• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Glenn Greenwald

this is to say that "major stakeholders hav[ing] a lot of influence" seems like a bit of a gloss w/r/t what's happening
 
I would suggest that it's probably a bit hyperbolic to suggest that these corporations have free reign to write whatever they want into the legislation. Typically a lot of the broad themes and provisions of the legislation have already been laid out and a lot of it is at the detail implementation level.
 
Last edited:
TenaciousKory said:
hmm. I think it's fair for stakeholders to provide input on legislation but I think (for example) writing whole bills for congressional actors to rubberstamp & submit seems sketchy and arguably undemocratic.
Click to expand...

Exactly. When legislators represent companies instead of their constituents, then democracy is dead. I don’t see a big difference between an oligarchy and a corporatocracy.
 
Last edited:
I didn't suggest that they have free reign to write whatever (I assume they work with a window of whether criticism will hurt the politician, for example) but it's less about whether the bill is rubber stamped and more about who is the focus of representation in a democracy. Is it the demos- or major corporations where power/wealth is controlled by a minority?
 
It’s easier for the people ruin or take over a corporation than an oligarch.
 
huh? in what way?

certainly not through labor organizing in this country; nor through political representation; nor through our judicial system; nor through what is considered direct action today (boycotts)

a lot of that political thought has been foreclosed on in the hyper-capitalist U.S. whether through blood or legal precedent or just plain statquo args. i'm not sure i agree.
 
unless your argument is another lesser of two evils thing - in which case, when do we stop making those kinds of choices?
 
ChrisL68 said:
I would suggest that it's probably a bit hyperbolic to suggest that these corporations have free reign to write whatever they want into the legislation. Typically a lot of the broad themes and provisions of the legislation have already been laid out and a lot of it is at the detail implementation level.
Click to expand...

next thing you know no one is able to deduct any interest expense anymore
 
Corporations have power because they play the game on both sides.

What’s the plan to change the game that doesn’t include voting for politicians and influencing them?

We are already seeing politicians seek out small donors instead of corporate dollars. That’s because people are speaking up instead of leaving it up to corporate interests.
 
TenaciousKory said:
huh? in what way?

certainly not through labor organizing in this country; nor through political representation; nor through our judicial system; nor through what is considered direct action today (boycotts)

a lot of that political thought has been foreclosed on in the hyper-capitalist U.S. whether through blood or legal precedent or just plain statquo args. i'm not sure i agree.
Click to expand...

Activist investor groups have had an impact on corporate policy.
 
PhDeac said:
Yeah. Pretty much. Equating corporatism with fascism is fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I think you have the wrong framing here. Both parties are corporate parties. Their electoral strategies are different, but you could more or less describe a Trump presidency like you would a Rubio presidency, with a few minor but significant differences. It’s not wrong to equate both parties when you’re talking about Congress or state houses. It is wrong if your only frame of reference is the 2016 or 2020 or 2024 presidential race.
 
ChrisL68 said:
I would suggest that it's probably a bit hyperbolic to suggest that these corporations have free reign to write whatever they want into the legislation. Typically a lot of the broad themes and provisions of the legislation have already been laid out and a lot of it is at the detail implementation level.
Click to expand...

That’s simply inaccurate.
 
PhDeac said:
Corporations have power because they play the game on both sides.

What’s the plan to change the game that doesn’t include voting for politicians and influencing them?

We are already seeing politicians seek out small donors instead of corporate dollars. That’s because people are speaking up instead of leaving it up to corporate interests.
Click to expand...

I disagree this is how corporations derive their political power. It comes from unfettered access to the political process and no meaningful campaign finance or legislative action reforms in the last century.

If you look at politicians with small $ vs large $ donors there are still fewer than half of all congress and state house elected officials who get < 75% of their donations from <$200 avg donations. The hurdle here is still a generation away.
 
TownieDeac said:
I think you have the wrong framing here. Both parties are corporate parties. Their electoral strategies are different, but you could more or less describe a Trump presidency like you would a Rubio presidency, with a few minor but significant differences. It’s not wrong to equate both parties when you’re talking about Congress or state houses. It is wrong if your only frame of reference is the 2016 or 2020 or 2024 presidential race.
Click to expand...

Um, have you seen the shit coming out of Republican state houses over the last 6 months? You think it’s be no different with a Democrat super majority?
 
No, I think the outputs and outcomes are different by some distance. I think the inputs and intents are similar.
 
TownieDeac said:
No, I think the outputs and outcomes are different by some distance. I think the inputs and intents are similar.
Click to expand...

Damn right! We'd see BIG ABORTION and their Democrat lackeys making sure girls and women control their own bodies just to keep the MONEY TRAIN coming.
 
I’d agree we really need significant reform. Any money flowing into politics needs to be transparent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top