Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 12:20:09 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "Doug Young" <dougy@bryden.apana.org.au>, <cjclark@alum.mit.edu>, "Jeremiah Gowdy" <jgowdy@home.com> Cc: "Jason" <kib@mediaone.net>, <ldmservices@charter.net>, <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: CA Power Shortage (was Re: Why do you support Yahoo!) Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001220120244.04767ed0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <000d01c06a4e$15def320$847e03cb@apana.org.au> References: <001d01c06a2d$279654d0$aa240018@cx443070b> <002301c06a1d$a52783c0$19bad818@debbie> <002701c06a25$27e7c9d0$aa240018@cx443070b> <006a01c06a40$11ffc580$ad181f40@bignet.net> <06fc01c06a28$7d9c3840$847e03cb@apana.org.au> <00b401c06a45$4d279020$ad181f40@bignet.net> <001d01c06a2d$279654d0$aa240018@cx443070b> <4.3.2.7.2.20001219223202.0467c4e0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:28 PM 12/19/2000, Doug Young wrote: >Whilst this is hardly the "proper" place for political debate, the point >about >"corporations have as much power over our lives -- if not more -- than >governments" >is a very real problem these days .... and not only in the US either !!!! Absolutely. Many of today's Libertarians -- especially American Libertarians -- hold the notion of "private property" sacrosanct, even when that property is owned by a large corporation rather than a private individual. From this logic arises their odd notion that, while governments should be limited, corporations -- which in many cases have more control than governments over key aspects of our lives -- should be untouchable, even when they pass the "duck test" for being a government. These ideologues, all of whom grew up in democracies, forget that before democracy was widespread there was another form of government: empires. Today, a citizen of a democracy may in fact be ruled simultaneously by several "horizontal" empires -- private corporations such as utility companies each desiring complete control of one business, market, or aspect of citizens' lives. None, of course, are democratically elected, so if the government does not regulate them, what we have in fact are unbridled governments. This is exactly the opposite of what a principled Libertarian would want. I recently asked an American Libertarian think tank -- fee.org -- if I could submit an article explaining this thesis to their newsletter. So horrified were they by the notion that this simple idea might get out that they not only refused the article but indicated a desire to repress the idea. I believe that they may have been worried that their large corporate sponsors (e.g. Microsoft) would react badly. >When one considers that the head of state in most western countries is >"officially" paid a fraction of what the "head of state" for major >corporations earns, its obvious that many of these corporations are in a >position to buy & sell virtually anyone they wish. eg its difficult for >those of us outside the US to know exactly what dealings went on in order to >get Bush in the White House, however some of us with nasty suspicious minds >harbour a feeling that he didn't get there on the basis of personal >ability. Bush became a candidate because monied interests thought that he would favor them and thus contributed many millions to his campaign. He won because a majority of the Supreme Court justices, some of whom wished to retire and be replaced by members of the same political party, were willing to defy their own long standing principles to ensure that party's victory. Two of the justices in the majority had close relatives who were actively campaigning, and yet did not recuse themselves -- a horrendous breach of judicial ethics. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20001220120244.04767ed0>