The capitalist network that runs the world

[dblack]

some one is going to rule.

This is the authoritarian premise in a nutshell, but I reject it.

You want corporations instead of governments run by the people to rule?

We want law and order, but we don't have to subjugate ourselves to 'rulers' - whether those rulers are corporations or 'the people'.

I agree with your first sentence. In your second sentence does not the first part, 'We want law and order', require the second? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying.

I don't think law and order requires that we submit ourselves to 'rulers'. Indeed, the entire point of rule of law is to replace the dictates of authority with deliberate, consistent laws that are limited in scope and reach.

 

[emptystep]

This is the authoritarian premise in a nutshell, but I reject it.


We want law and order, but we don't have to subjugate ourselves to 'rulers' - whether those rulers are corporations or 'the people'.

I agree with your first sentence. In your second sentence does not the first part, 'We want law and order', require the second? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying.

I don't think law and order requires that we submit ourselves to 'rulers'. Indeed, the entire point of rule of law is to replace the dictates of authority with deliberate, consistent laws that are limited in scope and reach.

Would you consider the U.S. government a ruler. If not do you have an example of a ruler or elaborate on the concept of a ruler.

One factor I am looking for is who influences a rule. If the U.S. government is a ruler who does apply the greatest influence on the U.S. government?

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

There is one small problem with the OP and the article posted: What is being described is not capitalism. I recommend learning about economic systems and capital structures first before spouting off about capitalism. Global capitalist network. Don't make me laugh.

 

[Truthmatters]

some one is going to rule.

This is the authoritarian premise in a nutshell, but I reject it.

You want corporations instead of governments run by the people to rule?

We want law and order, but we don't have to subjugate ourselves to 'rulers' - whether those rulers are corporations or 'the people'.

Why did our founders design a government where the people ruled?


your a nihilist?

 

[Truthmatters]

Capitalism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[TakeAStepBack]

There is one small problem with the OP and the article posted: What is being described is not capitalism. I recommend learning about economic systems and capital structures first before spouting off about capitalism. Global capitalist network. Don't make me laugh.

It happens here all the time. People like TM don't seem to understand the difference and she's been told more times than I can count the difference between capitalism and corporatism. But it never sinks in.

 

[Truthmatters]

And yet none of those companies has any real bearing on your life or your ability to do anything.

So they don't really rule the world do they?

some of them caused a recent economic world crash

 

[Truthmatters]

Unfettered caplitalism leads directly to corporatism

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'll tell my friends who used to work at Lehman and Bear Stearns that you said they were too big to fail

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Unfettered caplitalism leads directly to corporatism

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Capitalism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Oh, ya got me. Give me a moment to recover from my reeling.

A quoting of a Merriam-Webster definition of capitalism demonstrates a thorough understanding of economic systems and capital structures in what universe?

I noticed how the word "capitalism," or any real discussion on the mechanisms of same, is conveniently missing from the entire article other than the title. Whoever wrote the article appears to suffer from a lack of understanding, not to mention scholarship. Who would offer a title about the evils of capitalism and not discuss or even offer a basic understanding of it in the body? About the only thing said in the article that makes any sense whatsoever is that concentration of power is not necessarily a bad thing. That at least showed something approximating an understanding, as in a truly capitalist system, concentrations of power are rarely a bad thing. But for somebody, and I don't care who, to suggest that the global economy resembles capitalism is just outright foolishness.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

From the article.........

One thing won't chime with some of the protesters' claims: the super-entity is unlikely to be the intentional result of a conspiracy to rule the world. "Such structures are common in nature," says Sugihara.

Newcomers to any network connect preferentially to highly connected members. TNCs buy shares in each other for business reasons, not for world domination. If connectedness clusters, so does wealth, says Dan Braha of NECSI: in similar models, money flows towards the most highly connected members. The Zurich study, says Sugihara, "is strong evidence that simple rules governing TNCs give rise spontaneously to highly connected groups". Or as Braha puts it: "The Occupy Wall Street claim that 1 per cent of people have most of the wealth reflects a logical phase of the self-organising economy."

So, the super-entity may not result from conspiracy. The real question, says the Zurich team, is whether it can exert concerted political power. Driffill feels 147 is too many to sustain collusion. Braha suspects they will compete in the market but act together on common interests. Resisting changes to the network structure may be one such common interest.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Unfettered caplitalism leads directly to corporatism

False. Virtually ALL unfair advantages and coercive concentrations of power can easily be traced to government involvement in economic affairs.

 

[JKVegas]

some one is going to rule.

You want corporations instead of governments run by the people to rule?

What we are ruled by is money. Can you get the basics of survival without it? Can you grow enough food on your own land? Can you get water? Will you be able to heat your home? How many people in the industrialized world can do that? 1%? 2%?

What do you absolutely need to be able to survive?

A JOB. Because that's how you acquire currency. And currency is what gets you all the basics.

When currency becomes nearly worthless because of incredible amounts of government debt (not just the US but everywhere), the leaders of government will take over, initiate a one-world currency, which will soon lead to a one-world government.

And money will mean nothing. And the people of the world will allow it to happen, because like the Germans in the 20's and 30's, financially, they will have no choice.

 

[emptystep]

And yet none of those companies has any real bearing on your life or your ability to do anything.

So they don't really rule the world do they?

some of them caused a recent economic world crash

I would agree with the second part of this post.

The U.S. companies did bring down the U.S. economy in concert with maligned legislation. Then the ripples effects brought down other economies, although there were fundamental flaws in their systems that was an accident waiting to happen.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, they did not. The federal reserve and congress brought down the the US economy. Then everyone applauded them for their efforts to "fix" the mess they made. Meanwhile blaming Wall St. for the problem.

Once again, government interference and central planning fuck everything up. Capitalism that doesn't exist gets the blame.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Now heres a little clue for the right in this country that fights so hard ofr corporations.

They are not all Americans

Sounds like they're Democrats

 

[Truthmatters]

And yet none of those companies has any real bearing on your life or your ability to do anything.

So they don't really rule the world do they?

some of them caused a recent economic world crash

I would agree with the second part of this post.

The U.S. companies did bring down the U.S. economy in concert with maligned legislation. Then the ripples effects brought down other economies, although there were fundamental flaws in their systems that was an accident waiting to happen.

Yes it was called lack of good regulations

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Wrong again. As usual.

 

[Truthmatters]

some one is going to rule.

You want corporations instead of governments run by the people to rule?

What we are ruled by is money. Can you get the basics of survival without it? Can you grow enough food on your own land? Can you get water? Will you be able to heat your home? How many people in the industrialized world can do that? 1%? 2%?

What do you absolutely need to be able to survive?

A JOB. Because that's how you acquire currency. And currency is what gets you all the basics.

When currency becomes nearly worthless because of incredible amounts of government debt (not just the US but everywhere), the leaders of government will take over, initiate a one-world currency, which will soon lead to a one-world government.

And money will mean nothing. And the people of the world will allow it to happen, because like the Germans in the 20's and 30's, financially, they will have no choice.

Lay down and die if you like.

Im not going to