Corporate Feudalism

[Nikki Stone 1]

For many years, I have been watching the ascent of the corporation and its intrusion into the personal lives of Americans. And for at least the past 15 years, I have been using the term Corporate Feudalism to describe what I think is going on.

We have a government totally in thrall to corporate money. We have increasing "privatization" which is essentially a transfer of taxpayer dollars into private hands (corporations) for services that are usually cheaper and better organized when the government does them. (I am not counting products like weapons, here.) We have a growing and powerful radical Christianity which, unlike the real thing, supports corporations and the wars that make money for these corporations. This religious radicalism also support good corporate behavior (The 7 habits of highly effective people, and books of that ilk). We have a pre-fabricated political discourse (powered by talk radio, FAUX, etc) which is pro-corporate, anti-human rights in nature, and which uses God to support the corporate agenda. In essence, the marketplace of free ideas envisioned by our founders has become monopolized, and our politics is mere performance art.

On top of this, we now have corporations owning and operating the highly vulnerable voting machines with no paper trail.

Last night's 60 Minutes piece (on Weyco) is a symptom, not a cause. The worker will have no rights; the employer has the right to invade the employee's bloodstream, find a perfectly legal substance, and fire the employee for this under the guise of health premiums.

I can't help feeling that we are all serfs now.

[unpossibles]

1. gret point. sad but true. n/t

[Gyre]

2. Working for nazis has always been a risk when you're a serf.

Sometimes you get lucky, somtimes not. Happy Monday!

Gyre

[Nikki Stone 1]

3. Yeah, Happy Monday.

:(

[Armstead]

4. Kick -- This is THE issue

It hyas been building for 30 yars, and it has been ignored by most democratic leaders.

Workers rights and protecting economic diversity should be the key centerpiece of any agenda the Democrats come up with.

[sweetheart]

7. Very much i agree

Tolerance of diversity, media plurality, and economic sustainability
as the on-the-ground geo-political model "we" export.

[welshTerrier2]

38. "it has been ignored by most democratic leaders"

two quick points ...

first, i'm afraid it has not been "ignored"; i'm afraid it's been "condoned" ...

and second, perhaps we should not view those who impose such tyranny as "democratic" leaders ...

i'm just saying ...

and, in response to your "key centerpiece" comment, i would even take that a step further ... "protecting workers' rights and protecting economic diversity" are both critical ... but, and we see the problem embodied by our back-sliding Democratic Party (and of course the republican party), our government no longer represents the best interests of the American people ... "special interests" and their lobbyists have infested the halls of our government like a cancer ...

we really do have "the best government money can buy" ... what really needs to be the "key centerpiece" is good old-fashioned democracy ... we've lost that and all other issues will fail as a result ...

[Loonman]

5. So watcha gonna do about it?

Anything?

[Nikki Stone 1]

8. What would you suggest? (Other than the obvious: letters/emails, donations

and all the everyday activism that we do here.)

[Loonman]

11. I'm asking you

I have no problem with capitalism. It doesn't work half as good as it should, but it's a damn sight better than communism or Marxist socialism.

[Nikki Stone 1]

12. And I asked you what you would suggest.

Ball's in your court, dear.

[Loonman]

16. I wouldn't suggest anything

I don't care. Frankly, I was just curious if someone was going to actually foment a revolution or just sound and fury.

[Nikki Stone 1]

21. OK, then.

...

[Armstead]

15. Sure, the only alternative to Corporate Feudilism is the "Red Menace."

How narrow minded is that?

[Loonman]

22. Name another one, then

Socialism, communism, capitalism.

What else?

[Armstead]

25. How about capitalism with a moral framework?

That's neither socialism or communism.

But it is not the Social darwinism, Greed is Good, abusive andf ANTI AMERICAN system that we laughingly call capitalism today.

It is a totally false choice-- and an echo of the right wing message -- to divide the options as narrowly as you did.

[Loonman]

28. What's that: "capitalism with a moral framework"

Define, please...

[Armstead]

39. Think about it....

If you can't see it as clear as glass, you might want to re-think your own ideological biases.

But let me help you...There is a vast and varied number of differences between totally "free market" "win at any cost" capitalism with no moral or social compass and either communism or socialism.

Beyond that, it should be obvious that it is a totally false choice to think that the only alternative to right-wing Anything for a Buck Capitalism is Communism.

[Loonman]

42. It's just words

Morality is hard to define, "capitalism within a moral framework" has as much intrinsic meaning as a throwaway phrase like "family values". People can't define that one in concrete terms, either.

[Armstead]

44. Not just words and you know it

If you're playing devils advocate or engaging in trolling or just want a flame war, I'm up for it. Otherwise your statements are so patently ridiculous that they are not worth of an answer.

You want specifics beyond words?

let's see....Minimum wage that has plummeted; outsourcing jobs and forcing American workers down towards the level of Third World Poverty; deliberatly undermining job security...

Allowing a handful of corporations to monopolistically take over entire industries and sectors of the economy, and ruthlessly kill off all competition.

Oil companies telling consumers to go to hell because there is no alternative to monopolistic energy costs....

A growing a scary gap between a wealthy mionority and everyone else.

Want more? If you think it's just words, you're living in the clouds.

[Nikki Stone 1]

56. Capitalism does not equal the ideal of corporate control of our lives

Nor is the only alternative Stalinism.

The binary thinking is what gets us into trouble.

[Nikki Stone 1]

23. It's a common misconception.

Part of our propaganda training.

[Loonman]

31. Have you ever lived under a communist economic system?

How would it be better? I can't see it fulfilling individual or group needs.

You don't own anything, you don't earn anything, no need for money, there's nothing to buy.

[Nikki Stone 1]

36. And this relates to my topic how?

:wtf:

[eridani]

57. Anarchosydicalism

Nobody, under any circumstances, gets to own anybody else's means of production. You can own your own means of production, or be a part of collective ownership. I realize that this begs the question "collective at what level--family, friendship circle, neighborhood, city, county, state?" I think we can all agree that large nation-states are automatically regarded as too big.

[CrispyQ]

46. We need to revoke corporate personhood.

As difficult as that task seems, I believe it is the only thing humans can do to regain control of these inhuman behemoths that have better representation, better protections & better rights than we do, all because they have personhood rights.

Check out the corporate personhood pages at www.reclaimdemocracy.org Very good website & worthy of a donation if you have any to spare.

Also, Thom Hartmann has two very good books on the subject. One is written in comic-book fashion so it is a very quick read. "We the People: A Call to Take Back America" is basically a primer of what our founding fathers had in mind when creating & defining our democracy.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1882109384/qid=1130779617/sr=8-3/ref=pd_bbs_3/104-5792740-7358366?v=glance&s=books&n=507846


A much more comprehensive book on the topic is "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights" explains how corporate personhood wrongly became law of the land & the implications corporate personhood has on all of us.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1579549551/qid=1130779617/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-5792740-7358366?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

[Nikki Stone 1]

50. Thanks for all this info!!

:)

[xchrom]

6. bushco is the symptem not the cause.

and i agree with you and the poster previous who said this is the issue.

christian extremists are tools -- i think few corporate leaders could care less about religion -- they simply formulate the media in such a way as to manipulate these folks.
i.e. video gammes, hollywood censorship, books etc.

if christian fundamentalist got in the way of wall street -- they would be in for a rude awakening.
just my 2 cents.

oh and my last parting shot -- both political parties are infiltrated.

[mopinko]

9. you are absolutely correct

and most of the secret wars that this country fought have been for the corporations. not just oil, but for coca cola, et al.

[whatever4]

10. Good post!

I saw that piece last night too, on the smoking. And the most funny of all, to me, was that the owner had done NO cost to benefit analysis, and he freely admitted he didn't know if he was saving, past insurance premiums, at all. He just fired anyone that wouldn't quit smoking, no matter how long they'd been employed. What a guy.

And if ANY company feels free to do that? Sure, be healthy or else.

Odd how smoking is generally understood to stem from a need to self-medicate, a need for mood enhancement, it is frequently related to stress. Stress. Isn't that a killer too? Sure. Cure the symptoms, ignore the real disease. As policy. It's just more satisfying to hate smokers. And fat people. The poor. All those "problem" people. It's the modern day fix. It's even what HE said, in the interview, he said "eliminate the problem". Of course, whether he smoked or not, he'd never be "the problem" himself. No. That's for "average" folks, those not entitled to those "problems". Something he, himself, does not face and never will. Because, you see, he is the boss. It's what he said, "I'm the boss".

And, as such, he can do any damn thing he pleases. And will.

I think what we have now is the modern definition of fascism. Just because the average white folks doesn't have the thugs at the door doesn't mean a lot of minority folks don't.

We have one fifth the world population, but we have the most prison inmates. No other nation has a higher per capita percentage of their population incarcerated than we do, here, or a higher total number either. We're the number one prison state, ALL the way around.

No one blinks an eye.

Yes, it truly IS a fascism, for these reasons and others. We just don't realize we're on the mat, still too dazed to hear the count. imho.

[Democrats_win]

13. Greed begets greed. I've seen this greed grow since Reagan.

Big Brother is here and his name is Corporate America!

Unlikie our parent's generation, no company provides a pension plan other than 401K and many won't even provided that. All of this was so that companies could be more profitable. They won't provide insurance so that they can be more profitable, they won't give people vacation time and when someone does take a vacation, they won't hire someone to pick up the slack and those left behind end up being over-stressed for the whole week they're gone. Where did all that profit go?

Now in the name of profits they're looking at our private lives! Will we all be required to say, "I love Big Brother?"

[Nikki Stone 1]

45. That's true. Pension plans are really suffering, even public ones.

..

[ret5hd]

14. i missed 60Minutes...

could you give me a brief rundown in regards to how it related to your post please.

[Armstead]

19. It was a report on how companis were dictating employees' personal lives

Profiled one employers who fired employees for smoking on their own time. Not smoking on the job.

Expanded to show how employers were starting to do similar things to demand "wellness" of employees, to reduce their own health care costs.

Plus how companies like Wal Mart are starting to emphasize hiring of "healthy" associates. In otehr words, if you're fat or have high blood pressure, etc. you may not get a job, regardless of whether or not it affects your job performance.

[Nikki Stone 1]

20. Here is the DU thread on it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2198093


Basically, it's the story of a company that fired employees for smoking on their private time; ie, having nicotine in their bloodstreams. The company claims to be doing it to save money in health insurance costs but freely admitted to 60 Minutes that that had done no real research or cost benefit analysis showing how much they would save by firing smokers. Basically, workers were fired because their boss didn't want any smokers working for him. He is legally allowed to do this. Some of these workers had been there for many years and had exemplary employment records. The owner of the company argued that if smoking was more important to these people than their jobs at his company, then he had the right to fire them.

[TahitiNut]

17. Corporate Feudalism - Plantation Economics - Banana Republicanism

There's absolutely no question about it. Corporations have a "personhood" for which few of the civil liberty limits apply. Corporate "persons" can OWN corporate "persons" - that's slavery. Corporate "persons" have privileges above and beyond The People - in immigration and emigration, in preferential tax treatment, in superior PRIVACY 'rights' and in immortality. Corporate welfare (mandated 'investment' and bailouts) goes not to the neediest but to the most powerful.

If I were Emperor for a day I would, to begin with, outlaw corporations from owning corporations and require ALL public ownership, and all derivative rights of ownership, to be in the name of natural persons. Fuck conglomeration!

Regarding labor laws, to begin with, I would mandate a minimum wage based not only on the location or citizenship of the laborer, but on the 'citizenship' of the payor. American corporations should be required to pay a minimum of $5.15/hour no matter whether the laborer is in West Virgina or in mainland China.

[jobycom]

18. Not completely, not yet.

Feudalism isn't the control of government by private money, it is the complete replacement of government by private money. That's what's happening with privatization, and it's bad, but so far we still have a government.

Now, the government is corrupt, and there is the danger that it is being taken completely out of our hands. I don't fear DIebold, frankly, that all seems like a lot of panic. But the Supreme Court on December 12th, 2000, ruled that we could decide an election without counting all of the legally cast votes. And yes, read the decision, that's exactly what they said.

That's the first step to taking government completely out of our hands. Even if Diebold is rigging their machines, the vote is still deciding our leadership. We just have to clean up the voting process. But with Bush v Gore, the leaders have stated that THEY decide when a vote counts and when it doesn't. That's a lot more fundamental change, because it means that the law of the land is now that our votes don't have to count. That means we don't have control of the government.

As long as we have that government between us and the corporations, even if it does side more with the corporations than with us at the moment, we don't have feudalism. We still have the chance to take back government, change the rules to put corporations in their place, and end their control.

It may not seem like much of a distinction, but it is a tremendous distinction, nonetheless. Feudalism in Europe was brought about when government completely collapsed, and all that was left were the landowners and the tribal kings who had no power over them. There was no way for a serf to get any justice against a landowner. They could be, and often were, killed for no reason, made to fight in wars, robbed, raped, and anything else the land lords wanted to do to them. And the lords had no fear that they could rise up and boot them out, so there was no control other than the Church and a fear of Hell in an afterlife.

So far, our government still has to fear us rising up and throwing them out. In a practical sense, it's unlikely. In a legal sense, we do have that power. We can vote them out, we can take them to courts who aren't all controlled by them. We have options, if we decide to use them.

And, when the economy collapses, the corporations will go bust, but our government, weak though it may be, will still be there.

So we are heading towards feudalism, and we are suffering many of the symptoms of feudalism, but we aren't nearly there yet. And that is the reason we can all still fight, and can still hope. It's not all lost, and we do have the power to change it, if we can get enough people to want to change it. And we have BushCo. They are inspiring more people to want change than any of our speeches ever could. That's the cool thing about democracy. People can be fooled by words and television images, but at some point they do realize that they are hungry no matter how often they are told their bellies are full, and then they vote for change.

That's why we should all fear the Bush v Gore decision more than Diebold. The latter corrupts the vote, the former denies our right to it.

[Armstead]

24. Good Post, but there's something important to note

I agree with what you said -- BUT there's one point that is important to keep it in perspective.

The rules have been changed towards Corporate feudalism so much that what is considerd normal practices and values today would have seemed outrageous 30 years ago.

So many Big Lies have been pounded into peopel's skulls by the Big Media and Big Corporate Oligarchs and by the lack of a real political opposition.

So we are much closer to a Corporate State and collapse of government than we think, unless we remember the Big Picture.

[jobycom]

27. Change is constant

Of course things are different from 30 years ago. That's not to say the picture won't completely flip in the next 30 years. We've had these ebs and flows as a nation before.

The biggest problem with corporations has been deregulation. That seems to me to be the biggest problem with the economy as a whole, since larger corporations stifle business competition, which drives down quality, ingenuity, and wages. But it doesn't give corporations more legal power over the government, it just gives them more influence. Voters can reverse that if they get angry enough.

I don't have any problem with corporations. I have a problem with a government that shirks its responsibility in regulating those corporations. THAT's where we're failing, and that's the one thing we can fix, too, if we get people motivated to fix it.

[Armstead]

41. It has to be both government AND public values

I agre with most of what you said.

However, there is a whole otehr piece that is probably more important than government. That is what we the people are willing to put up with or support. That has more to do with a combination of perceptions of self-interest, altruism and what works best for a healthy economy and society.

As long as the values of Corporate Feudalism are able to outshout otehr values, the political process will continue to devolve, which will accelerate the continued demise of government as a counterbalance.

In otehr words, the public as consumers and workerts -- and the decent people who work in corporations -- have to demand better in terms of voluntary economic morality by the corporate sector to both support government and reduce the need for intrusive regulations.

[jobycom]

48. Sounds good to me

I remember Paul Tsongas saying much the same thing in 92. It does all start with what we expect from a corporation, as you say.

[Nikki Stone 1]

26. I agree with you wholeheartedly on Bush v Gore

And I hope you are right, but part of the reason I think corporate feudalism is a foregone conclusion is that I can't see Americans getting their asses away from the TV long enough to do anything like revolt. And so many of us are in thrall to these corporations through mortgages, loans, credit cards and the like. We spend most of our time trying to protect our families and keep these corporations at bay.

Also, the goals of this feudalism are not limited to the US. It is happening everywhere. Globalism's goals are corporate goals. The PATRIOT act and the HOMELAND SECURITY act seem to me to be in place to invalidate and attack any domestic protest that might be made by labeling it all as "terrorist".

[jobycom]

29. That's more fascism than feudalism

Fascism is when government and corporations are united, and that's more of what's happening. But we still have the vote. Barely.

The thing about TV is that when they've broken things too badly, people won't be able to afford tv. And when they've broken us too completely, we will just stop paying back all those loans and debts, as we did in the 30s. Corporations are killing the goose to get the golden eggs. Once the goose is dead, they are broke and powerless, and we reconstruct things as we have to.

The goal is to make the changes necessary before it all collapses, of course. The hungrier people get, the smarter they vote. So I hope we get hungry before it's too late.

[glitch]

32. "and then they vote for change."

and yet you don't fear Diebold.

[jobycom]

35. For the reasons I said.

First, Diebold's a myth. Doesn't mean there's not some truth to the myth, but it's blown way out of proportion. Even if Diebold is some evil empire blatantly fixing the votes, there are other machines being used, too, and Diebold would blow its cover if it got too far out of whack with the rest of the machines. They can only rig a close election, in other words, and frankly, I haven't seen proof that they've rigged anything. I don't trust the Ohio vote, but I haven't seen that Deibold rigged it.

And there has always been cheating, long before Diebold. People act like electronic voting makes cheating easier. It doesn't, it makes it harder. People have been cheating with paper ballots our whole history. Ask LBJ, he would never have been Senator otherwise. For that matter, there's a Texas Democratic Rep in Congress whose election was rigged with paper ballots just this last cycle. He's a Bush Democrat and he defeated a real Democrat only because someone found a box of uncounted ballots at a polling station in a bank (I think it was a bank) owned by a Bush supporter after the initial tally showed he lost.

I swear I think most of the people whipping up this frenzy about Diebold are Republicans, because it diverts us from the real issues. When I worked a polling station, we had people who were afraid to vote because of all the stuff they'd heard about BBV. We don't even use Diebold here, but they were convinced that something was up. I wonder how many people stay home because of this paranoid frenzy we've created.

[glitch]

40. Thanks, especially the part accusing us of being republicans.

Perhaps you sincerely believe it, but it is insulting to say so.
You discredit your argument that way.

[jobycom]

49. I did no such thing, and quit trying to win arguments by lying and attacks

[glitch]

51. Well, that's enough of that. As a courtesy, I say good bye. nt

[jobycom]

54. So rather than apologize for slandering me, you'll pretend you're the

victim? Goodbye, then.

[Vinnie From Indy]

47. And you would know this because...........?

Gut feeling? Should we all just take your word for it and shut up? If you truly have the gift of clairvoyance and infallibility, please throw us mere mortals a few bones and give us some stock tips or hot horses at Churchill Downs. There can be no doubt that there has been cheating in elections since elections have been used, but I think there are hundreds of positions one could take that would be more helpful to a free society than "it has always happened so quit whining" as you seem to be saying. I also think that in our modern age that the ability to affect an outcome is infinitely greater than in past times. For example, because of the web and computers, conspiracies do not have to be grand, disjointed affairs. Now massive cheating can theoretically take place in a darkened office with only a few people. In addition, because of the vast improvements in communications, polling and reporting, only slight alterations in the vote count in strategic locations can affect a huge change in outcome.

Finally, I would propose that if an administration would lie about 9/11 and Iraq at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives wouldn't stealing a few elections be child's play? How about 'dem stock tips?

[jobycom]

53. Come on, I didn't say anything like that.

And you're in no position to tease about clairvoyance. At least I backed up what i said with specific examples, or else expressed that it was my opinion.

And I didn't say "It's always been like that so quit whining." I said there has always been cheating but the democracy has survived anyway. As always, we should pass laws to make it harder to cheat, and we should especially ban proprietary codes not visible to anyone who wants to see them.

But we don't need to use Diebold as an excuse to not vote, and every time someone starts a thread about voting on DU all the Diebold-Doom-Declarers start moaning that all is lost. The effect is that people don't believe they should even bother with voting anymore.

I don't see any point to that pessimism.

[Vinnie From Indy]

55. Well, hopefully it will be the Repubs not showing up because they

think they already have it sewed up.

[yowzayowzayowza]

59. Coupla points...

...with all the news lately I finally got around to this excellent thread.

As its veneer serves the corporate state, the presence of some form of democracy in and of itself does not rule out the feudalism label.

...we should all fear the Bush v Gore decision more than Diebold.

INDEED. Furthermore, there is nothing to be garnered from the study of national exit polls that will more blatantly illustrate our predicament than Bush v Gore. A ridiculous amount of time, energy and passion have been wasted on blaming the machines and juggling numbers.

[burythehatchet]

30. we're fukked

[loudsue]

33. Recommended. Great post.

When corporations OWN the military, OWN the voting machines, and OWN the prisons .... all done with OUR tax dollars, then you have a recipe for the greatest fall of Democracy in the history of the world.

If we don't get corporate reform, voting reform, and laws about what our tax dollars can be spent on, we're going to hell in a hand-basket.


:kick::kick::kick:

[Nikki Stone 1]

43. Yes, The privatization of the military is really upsetting

It makes it hard to keep any international agreements, it leaves soldiers without proper equipment and supplies, and it transfers money to projects that many citizens would never vote for if they knew about them.

[evolved Anarchopunk]

34. very true. All of it, and more if you had kept going. We are all serfs,

and many of us are even wage-slaves. But it goes beyond that. Simply put, if General Mills could put you in a 4 walled white room and shove Cheerios down your throat, they would.... think about it.... they really really really would. Consumers are getting harder to appeal to and in addition, distribution of wealth is INSANELY concentrated w/in a few individual and corporate accounts, to the point where even if advertising works on an individual, there is a good chance they do not even have the money to purchase said product. Our system of commerce does not seek to redistribute wealth so as to produce a healthy cyclical current of consumerism. NO. Fucking heeeeeeell no. Advertising becomes more LOUD and OBNOXIOUS, more frequent and disturbing, more invasive and did i mention frequent. This is looked at as the solution to the problem from any boards members perspective, be it a business big or small.

But your point is validated by big business today. Corporate feudalism is real: our government used to be hellbent on pleasing (or appeasing) the people so as to be reinstated into power (re-elected). And as many political theologians here on DU and elsewhere have pointed out, with the advent of treating corporations like citizens (puke), and with their money far exceeding that of the average citizen, then corporations will continue to be MORE EQUAL than the avg. citizen, more influential, more involved in DAILY routines of what should be an independent and responsive govt, dictating their agendas indirectly upon a helpless, materialist society of their own creation. Im so sick of it, that i took Frank Zappa's advice and just turned off the TV one day, and canceled my newspaper subscription (which inexplicably.. comes anyway). But it doesn't stop it, and consumerism turned whatever country it touches, into a hellish existence over time. Over a long period of time.. but we are well into it....

[Nikki Stone 1]

37. Food for thought. (Not Cheerios though)

Our entire lives are corporatized.

[losdiablosgato]

52. The one thing of the ownership society is....

when you find out what owns you.

[NoSheep]

58. I am a prime example. Basically an indentured servant for the past

3 yrs. Still fighting in the courts to make myself whole. I'll write a book about it one day and mine will not be the only story.

[xchrom]

60. kick