Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The 'Ownership Class' and "(im)plausible deniability"

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.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-03-06 03:40 PM
Original message
The 'Ownership Class' and "(im)plausible deniability"
Edited on Tue Oct-03-06 03:42 PM by TahitiNut
At the height of US liberalism in the 70s, Congress (finally) passed the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) which, for the first time in federal statutory law, formally eradicated the hypocritical defense of plausible deniability for corporate executives. The common practice of claiming "no knowledge" of actions taken on behalf and to the benefit of the corporation, with the surreptitious instructions of "I don't care how you do it - just do it and don't let me know," became (hopefully) a thing of the past. Executives were deemed to have a duty to oversee and establish a system of internal management controls that gave assurance that any actions taken on behalf of the corporation, and activities funded by and performed under the corporation's name, were known to the executives. Failure to establish controls, take the initiative to oversee and obtain information, and ensure such knowledge was, for the first time, equated to complicity with penalties exactly the same as knowing involvement.

The same moral and ethical obligations exist in government office - despite the exemption from such laws they afford themselves, and despite the repeated erosion of the FCPA since it was enacted.

The fact that these people are embedded in 'ownership class' thinking is nowhere more aptly portrayed than in their claim that "it's not my job" to get that information - that they are Kings sitting on thrones awaiting petitions.

When Rice says "nobody knew" it's neither believable nor acceptable. They had a DUTY to obtain that information. They are NOT merely allowed to sit back and accept delivery. They're required to take active steps to obtain it.

When Hastert claims he "didn't know" it's even less plausible or acceptable. As it is with Boehner - who claims he "thought" it was handled bu can point ot no confirmation of that nor any act on his part to follow-up and ascertain such an assurance.

This is the corruption of 'ownership' thinking - that others are to blame, even though it is them who have the DUTY and to whom the benefits accrue.

This is at the black heart and corrupt soul of the hypocrisy of today's elitism. 'Ownership' - man's longest known corruption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-03-06 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Wasn't that poppy's escuse
that he was out of the loop, therefore he had no knowledge of actions of criminals in st. ronnies day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-03-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. I wish this were more interesting.
Edited on Tue Oct-03-06 09:28 PM by TahitiNut
(Sigh) :eyes:

It would've been nice if someone had the insight to mention "husbandry."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-05-06 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kicking for the INCURIOUS
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) 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 Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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 |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC