Einstein on Corporations

[georgephillip]

"The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society.

"This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature.

"The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population.

"Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the intelligent use of his political rights. — Albert Einstein, Monthly Review, May 1949."

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

If Einstein thought the situation was grim in 1949, what would he have to say about Citizens United or the state of Tennessee's current plot to allow corporations to contribute directly to politicians?

 

[peach174]

That is not true
This is from the supreme court website;

Holding: Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads, especially where these ads were not broadcast.

Notice- Corporations or unions can not give money directly to campaigns.
It gives them the freedom to run ads
This is why one of the justices said not true during President Obama's Jan. 2010 State of the Union Address
The News and Media reported this wrong.
A perfect example of Left Wing bias in the news.

 

[georgephillip]

If you listen to all or part of the 6:29 video in my link, you'll discover Republicans in the Tennessee state government are alleged to be writing new law that will allow corporations to contribute directly to politicians.

If Tennessee or any other state enacts such law, other states will have to follow or face the corporate consequences of being labeled "unfriendly to business."

SCOTUS is dominated by corporate lawyers with John Roberts being the prime example.

It's not a "perfect example" of Left Wing bias to point out how corporations are the most perfect example of central planning yet devised.

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

 

[editec]

"The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society.

"This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature.

"The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population.

"Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the intelligent use of his political rights. — Albert Einstein, Monthly Review, May 1949."

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

If Einstein thought the situation was grim in 1949, what would he have to say about Citizens United or the state of Tennessee's current plot to allow corporations to contribute directly to politicians?

Einstein could see the writing on the wall.

He quite correctly understood where CORPORATISM (AKA FACSIM) was leading Germany, and he had the good sense (and good fortune, too) to be able to get out of Germany when the getting was still good.

If he lived here now?

I suspect he'd been seeking accomodations in some other nation.

Hell I doubt he'd still be here, today, really.

The man was nobody's fool.

 

[editec]

That is not true
This is from the supreme court website;

Holding: Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads, especially where these ads were not broadcast.

Notice- Corporations or unions can not give money directly to campaigns.
It gives them the freedom to run ads
This is why one of the justices said not true during President Obama's Jan. 2010 State of the Union Address
The News and Media reported this wrong.
A perfect example of Left Wing bias in the news.

Peach you are showing us a distinction without a difference.

The SCOTUS has empowered CAPITAL to pervert the democratic part of our Republic.

This was not an oversight on their part, they knew EXACTLY where that would lead.

 

[peach174]

Lets see here - Media - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Schools & Universities - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Supreme Court may soon be controlled by more who lean toward the left, not even to mention judges who are making law rather that ruling what the law means.
Corporations - now have the right to run ads of who they would like to see elected.
Still seems pretty lopsided to me.

 

[georgephillip]

"The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society.

"This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature.

"The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population.

"Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the intelligent use of his political rights. — Albert Einstein, Monthly Review, May 1949."

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

If Einstein thought the situation was grim in 1949, what would he have to say about Citizens United or the state of Tennessee's current plot to allow corporations to contribute directly to politicians?

Einstein could see the writing on the wall.

He quite correctly understood where CORPORATISM (AKA FACSIM) was leading Germany, and he had the good sense (and good fortune, too) to be able to get out of Germany when the getting was still good.

If he lived here now?

I suspect he'd been seeking accomodations in some other nation.

Hell I doubt he'd still be here, today, really.

The man was nobody's fool.

Over half-a-century ago, Einstein and Bertrand Russell asked all humanity to put aside their strong feelings about many issues and think of themselves "only as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire."

They then asked the question "...shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?"

Corporations answer this question every day by placing their quest for profits over the welfare of humanity.

Failed States copyright 2006 by Noam Chomsky p.3

 

[georgephillip]

Lets see here - Media - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Schools & Universities - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Supreme Court may soon be controlled by more who lean toward the left, not even to mention judges who are making law rather that ruling what the law means.
Corporations - now have the right to run ads of who they would like to see elected.
Still seems pretty lopsided to me.

The richest 1% of Americans control Democrat AND Republican polity.

The richest 1% of Democrats and Republicans "earn" most of their money from the stock market.

Corporations are the stock market.

Does it get any more lopsided than that?

 

[peach174]

Corporations would not exist with out making profits
The Welfare of humanity is for society (all citizens)
Freedom of speech is for all, if unions can run political ads so can corporations

 

[editec]

Lets see here - Media - controlled by the majority of Democrats

Controlled by BIG CAPITAL

Schools & Universities - controlled by the majority of Democrats

Controlled by BIG CAPITAL

Supreme Court may soon be controlled by more who lean toward the left, not even to mention judges who are making law rather that ruling what the law means.

Controlled by BIG CAPITAL

Corporations - now have the right to run ads of who they would like to see elected.

Still seems pretty lopsided to me.

I don't doubt it.

If I was as miniformed as you (in fact I was once as misinformed as you are right now, too) I'd totally agree with you.

But the fact that you blem the DEMS, as though the DNC and RNC were diametically opposed to anything philosophically, indicates to me that as yet you still don't GET IT.

Hey, no problem, you're hardly alone drifting in the fogbanks of partisan propaganda

 

[peach174]

Lets see here - Media - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Schools & Universities - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Supreme Court may soon be controlled by more who lean toward the left, not even to mention judges who are making law rather that ruling what the law means.
Corporations - now have the right to run ads of who they would like to see elected.
Still seems pretty lopsided to me.

The richest 1% of Americans control Democrat AND Republican polity.

The richest 1% of Democrats and Republicans "earn" most of their money from the stock market.

Corporations are the stock market.

Does it get any more lopsided than that?

Corporations have stocks but Corporations sell products.
The rich do not control our votes nor does advertising

 

[georgephillip]

Corporations would not exist with out making profits
The Welfare of humanity is for society (all citizens)
Freedom of speech is for all, if unions can run political ads so can corporations

Corporations are creatures of the state.

At the very least you should be willing to look at some corporate history before defending the institution:

"Railroads were the leaders in the movement of monopoly grants, convincing lawmakers to use the government’s power of eminent domain to seize land from farmers and settlers and grant it, free, to the railroads, to provide convenient and financially low-risk rights-of-way.

"In just seven years after 1850, more than 25 million acres of land were given to railroads, and often it was alleged to be the consequence of bribes.

"For example, the LaCrosse and Milwaukee Railroad in Wisconsin passed out $900,000 worth of stocks and bonds to the governor, thirteen senators, and fifty-nine assemblymen...and soon after received a million acres in free land and freedom from competition."

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

 

[peach174]

Lets see here - Media - controlled by the majority of Democrats

Controlled by BIG CAPITAL

Schools & Universities - controlled by the majority of Democrats

Controlled by BIG CAPITAL

Supreme Court may soon be controlled by more who lean toward the left, not even to mention judges who are making law rather that ruling what the law means.

Controlled by BIG CAPITAL

Corporations - now have the right to run ads of who they would like to see elected.

Still seems pretty lopsided to me.

I don't doubt it.

If I was as misinformed as you (in fact I was once as misinformed as you are right now, too) I'd totally agree with you.

But the fact that you blem the DEMS, as though the DNC and RNC were diametically opposed to anything philosophically, indicates to me that as yet you still don't GET IT.

Hey, no problem, you're hardly alone drifting in the fogbanks of partisan propaganda

I'm not blaming any one. I am looking at hiring practices. The majority of main stream media of all kinds hire more liberal dems than republicans. Same with schools & universities- although many teachers have mixed left or right wings views, schools are teaching socialism instead of subjects.
And yes I do get it and so do many others. That is why voters are starting to vote for those who do not belong with the parties. They are voting out the incumbents.

 

[georgephillip]

If you are replacing incumbents with Democrats OR Republicans, you accomplishing nothing as far as corporate influence over your lives.

 

[peach174]

Corporations would not exist with out making profits
The Welfare of humanity is for society (all citizens)
Freedom of speech is for all, if unions can run political ads so can corporations

Corporations are creatures of the state.

At the very least you should be willing to look at some corporate history before defending the institution:

"Railroads were the leaders in the movement of monopoly grants, convincing lawmakers to use the government’s power of eminent domain to seize land from farmers and settlers and grant it, free, to the railroads, to provide convenient and financially low-risk rights-of-way.

"In just seven years after 1850, more than 25 million acres of land were given to railroads, and often it was alleged to be the consequence of bribes.

"For example, the LaCrosse and Milwaukee Railroad in Wisconsin passed out $900,000 worth of stocks and bonds to the governor, thirteen senators, and fifty-nine assemblymen...and soon after received a million acres in free land and freedom from competition."

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

I am not defending Corporations I am stating facts,
I thought that was corrected in the Court that corporations can not give contributions to any political party.
Lobbyists need to be dealt with now. How we go about doing it is still up for debate, but they should not be able to give any money either. Ads yes, money to the politicians no.

 

[peach174]

Give me some examples where Corporations control Schools & Universities and the Supreme Court

 

[georgephillip]

Lets see here - Media - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Schools & Universities - controlled by the majority of Democrats
Supreme Court may soon be controlled by more who lean toward the left, not even to mention judges who are making law rather that ruling what the law means.
Corporations - now have the right to run ads of who they would like to see elected.
Still seems pretty lopsided to me.

The richest 1% of Americans control Democrat AND Republican polity.

The richest 1% of Democrats and Republicans "earn" most of their money from the stock market.

Corporations are the stock market.

Does it get any more lopsided than that?

Corporations have stocks but Corporations sell products.
The rich do not control our votes nor does advertising

The rich and advertising completely control which candidates you are allowed to "choose" between.

The latest corporate bail out on Wall Street should convince you of which side of the class war elected Republicans AND Democrats choose.

 

[peach174]

The richest 1% of Americans control Democrat AND Republican polity.

The richest 1% of Democrats and Republicans "earn" most of their money from the stock market.

Corporations are the stock market.

Does it get any more lopsided than that?

Corporations have stocks but Corporations sell products.
The rich do not control our votes nor does advertising

The rich and advertising completely control which candidates you are allowed to "choose" between.

The latest corporate bail out on Wall Street should convince you of which side of the class war elected Republicans AND Democrats choose.

I don't think that Herman Cain is controlled by the rich or advertisers. Do you?
The corporate bail out is completly unconstitutional and voters need to vote in candidates that are running on a constitutional form of goverment, like the last 80 who have been elected. This is why the dems are so angry at them, because each of the bills they are trying to get support for, the newly elected republicans are telling them that their bills are unconstitutional.

 

[georgephillip]

Give me some examples where Corporations control Schools & Universities and the Supreme Court

peach174...

I have to leave for work...I'll respond as soon as I get home.

Thank you for the opportunity for legitimate debate without all the invective that often finds it way into political discussions.

 

[editec]

Give me some examples where Corporations control Schools & Universities and the Supreme Court

Go look at who sits on the boards of major universities and then go look at what other boards they sit on.

Does the term interlocking directorships mean anything to you?

The SCOTUS is a POLTICAL animal, Peach.

They who control our government control the composition of the SCOTUS.