Jews and Communism

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2004
15,755
512
48
http://www.beyttikkun.org/Justice.htm
That's why we at TIKKUN have developed the Social Responsibility Amendment (SRA) to the US Constitution. The SRA says this: Every corporation doing business within the US (whether located here or abroad) with annual income of over $20 million must receive a new corporate charter every twenty years, and these new charters will only be granted to corporations who can prove a history of social responsibility as measured by an Ethical Impact Report. which will measure the company's sensitivity to the needs of the environment, the community, and its employees. The Ethical Impact Report will be compiled by 3 different constituencies: the corporation itself, the workers (under conditions of confidentiality), and relevant community organizations around the world who wish to present their case about the social responsibility of the corporation.



To prevent a huge government bureaucracy making these decisions, the SRA will create a new system of Social Responsibility Grand Juries (SRGJ) composed of 25 citizens whose task would be to read the Ethical Impact Reports and receive oral testimony from the corporation, employees, and relevant community organizations--and then assess what they had learned.



If an SRGJ decided that the corporation should not be granted a charter renewal, it would then move to stage two: what to do with corporate resources. The SRGJ would listen both to corporate management, which could present a plan for how it was going to significantly alter its behavior in order to become more socially responsible, and it could hear testimony from other for-profit or non-profit groups that could propose how they might run the same corporation with more socially responsible policies.



The SRGJ would then decide to either award the corporate charter to another group, and with it the assets of the corporation in question, or to put the corporation on probation for three years.



If it gave the corporation a three year probation, the SRGJ would reconvene three years later to determine if the changes had in fact taken place, in which case it could restore the charter for the next 17 years (thus making up the full 20,) or it could determine that the corporation had failed to adequately implement significant changes, and award the corporate charter to some other management group.



Grand jurors would be selected by lot from the population, but balanced in order to guarantee racial, religious, spiritual, gender and economic diversity. Jurors would be paid (by a corporation’s charter renewal fee), would have subpoena power and could impose contempt citations and prison sentences upon corporate leaders for up to two years if they found that the corporate leaders were withholding vital information or otherwise attempting to disrupt or distort the evaluation process (for example, by trying to restrain the testimony of workers or community groups who had negative things to say).. They would be assisted in obtaining information on corporate behavior by a corps of Social Responsibility agents which operated much like today’s public defenders’ office, except with funding written into the amendment and not subject to electoral shifts.



The SRA moves away from the old demonizing of corporate leadership and instead recognizes them as another group caught in the dynamics of the capitalist market--and provides them with a way of explaining to corporate stockholders why the corporation must become more ecologically and socially responsible ("because otherwise we will lose our corporate ownership, a far greater risk than the costs of this social responsibility"). And by introducing the notion of an Ethical Impact Report, the SRA challenges market notions of how to judge efficiency.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
dilloduck said:
Pretty blatant. Where is the outrage form the mainstream media?


Jew are not subject to criticism like the rest of us. Whatever they say must be perfect. They're god's chosen people.
 
Passing an amendment to the Constitution is an Insanely Difficult Thing To Do. Perhaps the lack of media outrage stems from the fact that somthing like this is not ever going to be passed.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
deaddude said:
Passing an amendment to the Constitution is an Insanely Difficult Thing To Do. Perhaps the lack of media outrage stems from the fact that somthing like this is not ever going to be passed.

Well it seems crazy to give amnesty to millions of illegals too. Sanity is not a reliable metric when level setting expectations re: congress.
 
In regard to immigration both the "amnesty for all" and the "round em all up" extremes are unrealistic.

In regard to this preposed amendment, the lobbiests for big buisness would simply destroy any chance of this ever passing.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
deaddude said:
In regard to immigration both the "amnesty for all" and the "round em all up" extremes are unrealistic.

In regard to this preposed amendment, the lobbiests for big buisness would simply destroy any chance of this ever passing.

Not if they have these SPECIAL JUDGES on their payroll or as their friends. They will be all for it.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
Let's not forget, entrenched blue chips with huge market share don't really care about a fair playing field. They want fascism, and the huge government monopolistic contracts it provides.
 
rtwngAvngr said:
Not if they have these SPECIAL JUDGES on their payroll or as their friends. They will be all for it.

and again this is unlikely, because of the requirements for passing an amendment. First of all Constitutionalists are not going to pass anything that even looks like this, second this Civil Liberties people are no going pass this because it walks all over the right to property and due process. This is not going to happen RWA you are getting bent out of shape over nothing.
 
deaddude said:
and again this is unlikely, because of the requirements for passing an amendment. First of all Constitutionalists are not going to pass anything that even looks like this, second this Civil Liberties people are no going pass this because it walks all over the right to property and due process. This is not going to happen RWA you are getting bent out of shape over nothing.

Just like all the racists and nativists who care about the border?
 
The two are imcomparable. One is an actuall problem (imigration), the other is a situation that is so insanely unlikely that I am getting annoyed at explaining how insanely unlikely it is (your proposed amendment to the Constitution).

RWA's next crisis, "What if gravity just stopped working all of the sudden? What then?"
 
deaddude said:
The two are imcomparable. One is an actuall problem (imigration), the other is a situation that is so insanely unlikely that I am getting annoyed at explaining how insanely unlikely it is (your proposed amendment to the Constitution).

RWA's next crisis, "What if gravity just stopped working all of the sudden? What then?"

I have a problem with an organization that wraps itself in newagey/jewish goodness and then proceeds to lobby for totalitarianism of all kinds.
 
5stringJeff said:
Big deal. Everyone's always proposing to do this or that to the Constitution. It'll never pass. Why get all wrapped around the axle?


Oh. I was under the impression this was a message board where we talk about stuff?

To me this shows how the "spirituality" of the left has a very real political agenda.
 
rtwngAvngr said:
Oh. I was under the impression this was a message board where we talk about stuff?

To me this shows how the "spirituality" of the left has a very real political agenda.

I'm just saying that this is nothing to get worked up over. The CPUSA has a freako agenda for America, but they've got no chance to ever acheive it. Same with these guys.
 
5stringJeff said:
I'm just saying that this is nothing to get worked up over. The CPUSA has a freako agenda for America, but they've got no chance to ever acheive it. Same with these guys.


And I most fastidiously assert that it IS, in fact, something over which to get upworked.
 
rtwngAvngr said:
And I most fastidiously assert that it IS, in fact, something over which to get upworked.

So what do you think are the chances of the Social Responsiblity Amendment passing? I'd put it at roughly .00000000000037%.
 
5stringJeff said:
So what do you think are the chances of the Social Responsiblity Amendment passing? I'd put it at roughly .00000000000037%.


The same odds as something else that I can't think of right now.
 

Forum List

Back
Top