Social Conservatives and Corporatists.

[Quantum Windbag]

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini

This from a very well known Fascist.

Bingo.

Fascism is a form of corporatism. Sallow is worried about corporations having power, which is the last thing he should be worried about, because the government will never give up its power. The best corporations can hope for is that the government will not tax them into extinction.

Your kidding right?

Citizens United?

All Citizens United did was tell the government they could not choose to force people to incorporate and then use that law to prohibit them from talking about issues. I do not understand why anyone who claims to be moderate would have a problem with it. The interesting thing is that the FEC already exempted some corporations from having to obey the rules before the court forced them to let everyone have an even playing field. Maybe that is the problem, you actually prefer some corporations to have more political power.

 

[ShackledNation]

Then you point was what?

That the Constitution does, in spirit and in text, limit the federal government and protect the independence of the states. The history of the development of the document bears this out as well.

But hey, I'm really not interested in trying to convince you. Mostly in comes down to reading comprehension. If you're one of those who reads a modifying clause on the power to tax as 'broad implied power' to do whatever the state decrees to be in the interests of our 'welfare', then there's really not much point in getting into it.

No it doesn't. Not in the way you think. And your dismissive tone basically means your "conviction" in this area is all that strong.

Yes it does. We have a federal system in which the federal government is limited and the states retain significant independence from said federal government. The only way you can make the claim that the Constitution does not limit federal government and protect the independence of the states is if you have never taken a history class or read the constitution itself. It is simply the 10th amendment. If your view about the Constitution is so skewed, I too will not bother to waste my time.

Let me quote Jefferson for you.
"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground:
That 'all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the
people' (10th Amendment). To take a single step beyond the boundaries
thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take
possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible to any
definition."

Also, you must have no clue about the history of incorporation of the amendments, for if you did you would understand how much more independence the states historically had before then.

 

[Sallow]

That the Constitution does, in spirit and in text, limit the federal government and protect the independence of the states. The history of the development of the document bears this out as well.

But hey, I'm really not interested in trying to convince you. Mostly in comes down to reading comprehension. If you're one of those who reads a modifying clause on the power to tax as 'broad implied power' to do whatever the state decrees to be in the interests of our 'welfare', then there's really not much point in getting into it.

No it doesn't. Not in the way you think. And your dismissive tone basically means your "conviction" in this area is all that strong.

Yes it does. We have a federal system in which the federal government is limited and the states retain significant independence from said federal government. The only way you can make the claim that the Constitution does not limit federal government and protect the independence of the states is if you have never taken a history class or read the constitution itself. It is simply the 10th amendment. If your view about the Constitution is so skewed, I too will not bother to waste my time.

Let me quote Jefferson for you.
"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground:
That 'all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the
people' (10th Amendment). To take a single step beyond the boundaries
thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take
possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible to any
definition."

Also, you must have no clue about the history of incorporation of the amendments, for if you did you would understand how much more independence the states historically had before then.

Again..I posted "not in the way you think". The limits on Federal power come in the form of things they can't do..like march armies through your state and confiscate property for military use. But the "independence" of states only goes so far. They are all subject to federal law. They can't pick and choose which US citizens are allowed to travel in..or even live in their states. They are subject to federal taxation. They can't coin their own money. They can't impose tariffs between states. They can't secede...sheesh..you might just want to read the Constitution.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth

The 2 main branches of the Democrat Party are the Marxists.

Where would this Country be.....without Teabagger Math Majors?

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

as sad as it is, thats pretty accurate.

Feel free to add any I have missed.

they both hate the poor

Yeah.....how can anyone (possibly) question your statistics?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It should be duly noted that by "Corporatist" the OP means people who believe that we should have the freedom to work, labor, and trade freely to our mutual benefit and reap the benefits of our good or bad use of industry and thrift.

 

[dblack]

Again..I posted "not in the way you think". The limits on Federal power come in the form of things they can't do...

And the list of things the federal government can't do, according to the tenth amendment and pretty much everything written about the constitution at the time of it's formation, is infinite, and defined by omission, i.e. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution".

 

[Sallow]

Again..I posted "not in the way you think". The limits on Federal power come in the form of things they can't do...

And the list of things the federal government can't do, according to the tenth amendment and pretty much everything written about the constitution at the time of it's formation, is infinite, and defined by omission, i.e. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution".

Yep.

Do yourself a favor and read it. The Federal government has very board enumerated powers. It's that way for a reason.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It should be duly noted that by "Corporatist" the OP means people who believe that we should have the freedom to work, labor, and trade freely to our mutual benefit and reap the benefits of our good or bad use of industry and thrift.

Please don't assign meaning to my OP. The goal of the Corporatist in the long run is the elimination of Capitalism and the formation of Monopolies.

That's hardly free trade.

I've summed up for you the economic policies of the Republican party. If you want to think otherwise, than youre free to do so, but it's not a correct representation of reality.

But then I am not afraid of corporations or any other form of business. So I don't really have some paranoia that they control my life.

.....Especially when you're so adept at maintaining your.....

.....incurious-nature.

 

[Sallow]

Bingo.

Fascism is a form of corporatism. Sallow is worried about corporations having power, which is the last thing he should be worried about, because the government will never give up its power. The best corporations can hope for is that the government will not tax them into extinction.

Your kidding right?

Citizens United?

All Citizens United did was tell the government they could not choose to force people to incorporate and then use that law to prohibit them from talking about issues. I do not understand why anyone who claims to be moderate would have a problem with it. The interesting thing is that the FEC already exempted some corporations from having to obey the rules before the court forced them to let everyone have an even playing field. Maybe that is the problem, you actually prefer some corporations to have more political power.

What Citizen's United did was remove a protection against an abuse of the system. Corporations are now free to funnel money to PACS as they please without fear of breaking any laws. And it's astounding that anyone interested in a government not run by corporations doesn't see that.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I see both Democrats and Republicans eagerly embracing corporatism as a means for enhancing their own power at our expense. If anything, Democrats are slightly more aggressive with corporatist policies, but only slightly.

Wow.

Great examples you provided, there.

 

[dblack]

Yep.

Do yourself a favor and read it. The Federal government has very board enumerated powers. It's that way for a reason.

It all comes down to reading comprehension and will. If you can read things like a descriptive clause on the taxation power and imagine that it represents an 'broad-implied-general-power-to-spend-money-on-anything-that-can-vaguely-be-described-as-for-the-general-welfare' then there's not much to discuss. In your opinion (assuming you do think the general welfare clause means government can do anything) there is no such thing as constitutional limits on government and there's not much left for us to discuss.

And before you crow about it, yes, the Supreme Court agrees with you. They are wrong as well.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The two main branches of the current Republican Party seem to be made up of 2 camps. The Social Conservatives and the Corporatists.

The Agenda of the Social Conservatives seems to be:
-Have the state force a woman to bring each and every fetus to term regardless of how it was conceived, the risk to the mother's life, or whether there exists financial support to raise the child.
-Include the Christian Church in governance.
-Eliminate or reduce the influence of cultures outside the Anglo-Saxon realm in this country.
-Immediately deport any non-citizen.
-Close off immigration, entirely.
-Impose a singular definition of marriage..and that being a man and women..preferably of the same race.
-Remove any laws regarding the ownership of firearms.
-Hold a foreign policy that essentially recognizes that every other nation should be subservient to the United States. The US should be feared..not respected.
-That the rich are wealthy because divinity made it so. They should rule the nation as well.
-The government in general should only be responsible for keeping and maintaining the military..as well as upholding Christian Anglo Saxon culture.
-That the United States is a Conferacy of States. States hold supremacy over the Federal government.
-Eliminate or curtail the right to vote.
-Eliminate all public education.
-Eliminate Science.
-Eliminate all art that does not glorify Christianity.
-Make each and every crime subject to life imprisonment or execution.
-Promote legislation that squelches any speech that does not fit the agenda of Social Conservativism.
-Taxes are evil and ungodly.

The Agenda of Corporatists seem to be:
-The government exists to protect the interests of corporate entities.
-Revenue should be derived in large part through government contracts, loans, tax breaks and give backs.
-Regulation of any sort is unprofitable and should never be imposed.
-Risk is to be managed by the tax payer. Profit is private.
-Voting is counter productive to the Plutocracy..and should be curtailed.
-Unions should be completely eliminated. No laws regarding employment, employee safety, and wages should be implemented.
-The Federal Bank serves no useful purpose. It should be the Financial and banking industry that controls the value of currency and interest rates.
-Profit should be the sole domain of executives, with some going to shareholders..who can be screwed at any time.
-It should be the realm of corporations to determine whether or not their products are safe. Buyer beware.
-The government exists essentially as an extention of the Corporatists.
-The military-industrial complex is a wonderful source of revenue and wars should be encouraged.

And when you combine the to..or mix and match..it's easy to understand the Conservatives and today's Republican party.

Barry refered to the US Chamber of Commerce as a sinister tool of the republican party and now his mind numbed robots call Americans "corporatists". It shows you how bad things have gotten since the neo-socialist was elected.

Yeah....that's when it.....

.....ALL began......

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So the libertarian limited government branch is nonexistent? I think you are leaving out little old me. The Republican party has shifted to corporatism over the years, but us states rightist, small government libertarian conservatives are still here. The Tea party was heavily motivated by a small-government philosophy that all Republicans once shared.

You should probably let old-school Republicans....

.....speak for themselves.

 

[midcan5]

Excellent OP. I have to review carefully and add it my bookmarks that easily summarize conservative / republican / libertarian thought today. But you have to realize people who live in bubbles only see the bubble, argument, even when excellent does not convince someone who only sees in a certain manner. But what is frightening given America today is while our infrastructure collapses, inequality grows, and energy dependence hurts all, the conservatives cling to an imaginary past, and imaginary ideal, that never was, but since the last election that imaginary idea was lost, and only a return to ? will return us to nirvana. Humans are odd creatures.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...es-of-midcans-insights-into-contemporary.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/50859-conservative-beliefs.html

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So the libertarian limited government branch is nonexistent? I think you are leaving out little old me. The Republican party has shifted to corporatism over the years, but us states rightist, small government libertarian conservatives are still here. The Tea party was heavily motivated by a small-government philosophy that all Republicans once shared.

"State rights" and "Small Government" harken back the days of yore when you could own people.

I ain't with that.

Typical irrational response.
Slavery is now unconstitutional, so that is a moot point.

Yeah.....since the 1700s.

We've heard.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fG-x1K2eZo]YouTube - ‪Michele Bachmann Iowa Speech Bachmann Founders Ended Slavery Mediaite‬‏[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzSWi2gruU8]YouTube - ‪'Founding Fathers' Owned Slaves; The 'Evils of Slavery' & Michele Bachmann's Lies‬‏[/ame]​

 

[dblack]

I see both Democrats and Republicans eagerly embracing corporatism as a means for enhancing their own power at our expense. If anything, Democrats are slightly more aggressive with corporatist policies, but only slightly.

Wow.

Great examples you provided, there.
​

Oh.. didn't realize your googler was broken. Here ya go:

Democratic corporatism - Google Search

This one sums it up nicely:

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5463/democratic_corporatism_brings_reagan_back_from_the_grave/

 

[editec]

Yeah I think that about sums up the GOP of today... the unholy alliance of relatively cluelss social reactionaries and crypto-fascist corporatists.

As opposed to the DNC which is the unholy alliance of relatively clueless social radicals and even more deeply crypto crypto-fascists.

Either way, the American Dream is screwed

Well yes and no.

It really depends on the more moderate elements in this country. One of the reasons we are getting the type of people we are getting as politicians..is that a vast number of level headed people have simply given up.

They don't vote. And they think they are making some sort of statement.

I think a number of people have "given up" going the political moute because we understand that playing by the rules of a game that is RIGGED is largely a waste of our precious time.

I happen to be one of those people, Sallow.

I used to sit on the board of this states largest public action group. We had 30,000 dues payingemembers in a state of about 1 million people.

But even sitting on the board, I realized that my ability to change things VIA THE SYSTEM was largely illusionary.

Hence I withdrew from public life and focus on creating a revolution through good works, instead of politics.

I often wonder if I made a mistake, if I ought to have continued in the game of politics.

But I KNOW that what I do now has merit, and I know that what I did them often had consquences that left me less than satisfied with the return I got for my efforts.

I guess in my heart of hearts, the only organization I can fully trust is the one that I control.

I am reasonably sure that I might have made a career in politics, but I also know there was no way I could have made it without getting in bed with what I think is the devil of compromise.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

No it doesn't. Not in the way you think. And your dismissive tone basically means your "conviction" in this area is all that strong.

What the Constitution DOES do is limit the power of the government over the INDIVIDUAL. That's something that at almost every term the conservatives are trying to destroy. From the implicit right to privacy to the explicit right to be safe from torture..conservatives weaken and tug out those rights.

It's really something to behold.

And you don't see how the left does the exact same thing only with different issues primarily concerning the 1st and 2nd amendments. Okay. *shakes head in disbelief*
I forget which Founding Father said it but he said, "Our liberties are never in such jeopardy as when congress is in session". There were two opposing parties back when he said it.

If your asking me to say "My ideology is perfect", well, guess what, it's not. I'm open criticism..and I will make adjustments if your point is valid. It's called "compromise".

.....Or.....more-commonly....Maturity.

*

"HERETIC!!!"​