Should Democrats be the anti-corporate party?

[yurbud]

Poll question: Should Democrats be the anti-corporate party?

Given the success of the GOP K St. project to make all business lobbyist Republicans, and the abject failure of the DLC policy of trying to be part progressive lite, part business lite (which makes them a second choice at best for both), should democrats adopt a more openly anti-corporate stance, and say whoever gives us money, we will NOT bend on core principles of protecting American consumers and workers?




Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[jmaier]

1. Nope

Democrats should be the pro-responsible corporate party.

[guajira]

2. Another Wes Clark Dem Agrees With you

I'm a Democrat, I'm fiscally conservative, I'm Progressive, I believe in capitalism. On the other hand I respect my liberal friends and think the Dem tent is big enough for all of us!

[Clark2008]

31. Another Wes Clark Dem in agreement.

I'm fiscally conservative to the point that I like balanced budgets and am conservative in my own spending and budgeting.
I think corporations are necessary, but should be helpful instead of harmful to the economy. Capitalism with enforced laws is the most enjoyable: when they can't take off to other countries and leave their workers jobless without repercussions or when they can't gobble up ALL the Moms and Pops and limit speech (the media, for example).
I don't want the Dems to be the "anti-corporation" Party, but how 'bout the "pro-enforcement" Party. We need to be FOR something, instead of against things.

[yurbud]

4. they have to come up with a soundbite summary people will agree with

"A group of people can't hurt others just because they call themselves a corporation."

"Businesses need to be held responsible for their actions at least as much as individuals."

those suck. Got a better one? (it might help if you say your ideas in a Bill Clinton voice)

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[Mythsaje]

25. A business isn't a person

unless it can be thrown in jail for breaking the law.

[yurbud]

35. I like that

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[Mythsaje]

39. Thanks

I think corporate person-hood is a legal fiction that should be done away with as soon as possible. This pretense allows the foolish to believe that such artificial people actually have RIGHTS like a real human being--which they don't...and shouldn't--especially when they cannot be held to the same standards of responsibility.

A corporation is the sum of its parts, parts which can only be held to a limited amount of responsibility for the corporation's actions. This is one of the great fallacies we've allowed to take root in our country.

[yurbud]

42. there should be a way squeeze more restitution out of them too

As kick ass as Elliot Spitzer is, I think he gets back HALF at best from these scammers.

If you locked them up in regular ass-rape prison until all the money they spirited away to shell corporations, Cayman Islands accounts, and loans to friends is returned, they would get pretty fucking creative about getting the money back.

[brainshrub]

3. I can't beleive people think that there is no inherent conflict

I can't beleive people think that there is no inherent conflict between interests of workers, consumers, and corporations.

That's like saying breathing water isn't an inherent quality of a goldfish.

[yurbud]

9. there is no inherent conflict

as long as individual people know their place in the food chain and respect their masters.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[me b zola]

14. I'm in your camp

It is inconceivable to me that someone would not see the inherent conflict between slave & master. For someone to take the stance that there is no conflict between corporations and workers, I can only wonder at how they view current events, how they view the history of the labor movements that came about during the industrial revolution, and how those two things are now colliding to take us back to the turn of the century---early 20th century.

No inherent conflict??? I'm speechless. :banghead:

[brainshrub]

19. We love massa! Massa takes good care of us!

Massa gives us da 401(k), and if'n we're good little slaves we get a health-plan. (That is, until massa can outsource our jobs to India.)

[yurbud]

37. Now, Toby, if you are good, you might get health insurance someday...

[yurbud]

36. I was being sarcastic

I think if corporations could make money throwing live kittens and babies in wood chippers, they would do so.

[applegrove]

5. If corporations are the citizens they should be and not drinking

Kook-Aid and working against the government to end all government regulations.. they are necessary. Bill Gates has done wonders. He also needs to be slapped down on monopoly issues sometimes.

They all needs to follow the 'intentions' of the law and respect the rights of citizens to make decisions about how they want their country regulated and ran.

They need to be open about any political leaning - so that the public can stop buying their products if they align themselves with one party over another.

[DireStrike]

6. Corporations CONSTANTLY try to stomp out labor interests and power

Labor has no backup from above. A balance is needed.

Corporations are voracious profit seekers and care about nothing else. They are inherently more organized than laborers and thus should be helped less and opposed more.

[bahrbearian]

7. Power to the People!

[napi21]

8. The problems aren't with the Corporations!

The problem is with SOME people who abuse Corporate power.

Most Porporations try to abide by the laws. The problem now is, the regulations have been relaxed so much, they can do lots of harm even when they function withing the laws!

Look at what Shrub just did with the SEC! Donaldson (?) was just being too hard on Shrub's buddies in the business world, so he fired him, and is replacing him with someone who is "more business friendly!"

[BrklynLiberal]

11. And guns don't kill people...People kill people.

:sarcasm:

[billbuckhead]

13. Actually people with guns kill people and corporations w people w guns

are really dangerous.

[BrklynLiberal]

23. Absolutely! And laid off corporate workers with guns are the worst.

[BrklynLiberal]

10. If we don't get corporations out of government, they will BE the

government.
They are like the scorpion..it is their nature. They will never willingly settle for less than everything they can get. They will only give what they are forced to give. If it was up to the corporations there would be no child labor laws, no minimum wage, no 40 hour work week, no health laws, no labor unions, no environmental laws etc etc etc. We would be back to the era of "The Octopus" and the other muckraker stories.
Corporations see the government as a tool to protect and preserve their interests...and that is all. The military is there to protect their interests overseas.
The only law that matters to corporate entities is the bottom line. ******************PROFIT****************
Anyone who argues against that is either lying or incredibly naive.

[napi21]

16. Of course you're right! What I said is that the GOP leaders keep

reducing the regulations on Corp. America to let them do MORE of what they want...which is EVERYTHING!

I just think it's wrong to hate ALL Corporatios. They simply need to have realistic regulations on them to control their actions.

[mcscajun]

21. What we need is not anti-corporatism, but an end to corporate personhood

That's where all the trouble started.

Corporations were well-controlled by government (not in every single case, certainly, but egregious problems resulted in charter revocation) before corporate personhood took hold.

[BrklynLiberal]

22. But as long as corporations are in control of the government, they are not

going to allow the government to put controls on them!

[necso]

12. Being in favor

of (something approaching) an optimally operating market system (demand choice, demand flexibility and alternatives, true competition (which means that competition can arise with minimum difficulties), etc, etc) means allowing no players to rise above the rules of the game -- or attain unfair advantage. But this is not anti-corporate -- it is only anti those who will not play by the rules (of an optimally operating market system). And this is what societies do -- define wellbeing, set rules and make people play by them.

And it is not anti-corporate to attempt to stop those who would defy the restrictions that we place on them as neighbors, citizens, employers and entities in the marketplace (etc), by running overseas (or just disregarding the rules).

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. Yes--but anti-corporate may not be right way of putting it

The Democratic Party should clearly define itself as the party that sticks up for ordinary folks--When commerce and working people share the same interest then let's work together.If it comes down to a choice between the interest of corporate-power and people-power it is both strategically and morally imperative to be with the people--

"When I was a boy".:bounce: growing up in a PA steel town. People were culturally to the right of most of the right wing nuts of today:hurts: .But most of them still voted Democratic:dem: thru thick and thin because they new:patriot: the Democratic Party:dem: :kick: would fight for them...:applause:

[napi21]

18. That's what the Democrats USED TO BE!

What went wrong?

[Douglas Carpenter]

34. During the late 70's

Mr. Strauss :evilfrown: --the DNC Chair during the Carter years starting moving the party to the right on economic issues. Then it became uncool to use the language of "class war":nuke: .--Candidates became more and more dependent on money from corporate lobbyist.

But take a look at Bernie Sanders in Vermont. He wins the votes of cultural conservatives :patriot: in staunchly Republican counties most of the time.

Just imagine if people knew that voting Democrat meant voting against outsourcing jobs and voting for single-payer universal health care. That would have the Repubs on the run in no time:kick:

:toast:

[newyawker99]

46. Hi Douglas Carpenter!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[LSdemocrat]

17. We should only be anti insanely freaking huge multinational corporations

Which is entirely different from being anti-business or anti corporation.

[napi21]

20. Ues! What ever happened to anti trust laws?

Remember Taft/Hartley laws? I don't ever remember them being repealed! I suspect the controling entities simply turn their head the other way when one company wants to control the majotiry of the nedia outlets, or consolidate the phone companies, or gwor all the food like Conagra does.

[OnionPatch]

24. No they should be the anti Corporate CORRUPTION

party.

No, we shouldn't be anti-corporate, just pro-people. I also firmly believe we should be the Pro-Small-Business party. Small businesses stay in America. Small businesses vitalize our communities. Small business is the tool for Americans to achieve the American dream. I believe they should be given special privilege over huge corporations.

Corporations have their place but they need to be watched carefully that their power does not become abusive and counter-productive to the needs of society. Profit must not be allowed to trump the good of the people.

[noamnety]

26. Not all corporations are anti-labor

I've worked for an employee owned corporation before, and I never once felt like they were taking advantage of me, or like it was a slave/master relationship. I left to do other things with my life, but I was able to afford to do so because of them.

Other companies like Costco have proven that CEOs can care about the welfare of their employees.

We don't need to be anti-corporation - corporations provide jobs and services that we all use. But that doesn't mean we should bend on core principles. Workers deserve fair pay and safe working conditions; consumers deserve products and manufacturing techniques that don't harm them or the environment.

I don't think we need to take a position that is PRO or ANTI corporation. Corporations are not people. We are supposed to have a government for the people. So policies that help people are good, policies that hurt people are bad. Those policies will be good for responsible corporations because it levels the playing field for them - it's hard for a responsible company to stay competitive against players like Walmart who treat their employees and suppliers like slaves.

[Radical Activist]

27. We should be against corporate abuse of power.

That's different. We should be against the bad things corporations do, not against all corporations regardless of their behavior. That is a stance that will gain mass support, as opposed to blindly hating any company that makes money.

We should paint it as an anti-crime position. When a Republican talks about locking up criminals and throwing away the key we don't accuse them of being anti-human. Its understood that they're only talking about humans who are harming others.

In the same way we should talk about punishing corporation that harm others. That doesn't make us anti-corporate. It makes us pro-human and pro law and order.

[Warpy]

28. Any government or political party that has "democratic" anywhere

in its name should stand with the people against the powerful, as it did for a long time after the Great Depression.

If it doesn't, the people need to overthrow it, either through the ballot or by the means specified in the Declaration of Independence.

That's our history and that's the legacy the founding fathers left us.

Tyranny is unacceptable.

[ArcRabbit]

29. 99% of the time a corp will screw you over

Because I know, I've worked for many corps that did. (Walmart, Blockbuster, Target, FoodLion, I could go on) Especially us retail guys. They don't give a flying flip about us. They care about the one thing that they love. Money, Money, Money. And through a democratic process, they should be controlled (imho) so that they don't trample on the workers so much to line their pockets with gold.

[kenny blankenship]

30. You do not have to be anti-coporation to be FOR social rights

but it's for damn sure that the corporations will INTERPRET it that way.

The false choice presented to American citizens is unrestrained limitless capitalism on the one hand -=OR=- a monopolistic state ownership of the means of production on the other. This has always been a false choice calculated to foreclose on the chance that democracy in America would put any real qualifications and conditions on the rights of capitalists and corporations.

There has always been a middle path.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. Yes! But, fat chance with two capitalist parties at the same trough.

[jonnyblitz]

33. wow the people who believe the 3rd one down to be true

must be in some ((((((serious))))) denial. please. :eyes:

[yurbud]

38. Mussolini: Fascism is corporatism

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."

-- Benito Mussolini (from Encyclopedia Italiana, Giovanni Gentile, editor).


That's the bottom line reality, but people's belief in American exceptionalism is so strong, that bounces off.

If you asked if corporations have more power than citizens, even citizens collectively, people would instinctively say yes.

If you showed them that quote and had the dusty old book to prove the authenticity, they would agree that Mussolini said it.

But they wouldn't be able to put the two together into a syllogism:

Mussolini, a fascist, said fascism is corporations becoming government.

Corporations are becoming our government.

Therefore, we are becoming fascist.


Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[PeaceProgProsp]

40. We should be the "corporate responsibilitiy for capitalism's sake" party.

And that should be one of our top priorities.

[PeaceProgProsp]

41. We should be the "corporate responsibilitiy for capitalism's sake" party.

And that should be one of our top priorities.

[Ouabache]

43. They poke holes in a body before cremation?

I did not know that.

People first, corporations second, and only when helping a corporation helps a LOT of it's employees, customers, and the community in which the corporation resides. (Asuuming that is a community in the USA) Those are the only times the Democratic Party should carry any water for a corporation. And we should only help out a corporation if they pledge to allow unionization if the workers vote for it, and provide an array of benefits to ALL their employees. And we should make help to corporations dependent on them linking the pay of their officers in a direct relationship to the pay of their lowest tier of employees. If the officers want a raise, they have to do like wise for the lowest paid in their organization. Fair is fair.

[Dover]

44. I don't think it should be such a blanket policy. That's not constructive.

We should be targeting the ones that have infiltrated and run the government and write the policies without a democratic process. They need to be brought to heel in so many areas; their legal designation and rights as a "citizen" should be revoked and reworked, their taxing responsibilities should be reworked to allow global competitiveness while being responsible to their host countries. Off-shoring has to stop. Their behavior makes it very clear they are incapable of self-policing. It simply goes against their profit-making nature.

However, this is a pretty complex subject because things are in such flux, as outsourcing, multi-nationalism, currencies/monetary systems and trading blocks to name a few things are new. But corporations SHOULD NOT be the new global governing bodies they so want to be. We need to set up a 'new' government infrastructure that is responsive to both domestic and international issues/policies/laws, and works seamlessly with separate global governing bodies.

But don't forget one of the BIGGEST problems we face....the huge size and control by the Military Industrial Complex...who essentially work for and support these big corporation's agendas.
I refer specifically to Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Halliburton.

[Dover]

45. The corporations are planning to BECOME the "government".

Remember this little slip of the tongue?



FLASHBACK: TIMEWARNER HEAD LEVIN WARNS OF 'AMERICAN CULTURAL IMPERIALISM'; SEES CORPORATIONS TAKING 'GOVERNMENT ROLES'

AOL chief executive Steve Case and TIME WARNER chief executive Gerald Levin
testified Thursday before a complete panel at the Federal Communications
Commission.

But candid comments made by Levin earlier this year during a media
roundtable have some lawmakers in Congress concerned that something is foul
with the latest greatest media marriage.

Levin recently warned: In the post-Cold War era there is only "American
cultural imperialism."

"There's no countervailing force, that's a significant problem," declared
the man who will become the most powerful media executive in history if the
AOL/TIME WARNER merger is approved by federal regulators.

Levin sees a future where major media corporations take on responsibilities
currently administered by governments.

"We're going to need to have these corporations redefined as instruments of
public service because they have the resources, they have the reach, they
have the skill base, and maybe there's a new generation coming up that wants
to achieve meaning in that context and have an impact, and that may be a
more efficient way to deal with society's problems than governments,"
predicted Levin.

A summary of Levin's past comments were circulated behind committee doors
this week, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, including Levin's belief that an
"old-fashioned regulatory system" has to give way to a new "global concern."

"It does appear that Mr. Levin has greater designs than simply running an
entertainment conglomerate," said one Republican lawmaker who would like to
question Levin on his feelings about "American cultural imperialism."

At the TIMEWARNER Global Forum gathering in Shanghai last year, Levin
introduced Communist China's President Jiang Zemin, calling him "my good
friend."

Levin presented him with a bust of Abraham Lincoln.

Levin, who refused to meet with human rights representatives during the
trip, told vaunted visitors that Jiang can reel off the Gettysburg address
from memory.

[Hugin]

47. Planning?

Just saying...

Hey, I'm thinking this post would make a great
thread.