What is corporatism? or Why we are in Iraq!

I recently bought Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine. Reading it has informed me and infuriated me to the point of action. This is the first action I am taking. I am going to spread the word. I believe every American citizen has the obligation to read and thoroughly digest this wonderful work of art. (ALthough, I'll settle for every kossack)

To begin with, corporatism is a political system designed to support corporations. It has its beginnings in the laissez-faire economic theory of Milton Friedman. A better term for this whole system would be disaster capitalism. The reason being that corporatism requires a disaster to exist and/or sustain itself. For example, in the US 9/11. Indeed, the Neocons
here in the US are the party which most promote these ideas of disaster capitalism.

Disaster capitalism is the economic theory that is the true ideological opposite to marxist economic theory. There is a middle road called Keynesianism(pronounced: canezeeinism), named after John Keynes. Disaster capitalists relish in the fact that they have taken the place of keynesianism as the predominant economic theory among politicians

N.B.: this isn't gonna be technical or numerical!

Let me begin by truly identifying and defining the enemy: disaster capitalism or corporatism. I begin here because this is the heretofore unnamed rationale that corporations use to justify all sorts of unhuman, inhumane behavoir. In short it is our ideological enemy and must be understood in order to be fought against most effectively.

Here in the US disaster capitalism was put into effect in New Orleans after Katrina. As an economic policy disaster capitalism is defined by three major facets: privatization, deregulation of markets, and defunding of social programs. In other words the government is taken out of the market. These three tenets were on the minds of the business lobbyists who invaded Baton Rouge and began saying their refrain: this is a clean slate. This immediately implies that disaster capitalists view any sort of disaster as an opportunity to remake laws according to those basic three tenets. The quintessential circumstance of this is what happened to the education system of New Orleans and Louisiana. It was privatized through charter schools. Know that the charter school idea has been soundly rejected in vote after vote across the US. This is why they need disasters. In the aftermath of such tragedies people are stunned and generally politically paralyzed. These economists get to the ears of the politicians and tell them we have the solution to your problems. Our ideas will remake your city, state, country, etc.
Observe also New Orleans after katrina was a minor accomplishment for the DC's(disaster capitalists from now on). There first major accomplishment was Chile's forced entry into the globalized economy. As you may or may not, Chile has its own 9/11(erie coincidence) with the difference being that it is now undisputed that this whole episode was manufactured by Pinochet and his CAI backers.
This whole thing occurred in the early 70's. Let me set this up. In the late 40s and 50s, Keynesianism was being applied with great success in raising standards of living and spreading wealth in region of South America called the Southern Cone, consisting of CHile, Argentina, and Uruguay. Around this time Milton Friedman was becoming well established as the best economist in the US. He was based in the University of CHicago. He was a complete ideologue and he always railed against government intference in the economy. He gave lectures to many important people: rumsfeld, wolfowitz.
There's a lot of history that can be explained by DC, but let's skip that and get to the good part Iraq and the Bush regime. Since the beginning of the current Bush regime there has been a homeland security bubble. Now thi s did predate 9/11 but this disaster sure spurred on its growth. In fact, obvious DC in the US goes back to BUSH I, cheney had strong ties to Halliburton and rumsfeld had strong ties many defense contracting firms. Each stood to make money if the US were to go to war or even if just some natural disaster occurred anywhere in the US. It's crucial to point out the potential conflicts of interests because later on both rummy and cheney will act on behalf of there business contacts, or so the casual observer my notice. Indeed, the DCs the line between corporate interests and public interests are now all gone.

Geez, I could go on and on but I'll cut it off here and make another diary about other aspects of this including answers to the following questions:
Should Obama even mention DCs?
What do russia, poland, and indonesia all have in common?
What specifically should we the people do to protect ourselves against these assaults?

Remember my primary source for all this is Klein's book!!! Buy it, read it, pray to it!!

•  ...

  http://www.foavc.org
  http://www.articlev.org

  the two sites above contain information and a possible strategy against the thing klein articulates in her book.

  by john de herrera on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:43:40 AM PDT

  •  how long have you known about this?

    by deutschluz on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:55:25 AM PDT

    •  the book, or the idea of an Article V Convention?

      the book i've known about for months, and went to hear ms. klein speak when she was in town.

      the convention clause of the constitution, and the idea that it's meant knock corporate interests out of governance, i've known about for awhile.

      if you're serious about doing something to stop unchecked corporate interests, imo, talking about an article v convention is the logical thing to do. but more importantly, in order for the idea to gain traction, citizens must be shown. that's why i think a documentary is the best way to get that job done.

      by john de herrera on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:47:09 AM PDT

      •  Constitutional Amendments

        Absolutely necessary to address the problem of anti-republican corporate power.

        In the constitution, states are prohibited from establishing aristocratic title systems or anti-republican governing bodies. With corporate laws and charters, they have done both.

        Are we to be persuaded that aristocrats, functioning as aristocrats, in the same manner as aristocrats, with a title system and an organizational scheme that is aristocratic, are somehow NOT aristocrats, simply because they choose to dress themselves and their system in corporate clothing?

        The corporatists match aristocrats in both function and arrogance, pretending that they have powers that they do not, and pretending that we are ignorant of their pretenses.

        Because corporatists favor legal hair-splitting and technically legal overthrow of republican government, we must answer them with specific prohibitions of the unconstitutional anti-republican system of corporate power, and it must be written into the constitution.

        We have already seen how corporatists assume powers to frustrate efforts to restrain them by statutory, legal and regulatory means. Constitutional Amendment is the last recourse, short of armed revolution and the establishment of a Second Republic. I fear we may see a revolution anyway, but we must try peaceful means first.

        In addition to constitutional amendment, it is absolutely necessary to prosecute the neocon cabal for their many treasons, war crimes and racketeering schemes. I favor prosecutions first, as a means of informing the public of the true nature of the fascist threat, and to gain support for constitutional amendments.  

        by taraka das on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:28:53 AM PDT

        •  i'm glad you see the need

          for a national convention. i'd like to use the text of tis reply for a diary if you don't mind.

          by john de herrera on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 11:04:38 AM PDT

          •  I don't mind

            Permission granted

            by taraka das on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 11:18:26 AM PDT

          •  The Founders

            They too tried to persuade Britain to amend the constitution before resorting to rebellion.

            Corporate interests, using their influence on the Crown, defeated such efforts in Parliament.

            And then they sought to show those uppity peasants in the Colonies who was boss, leading to the abuses that eventually drove the Colonies into rebellion.

            At the root of these events were financial realities stemming from the Seven Years War, a global imperialist struggle supported by the corporate aristocrats.

            We've come full circle.

            by taraka das on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 11:26:11 AM PDT

•  Fascism=disaster capitalism

  Witness the scorn of Barack Obama by corporatists (ahem! fascists) who claim that government regulation is a form of "elitism" because those in favor of government regulation presume to "know better than the market."

  In an economy dominated by corporations, the corporatists hide their control by interlocking directorates behind the "market" euphemism.

  What the arrogant corporatists really mean when they say that government regulation presumes to "know better than the market," is that government regulation presumes to know what's best for the country, as opposed to the corporatists being the deciders of that.

  We don't really have a capitalist market. That is a myth being perpetuated by the aristocratic, corporate-titled fascists in ascendency today. We have an economy dominated by government-chartered corporations. That is not a capitalist system. It's a socialist one. Under the current status of corporate law, it is a system in which corporate-title-holders have become a power unto themselves by assuming powers that are unconstitutional.

  The American colonists had the same problem with aristocrat-dominated corporations. And we know how they solved that problem.

  Our situation is somewhat different: Not all of our corporate elite are onboard for a fascist future. THANK GOD! The People and the corporate elites are all becoming aware of the problem that the corporate-dominated media refuses to discuss: we have an anti-republican system of power that is assuming power over our republican government.

  The corporate elites who ARE fascists are surely feeling the heat right now. Unfortunately for them, from their perspective, there isn't anything they can do about the coming changes, and many of them are likely to get run over by it. They've painted themselves into a corner by stubbornly clinging to outdated technologies, and to an unsustainable system of wealth distribution and generational wealth transfer. Worse, they've involved the whole world in this "bridge to nowhere" project.

  It is the corporate elites who are truly republican loyalists, who KNOW that the "fascist future project" is doomed, who will be the technocrats we rely upon to restructure our corporations with republican principles and will be the leaders into the New Age.

  A new energy infrastructure, and a paradigm of abundance will replace "disaster capitalism," "the long war," and Armageddon mythology. At least, I hope so. Otherwise, look for world war and another American revolution, simultaneously, in about 15 years.

  by taraka das on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:45:52 AM PDT

•  A note on my use of the word "republican"

  When I speak of "republican corporations" I am not referring to any political party affiliation. I'm referring to corporations restructured with internal and external republican divisions of power. I'm speaking of corporations without multiple title-holders, without interlocking directorates and without a myriad of anti-republican customs and practices.

  When I speak of "republican loyalists" among the corporate elite, I am not referring to corporate leaders loyal to the Republican Party, but rather, I am referring to corporate elites loyal to the republic.

  In my experience as a community organizer, I spoke with many corporate elites who know and understand the threat of fascism that has arisen from corporatist power. What these people need is a national leader who addresses the fascist threat constructively and positively.

  It is the prerogative of the People to define the role of the corporate charter and the role of corporations in our society. The People grant corporate charter, and for a purpose: public benefit. Corporate charters are not an aristocratic entitlement nor an independently established authority. Profit is an incentive, not the primary purpose of corporate charter. Political, economic, legal or social power for corporate interests is conditional and revocable.

  by taraka das on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:13:35 AM PDT