Donate to DU!
Democratic Underground Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Google

Reply #26: Time to reinstate the corporate death penalty... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
First thread | Last thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
warren pease (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Jan-17-08 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #13
26. Time to reinstate the corporate death penalty...
I'm really starting to like the idea of corporate charter revocation. Basically, if they consistently act like felons and their business practices routinely include befouling local ecosystems, clear-cutting, releasing toxic chemicals into the water, air or ground, screwing the community out of legitimate taxes, laying off half its workforce and replacing them with H-1b visa holders, moving some or all of its operations overseas and so on... If they're going to claim the privileges of "personhood," then they should damn well be subject to the same legal sanctions and criminal penalties any other person would incur for such behavior.

Or, more to the point in this thread, corporate death for giant holding companies buying up all the country's information outlets, replacing news with infotainment and propaganda and claiming First Amendment protections apply to broadcasting this nonstop drivel.

Just think for a second about which media outlets have pissed you off in the past week. I'll start with NBC for the Kucinich lockout, then CNN, Fux, CBS, ABC, the History Channel, the NYT, the WaPo, my local rag, AM radio motor mouths (for the three seconds it took to hit the mute button) and even ESPN. All of them peddled lies, distortions, disinformation, government-approved spin, told breathless tales of D-class celebrity idiots and engaged in actions harmful to the continued survival of the republic -- i.e., promoting and perpetuating the brain-dead culture of Dumbfuckistan. And that's just a normal week. The big six media conglomerates are also in probable violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, but that's another subject.

Media companies are particularly sensitive to charges of malfeasance, since they have a special obligation to be of service to the public in return for being allowed to use our priceless airwaves on the cheap or for free. To the extent that they ignore that mandate, they're vulnerable to charter review at the very least, and revocation if warranted. The FCC actually used to care about such things until St. Raygun deregulated everything he could find, a practice continued by all his successors, no exceptions, and reaching epic proportions with the Codpiece in Chief.

Obviously, it would take a new and fairly progressive administration to take on the GEs and Viacoms of the world -- one whose figurehead hasn't accepted massive bribes from those very same companies in return for favorable legislation and minimal regulatory oversight, and which the corrupt liars characterize as merely "buying access." Of the possible finalists, only Edwards seems to have any desire to take on these cancerous monsters. The GOP will remain worse than useless, Clinton and Obama are too heavily invested in corporate values and stuffed with corporate money to fight for the peasants against the oligarchs and Kucinich has been judged "unelectable" by people so much smarter than us that we really should just accept their word for it. :sarcasm:

So as usual, it's up to us, and we can decide pool our talents and combine skill sets and work to revoke their corporate charters. The rewards are huge. If successful, the corporation ceases to exist as a legal entity. You can then seize their liquid assets and divide them among the corporation's creditors -- which, in the case of a relatively solvent company, means the workers and contractors -- and auction off anything not nailed down, with proceeds again going to the workers and small creditors. The shareholders just lose their investments, the execs may or may not be subject to civil or criminal liability and when a new business moves in to occupy the old facilities, they're compelled to hire the former occupant's workers first.

I think it's long past time for people to begin harassing these unaccountable fiefdoms and either dissolve them entirely or cripple their ability to operate in secret and outside the laws and ethical constraints the rest of us are subject to. In fact, when I get a few spare hours, I'm going to work this stuff up into an OpEdNews or Online Journal article and see if I can draw a bit of attention to the issue.

Here's some background material. Unfortunately, successful revocation hasn't happened for decades, so there are no contemporary "how-to" case studies. But several of these links outline circumstances that could result charter revocation, along with citing precedents and legal arguments. Others contain the processes and templates needed to create the proper paperwork and get it into the hands of the right (i.e., more sympathetic) government officials. Fortunately, it's not as boring as it sounds.

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2002/02oct-nov/oct-no...

http://www.duhc.org/rethinking_revoking.html

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Controlling_Corporati...

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=1810

http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/news2003/1230-0...

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/de...

http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/corporatedeath103...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-drobny/the-best-u...

http://www.corporations.org/afd-paradigm-shift.html

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/cases/clcc.html?c...


That's probably enough for starters. For more, search Google for any combination of "corporate charter revoke procedure case study"... and so on.

Happy hunting,


wp

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  Should there be laws against Media lies? Smith_3  Jan-17-08 05:00 AM   #0 
   Guten Morgen! Nice idea.  Angela Shelley   Jan-17-08 05:23 AM   #1 
   How 'bout we reinstate the Fairness Doctrine instead? n/t  murielm99   Jan-17-08 05:43 AM   #2 
   Should there be laws against the  malaise   Jan-17-08 05:50 AM   #3 
   That would solve one problem until the end of time ...  Angela Shelley   Jan-17-08 05:56 AM   #5 
   TOBAL  hfojvt   Jan-17-08 05:56 AM   #4 
   One Hell Of A Slippery Slope  KharmaTrain   Jan-17-08 06:12 AM   #6 
   What you said.  blondeatlast   Jan-17-08 09:53 AM   #25 
   No  MonkeyFunk   Jan-17-08 06:17 AM   #7 
   Our media is allied with this government.  mmonk   Jan-17-08 06:56 AM   #9 
      so you want the government to be able to sanction  MonkeyFunk   Jan-17-08 07:00 AM   #10 
         No, I want separation.  mmonk   Jan-17-08 07:05 AM   #11 
            what, specifically, are you talking about?  MonkeyFunk   Jan-17-08 07:11 AM   #12 
               Allowing media conglomerates to exist without accountability  mmonk   Jan-17-08 07:34 AM   #14 
   Fairness Doctrine n/t  lildreamer316   Jan-17-08 06:47 AM   #8 
   No. But broadcast media, using public airways,  Warren Stupidity   Jan-17-08 07:32 AM   #13 
   Time to reinstate the corporate death penalty...  warren pease   Jan-17-08 10:51 AM   #26 
   We certainly have our share of propaganda in full swing for years now, something should be done. nt  deacon   Jan-17-08 07:42 AM   #15 
   Leak some false information to a reporter so he's silenced by going to jail  taterguy   Jan-17-08 07:44 AM   #16 
   Or planted stories like the Iranian speed boats?  mmonk   Jan-17-08 07:49 AM   #17 
   how about KNOWINGLY lying?. . . . n/t  annabanana   Jan-17-08 07:50 AM   #19 
      Then you'd have the "I was too dumb to know any better" defense  taterguy   Jan-17-08 08:00 AM   #22 
         Which is certainly a valid defense in far too many cases...  warren pease   Jan-17-08 09:03 AM   #23 
         Or "I'm not a reporter, I'm an entertainer." nt  blondeatlast   Jan-17-08 09:52 AM   #24 
            Better yet, "on-air talent." Yup, that gets to the heart of the matter.  warren pease   Jan-17-08 11:01 AM   #28 
   It used to be against the law to make false claims in advertising.  annabanana   Jan-17-08 07:50 AM   #18 
   Me too.  mmonk   Jan-17-08 07:57 AM   #20 
   This crucial problem won't be addressed so long the people do nothing  Echo In Light   Jan-17-08 07:58 AM   #21 
   Truth in the media...what a novel concept ;) n/t  arthritisR_US   Jan-17-08 10:54 AM   #27 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2009 Democratic Underground, LLC