User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Libertarianism, Corporatism, and Capitalism3005 days old

  1. #11
    Established Member
    Flex your head Bittereinder's Avatar
    Last Online
    @
    Join Date
    2010-08-03
    Posts
    1,690
    Location
    Leuven
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Religion
    Postmodern nationalism
    Flanders lion European Union

    Default

    Thing is that, in the mainstream definition of 'corporatism', a corporate group does not solely refer to for-profit organizations, but can imply any sort of collective body or association, usually government-approved and representative unions and employer's organizations. I recommend that you read the Wikipedia article on Corporatism:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

    Corporatism, also known as corporativism, is a system of economic, political, or social organization that involves the contract of corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labor, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, into a collective body.[1] Corporatism is based upon the interpretation of a community as an organic body.[2][3] The term corporatism is based on the Latin root "corp" meaning "body".[3]

    One of the most prominent forms of corporatism is economic tripartism involving negotiations between business, labour, and state interest groups to set economic policy.[4]
    This is actually a relatively regulated form of capitalism in which the power of business is circumscribed by the necessity to come to a compromise with labor and the need to gain approval from the government. It is fundamentally different from socialism in the sense that the interests of 'the nation' are emphasized and not just those of the lower classes, and that class differences are glossed over instead of magnified. However, from a libertarian point of view, it still amounts to an unacceptable level of government control over the economy.

    I believe that the term you're looking for may be 'Corporatocracy', which is very different:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Bittereinder For This Useful Post:

    meranaam (2013-01-18)

  3. # ADS
    Advertisement bot
    Join Date
    2013-03-24
    Location
    ForumBiodiversity.com
    Age
    2010
    Posts
    All threads
       
     

  4. #12
    Established Member
    Theorist Unome's Avatar
    Last Online
    2015-03-30 @ 21:41
    Join Date
    2010-06-29
    Posts
    4,341
    Location
    Jupiter
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Y-DNA
    R1a
    mtDNA
    U4b
    Race
    Europid
    Metaethnos
    Prussian/Slavic
    Ethnicity
    New World White
    Phenotype
    KN, Atlantid
    Politics
    Philosophy
    Religion
    Lead by Example
    United States Poland Germany Sweden

    Default

    Corporations have developed within the US with rather blatant contempt against State, Federal, and even International Laws. I don't know the subtleties of how it occurred, within the Supreme Court, but somebody managed to influence an ideology favoring the "Corporate State" or as you say "Corporatocracy", against the interests of society within the corporate entity (now a Business), exists. Though you can best see the connection between Corporation and Federal Governance by Bush Jr., Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the other previous Neo-conservative Hawks. They essentially used the Federal Government to line their own pocketbooks, by directly contracting billions of dollars to their own Corporate Interests.

    Corporatism is not the same since its inception between Western Europeans and Amerikans, today. Even in Britain, things have changed. Corporations have become 'legal' entities. And this is appropriate. Because as long as Corporations can extort revenue between legal bindings, and contracts, the Profit Margins become infinite. All that stops 'Business' and 'Economy' from rising, become reduced to larger collectives of governmental powers (like the Federal United States, or the European Union). In fact, the EU had best well learn these lessons unless they/you repeat them. But the European and Amerikan economic climates are different atmospheres… and representative of different (or Divorced) cultures.

    How Corporations 'should' or 'ought' to represent Society becomes ambiguous…


    In the United States, during this previous Century, and concerning the World Wars of the 20th Century, Arms Trade, Manufacturing, and War Technology has driven the Military Industrial Complex to the creation of Artificial, False wars. In short, Corporations cost people their lives, money, and even social/politickal powers. Now, are 'Governments' to blame for this, or the Greed inherent within the economic structures of any particular Corporation? This is debatable…

    But the US interpretation of Corporations do seem as I presented them… according to my insider perspective. The US has gone a different route, regarding Corporatism. "Corporatocracy" as you linked it… and politickal 'Liberalism' do share many of the same ideologies & goals concerning powers of governance. The difference becomes reduced to one between 'Business' and 'Government'. If Corporations become more powerful entities than State or Federal governments, and this is debatable as to whether this already has become reality, then why serve any nationalistic sense of identity in the first place? Why owe loyalty/allegiance to your ethnicity, race, or culture, when… Money is king. And money is all that matters…?

    People begin to serve 'McDonalds' or 'Enron' or 'Lockheed Martin' or 'Exxon-Mobile', like Slaves and Masters. It's a new, philosophical dialectic… between the concepts of Business and Government. And it's about the inherent value (???) of people as "human beings". Because, after all, in the US, Corporations do afford the protection of "human rights". I bring this up, again, because it is the crux of the matter in terms of cultural & politickal differences between Amerikans and Europeans.
    A Finngolian barbarian reaches his intellectual capacity and exposes his true nature:
    Quote Originally Posted by Motörhead Remember Me View Post
    You're so wrong, you should be shot.
    Anthro Info: European Haplogroup Spreads
    Quote Originally Posted by Unome's Eurogenes DIY 2.0 View Post
    47.07% Western European
    35.58% Northeast European
    7.59% West Asian
    5.20% East Mediterranean

    2.88% Volga-Ural
    1.46% Middle-Eastern
    0.22% N/A
    jr1 wrote: …if a pig's born in a stable is it a horse?
    Wickedgirl wrote: In my personal opinion only radical feminists really want absolute gender equality. Normal women don't, they want to be women …what I believe in is the very essence of femininity.
    Acquisitorz wrote: Is a chain made of gold a nice chain when its placed to restrict your brain?
    Archangel wrote: The meek shall inherit the Earth… because the strong shall inherit the Stars!
    Wojewoda wrote: Burqas are for women, what guns are for men: Great Equalizer.
    Kwestos wrote: I don't know what a commie is to be honest. A kid of a rich lawyer in New York who wants to be cool, or a desperate peasant in Bolivia who protests because government stole his land…



    All words are,
    Are infectious,
    Affections.

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Unome For This Useful Post:

    Bittereinder (2011-05-26), Creature (2011-05-29), meranaam (2013-01-18)

  6. #13
    Established Member
    Junior Member meranaam's Avatar
    Last Online
    2013-09-13 @ 17:02
    Join Date
    2011-05-18
    Posts
    585
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Y-DNA
    J2
    Ethnicity
    Tamil
    Phenotype
    Indid/Weddid
    Religion
    Freelance
    United States India

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unome View Post
    International Socialism, or "The NWO" becomes imminent as long as fewer & fewer people, politickal organizations, and philosophical ideologies remain to resist the transition to a "one-world governance". This also reflects the nature of Economic competition, on the International Corporate level…
    Excellent. You are mirroring exactly my thoughts here.

    There is nothing spectacularly demonic or scary or cringe-worthy about the "NWO".

    It all goes back to human nature basics

    there are people who;...

    - want to make money
    - want to make as much money as possible
    - want to make money the easiest and fastest way
    - make money, and don't want any interference of any kind i.e. unobstructed(now theres a word...)
    - want to make money with the least possible risks
    - and means that would most likely ensure profits and success


    Its really that simple.

    We know China has got nothing to gain from any kind of expansionist, inclusivist ideologies because the people are capable of manufacturing all they can ever dream of(atleast on a basic level, the sophisticate stuff usually is Continental European, which is just a luxury). Theres nothing for the Chinese to benefit from. The massive economic shift China is causing on a global scale is the simple fact that the Chinese are by far "the most" productive and efficient people. Hence the Chinese sort of protected themselves with Nationalism/Sino-Communism. This makes me suspect that China probably is a top priority for world players. I forsee alot of political changes that would in some way try to "deal with" China's rapid growth. Possibly alot of countries(especially those run by those in-charge of implementing the "NWO") would in some way want to make sure they can have their hands on China.

    The only benefit we can acquire from capitalism is the transference of goods, particularly import. Things we are either incapable or have no access to making ourselves. The problem with capitalism is that instead of just selling;

    You can't just sell an idea/design because these stuff have patents and copyrights.(the only time world leaders ever do this is for political reasons, they "help out", in order to control people and regions "joint exercises", "exchange programmes" whatever the heck)

    Not only that we need raw material, workforce and technology to make them.

    We know many foreign and distinct cultures who have traded with each other since ancient times.(mutual benefit) But they didn't deliberately mongrelize back then.

    But the extensive promotion of multi-culturalism intentionally on an international level seems to be a relatively new phenomenon. And we can say that there are agendas behind this. Don't forget that. Everything has got a $ sign attached to it.

    Finally "the NWO" basically just means more power to the hands of those who already have power.

    x~ I mean instead of any lame "sinister" reasons. Its just the basic question, "if you can have more power - why not?"

    And its not like these guys really give a damn about the people. Who the heck wants to break their backs trying to run people?(only people who care do!) People have tonnes of problems and complains. Trying to control one human...(people already have family problems all the time) what about herding the whole lot!

    (going back to "x~") They use military to get their point across. So the guys who used to run a place, and are being told to allign themselves with them(the big guys with big guns), in the future will simply be losing it. They will just be knocked down like chess-pieces.

    There are always people on the planet who can never keep their hands to themselves. So if you think there is no "NWO" then you're probably naive or sincerely dumb.
    Last edited by meranaam; 2013-01-18 at 17:31.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to meranaam For This Useful Post:

    Unome (2013-01-19)

  8. #14
    Established Member
    Junior Member meranaam's Avatar
    Last Online
    2013-09-13 @ 17:02
    Join Date
    2011-05-18
    Posts
    585
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Y-DNA
    J2
    Ethnicity
    Tamil
    Phenotype
    Indid/Weddid
    Religion
    Freelance
    United States India

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meranaam View Post
    They will just be knocked down like chess-pieces.
    There was a leader... who got a dose of this... there is a so-called trusted secret divulgence public outlet on an international level... and they tried to smear a certain leader... which is of course true(what the smear actually meant)... since they were the ones who taught him that there is a particular religion which is problematic and tried("pretense") to have mutual cooperation in trying to deal with this certain religion...

    naturally anyways there has been this problem with the country this leader runs, by the sheer and obvious fact that this country is in a region, right dead centre and totally surrounded... and they will always have to be dealing with this problem and we know for a fact that they employ watchguards to take care of this issue... and they are doing their utmost to deal with it.

    By the sheer, fragile nature of the country and how they can't afford to even make even one mistake. Any mistake allowed can turn into a catalyst and literally possibly destroy the whole damn place...

    anyone already knows they take utmost measures to deal with this "problem"

    and we know for a fact that there ARE groups... foreign groups who aid them(this country)...

    but its the same leaders who own these groups that are wanting to try and test the leadership of the country

    they wouldn't have smeared him for no reason...

    these guys said it("smearing"), as a kind of a message to reveal, that they know how the leadership tries to deal with it

    and how fragile the place is with regards to this problem



    - - - Updated - - -

    We know very well that they are testing him... because they want to send military in there... and if they could(which they absolutely can)

    they will try to turn the problem into a big problem and(make it spill, make it erupt, make the whole place burn)...

    ANNEX the WHOLE region

  9. #15
    Established Member
    Junior Member
    Last Online
    2014-12-29 @ 07:55
    Join Date
    2012-03-30
    Posts
    644
    Gender
    Y-DNA
    03a3* P201
    Race
    Mongoloid
    Phenotype
    Malaid
    Metaethnos
    Malay
    Ethnicity
    Visayan
    Politics
    Conservative

    Default

    i think OP doesn't understand what corporatism is.

    Wilson and the initial progressives wanted a corporatist state, and so do their idealogical children (Obama and his advisors)

  10. #16
    Established Member
    Junior Member meranaam's Avatar
    Last Online
    2013-09-13 @ 17:02
    Join Date
    2011-05-18
    Posts
    585
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Y-DNA
    J2
    Ethnicity
    Tamil
    Phenotype
    Indid/Weddid
    Religion
    Freelance
    United States India

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meranaam View Post
    (going back to "x~") They use military to get their point across. So the guys who used to run a place, and are being told to allign themselves with them(the big guys with big guns), in the future will simply be losing it. They will just be knocked down like chess-pieces.
    All nations and peoples on the planet right now have leaders. Leaders who don't just have to answer to their own community/peoples/nations but to the world-at-large(globalism a result of former-"British" colonialism and now technology - communication for the masses that reaches great distances, more people across the globe are more connected to each other right now, and highly expanded economics that covers a global scale, and instrusive militaries, mobilizing and reaching places previously unimagined, meddlesome leaders try to get allies to help serve as proxies "extend the arm and might further than you can on your own")

    All these individual leaders run their individual regions and peoples. Good enough.

    BUT... what do you think is going to happen when the meddlesome guys interfere?

    What the leaders who struggled so much in running a place are just going to give it up?

    And you think these meddlesome leaders are just going to keep quiet?

    They've installed intelligentsia everywhere. While those leaders are individually trying to run their country. These intelligentsias are also trying to figure the country out.(under the pretense of "defense" and also as "counter" to other intelligentsias)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by meranaam View Post
    These intelligentsias are also trying to figure the country out.(under the pretense of "defense" and also as "counter" to other intelligentsias)
    While its true that these things are of primary concerns.

    The fact of the matter is there are people who are being recruited for "gathering information". Gathering information = keeping track = knowing whats going on = in someway stay ahead of those you're profiling (duh!)

    But its the guys who are at the top(probably) who are given the task of "figuring out how to run the country/how the country runs" (otherwise why would they have seperate departments in intelligence organizations? - keep the watchdogs seperate, make sure nothing leaks out, don't let them know whats going on - the reason for having to keep them seperate is because if they put the pieces of puzzle together they will be able to see the bigger picture -, they all should be only concerned with their own individual tasks)

    Every organization needs people. People who specialize in a specific task. But the guys who REALLY -and I don't mean your puppet boss- own and run these organizations have got the real plans. And obviously they won't be doing things themselves. They have "entrusted" people(guys who handle their actual plans). Or maybe they even lie to these people lol. Incase they themselves don't turn into politicians and work against them(who more dangerous to them than those who were intimate with them? and have a grasp of their intimate secrets?). I guess if they've been duped, they could feel betrayed if they ever figure things out. So I bet these watchdogs also might have their own watchdogs(to make sure they are loyal).

    The thing is either these watchdogs know about it, whats EXACTLY going on, or they don't(the smart ones will eventually figure it out). If they do, they probably in someway are being allied to the bigger cause(like as if people can ever keep shit to themselves, you need promise people shit so that they won't work against you) in a more grand way.(promotion to the rank of lesser politicians - or just promotion in someway - there is always a reason when people are nice, especially when powers are involved, or they just try to keep these guys happy by paying them excessively and giving them luxuries - to have them remain in their good books)

    Whenever they are organizations, especially organizations that handle classified matters, privilege will be congruent to ranks.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Is Capitalism Dead?
    By Vasishta in forum Economics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 2019-07-14, 08:13
  2. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 2011-04-19, 06:48
  3. State Capitalism vs. Socialism
    By Holden Caulfield in forum Communism & Anarchism
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2010-10-23, 17:38

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
<