’t one portend, that if Saddam were still in power, he might be facing what Mubarak is now facing?

    Comment by black swan — February 1, 2011 @ 3:47 pm

    • Thanks, black swan.

      I think Saddam would have massacred anyone who tried to protest, even his among his own clan/Sunni base. He did so with Shiites and Kurds. He used poison gas on the Kurds.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2011 @ 4:19 pm

  6. Is there time for a lawsuit challenging corporate hegemony? I get the impression that the economy is quite close to going over the edge, which would possibly obviate the need. I think the US is being abandoned for Asia, and that in the event of the next big oil shock, or economic shock that causes oil scarcity/volatility, that the rats will abandon our sinking ship. Other than fracking for gas and growing corn (if still profitable), what else is left for them to pillage here? Outsourcing is accelerating. At this point our best chance at surviving corporate predation is a fast crash. Ian Welsh wrote this today:

    “Earn your money while you can, folks, ’cause your leaders are determined to crash out the economy.  And if oil prices don’t stop increasing, you won’t even have a year, you’ll have six months before the next downturn.”

    I think local Transition Initiatives would be a better investment of one’s time and funds, such as buying gardening tools for all. It’s time to start creating our own people’s councils 🙂

    Comment by AR — February 1, 2011 @ 6:13 pm

    • AR, you may well be right about this. I wonder though, where will they go? You say that the US is being abandoned for Asia, but the Chinese are unlikely to welcome laowai kleptocrats with open arms. Isn’t that what the gated communities and the police state are all about? I don’t think these folks are going anywhere, anytime fast. It seems that they have made some, perhaps, close-to-fatal mistakes, though. If I read Russ correctly on MERS, it’s possible that the whole charade will tumble earlier than planned.

      Comment by paper mac — February 2, 2011 @ 12:55 am

    • I think the US elites want to secede from law and civil society, while still imposing the pseudo-law on the people and destroying civil society completely.

      But they’ll stay on the land, “legally owning” it, and at any rate using brute force to dominate it.

      Our best bet might be that the system starts collapsing soon enough on its own, since unfortunately there’s no evidence that the people will rouse themselves to give it a kick to bring it down.

      In the meantime, Transition-type initiatives are the way to go. (My sustainability group just had our first meeting the other night, where I proposed we set up a seed library.)

      (Although I don’t know if Transition Towns itself, with its studied apoliticality, is exactly the right framework. We definitely need to go further to set up political councils, if only as a shadow local and regional government at first.)

      Comment by Russ — February 2, 2011 @ 3:19 am

  7. […] same.   I’ll conclude with a reprise of the conclusions of two earlier posts, the first on the identity of corporations and government, the other on how to limit government and corporate assaults by limiting the government’s […]

    Pingback by Corporations Are Extensions of Government « Volatility — March 18, 2011 @ 3:51 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: