Radical Politics & New Ideas

Hey, here is a good argument for why corporations shouldn’t be considered persons.

It has to do with the power structure. Corporations are constructed of many people, who work together, presumably in order to benefit themselves. Under this model one might argue that since a corporation consists of persons entitled to full constitutional rights, then the corporation itself should inherit those rights.

However, the decision making structure of the corporation is what makes it unreasonable to assume that it should be entitled all constitutional rights associated with persons. Each individual person has the ability to make decisions for themselves. Only one person or a few people within a corporation have the ability to make decisions within a corporate structure. And not every person the corporation agrees with the decisions that get made. In many cases all the persons comply due to the need to accumulate wealth to stay alive and comfortable in some capacity. If any of the persons disagree with the decision, the one or few decision makers have the ability to remove the dissenting person(s) from the corporation. The non-decision maker persons however, do not necessarily, and in practice very rarely have the ability to remove the decision makers from the corporation or its property.

Person = Person

People =  Zero to Many Persons

Corporation = People + Formal Decision Making Structure + Formal Assignment of Property

Because of this unequal relationship between the decision makers and the rest of the persons that make up a corporation, the corporation cannot be said to fully reflect or even resemble a single person. Therefore, personhood should not apply to a corporation in any legal sense.

The ability for a corporation to claim personal rights against the democratic decisions made by governmental structures undermines democracy because decision making power that dictates and affects many persons is being focused into the hands of one or a few persons, exactly the problem democracy is intended to prevent.

(Source: movetoamend.org)

they work on your mind.

You just broke something I spent 1000’s of man-hours working on!

It drained your life away.

moments in the past.

Mem stand in line, smash these ATMs.

We might assume leadership to be a thing that humans in the present and into the future are predisposed to do, somehow by nature or as a matter of the course of history.

If this were the case, any leaderless governmental solution we create will have the problem, or the potential problem, of leadership structures forming.

Some or all people under uncertain circumstances may be driven to leadership, like a bad habit, or compulsion that must be appeased by imposing rule on others.

So, if this were the case, what would we need to do prevent leadership from happening?

Jail any leaders? If you exhibit behavior with some resemblance of leadership, would you be in danger of imprisonment?

Create mental health programs to identify and attempt to suppress the leadership impulse or relieve leaders of their compulsion through some sort of therapy or manipulative system of education?

Could you create a governmental structure that is impervious to the effects or otherwise prevents leadership structures from forming or sidesteps leadership structures and thus avoids or mitigates the effects?

How could the prevention of leadership ever be accomplished?

You know how sometimes you just have to feel what’s right?

I don’t get that.

Life for me is a giant question mark.

Does it exist?

You can’t just expect a teenager to agree with you, or understand the life-long consequences of the horrible punishment you wish to inflict on them for making mistakes or doing what they believe.

We really shouldn’t call ourselves a free nation when our incarceration rate is the highest of all industrialized nations in the world and has been since 2002 now in 2013

I don’t like to write about my life, or what happened, but I feel like I had a radically different and hellish experience in my early life than most people had and so it is important to get it out for people to think about.

I used to listen to my parents arguing and screaming at each other at the top of their lungs, keeping me and my brother and sister up or waking us up, almost every night of my early life. They would swear at each other mostly during the arguments, or accuse each other of not wanting to fuck the other anymore or yell about something about money or the kids or you are a fucking liar. I never called it swearing I called it cussing when they said like fuck or shit head or ass hole or piece of shit, I think my mom said peace of mind a lot and I thought it meant piece of mind, pieces of mind, piece of the pie, maybe it did sometimes too, like: I’m going to give you a piece of my mind..

May dad used to beat up my mom, or attempt to while she fought back every once in a while.

“Don’t lie about me in front of my children!!!” was a big thing that seemed to be associated with that kind of violence.

“I’ll fight you tooth and nail”, my mom said. I still don’t know where she came from with these expressions she would use when she was really reacting..?

I remember somebody talking about my how dad punched my mom in the stomach while she was pregnant with my brother or kicked her. Or maybe that was my cousin and her dad while her mom was pregnant with her little sister? They would argue to a whole different tune of fucked up.

My parents cared so much about us kids. Everything was for us kids. And even though we didn’t have money we ate every day and my mom was proud of that, and when she ever mentions that fact she always seems like she is really amazed it worked out like that.

I lived off food stamps with my mom for a while, so anybody that’s got a problem with food stamps or welfare can suck my dick, cause if we didn’t have that, I would have been figuring out how to rob you instead of writing this blog.

We were lucky to have grandparents on my mom’s side that had to help us out full time eventually and let me and my sister and brother stay with them and live with them when things got really fucked up or before and after school.

Of course, it makes me feel kinda privileged in a messed up way and guilty up that probably the only reason they had money, considering how fucked up everybody was, was because of the systemic segregation that they believed in and promoted.

They were really into capitalism and always told me to work as hard as I can and don’t care about anybody else because that was the way to achieve success and the best way or maybe the only way the world was bound to work and I was bound to survive and that it was somehow dignifying to obtain and compete and beat out others.

I remember my aunt crying about how when my grandpa died he was so heart broken when one of his few friends, a mutual friend of him and my grandmas, this holocaust survivor, totally ignored him when he tried to say hi to her after my grandma died. He was a severe racist and she probably knew it and thought he was a creep.

Although I loved him and really loved being with him for many reasons, my grandpa was pretty creepy in alot of ways. Despite being racist which was a mostly conscious accomplishment of his life, he was severely manic depressive and had trouble controlling his temper. We all just kind of knew not to push any of grandpa’s buttons, and all understood he was a little weird, which was cool and fine in itself and kinda cute in ways like taking care of old people typically is.

I only saw him flip a couple of times and never all the way. I heard about it when he apparently threw my cousin out on the front lawn flt on her stomach after she refused to wash her hands before dinner. Somebody at my school actually saw it and apparently the school was a little concerned. Like, he couldn’t handle certain things, like movies about war particularly and any swearing on tv for some reason, although he swore alot himself and said bitch and nigger all the time and jesus christ god damn son of a bitches cheap shit female drivers.

My grandparents used to tell me my dad was a worthless bum.

They apparently hated him and he knew it and I didn’t really know how it all came about and they knew he beat up my mom and she kept getting back together with him over and over again.

He was a great father in a lot of ways and really inspirational and a great teacher and he loved his children.

Does that seem like a strange thing if you were to hear your grandparents saying something like that about your dad or would that seem somehow out of the ordinary to you? Not really to me at that age, but I sometimes wondered what it was like to not have that, and it made me feel a little funny sometimes and pissed and like something was wrong or out of the ordinary when my grandparents were making fun of him.

My great grandmother made me lock out my best friend when I was little, when me and some other friends came in to get a drink of water. “I don’t want that god damn nigger in my house!” she said to me vividly as she kind of trembled in fear, like how a cat does at some ridiculous harmless shit it is afraid of. “Why?” “Because he’ll steal something”

I was so mad right then but I got him a glass of water and stood there with him with a few minutes and then I had to go back inside to get everybody and left him out there.

There are not many things I’ve ever felt so tormented about after growing up. I can’t imagine how he must have felt when that happened, having to stay out there ALONE. He looked a little pissed off at my grandma, but we never really talked about it, like neither of us cared and just figured my grandparents were dicks like that. I think it was mostly confusing for both of us because I didn’t understand what this racist shit my grandparents were saying even meant or why they would think he would want to steal our stuff at that age and he probably didn’t really get what was going on at all because my grandma like ducked me inside the door where he couldn’t hear to tell me not to let him inside.

I wonder how that guy grew up, I used to move alot and haven’t talked to him since. I bet after he grew up he thought about that weird memory and figured out that he had been a victim of racism and is maybe even pissed or enraged about it, maybe he even thinks I am a racist or that I was intent on the act of victimizing him. Actually I moved away from there not too long after that happened maybe within a year so I didn’t really ever get the opportunity to reflect on that with him or any other friends.

That’s another thing, I used to move around alot. My dad couldn’t keep a job because he would always get pissed and start fights at work. He would even fist fight at work sometimes, he was so passionate about everything.

It was really amazing to be around that in a lot of ways, like he was wild and courageous and smart and vocal. I think that was why my mom stayed so attracted to him.

He went up to these old ladies once randomly in a grocery store talking about shark attacks and said how there was a greater probability that you would die by getting stung by a bee than getting attacked by a shark.

He was a lifestyle surfer and the shark conversation definitely struck a chord with him.

That was when him and my mom were separated for the last time and he lived in Cocoa beach, I think. I was hanging out with him and checking out his humble digs in like this shack thing he had behind some older Ronald Reagan looking dude in the Co. beach suburb.

He had an orange tree in his back yard and that was the first time I ever saw that in my whole life of being down in Florida. I’m pretty sure I remember we were not allowed to pick them.

He shot himself in the head, actually in his neck, in that house, probably in his bedroom. I don’t understand how he got his neck or what he was doing with the gun there, like, why he would think of the neck and not the head..? How the fuck was he holding his gun? There were two bullet wounds below his jaw on the side of his neck, there was tape on them and, like, painted over with bluish rosy tan pale skin colored paint at the funeral. The attempted fakeness looked mostly disgusting.

I knew everything that had happened already from hearing him over the phone. “Do you love him!?!?” “Yes!”  pew “Oh my god Matthew!! Oh my god Matthew no …”

I could imagine what happened and had a picture in my mind of what he looked like that was really different from what he actually looked like after he died and the actual position of the wounds really threw me off.

I always wondered what that was like for my sister, when it actually happened, because she was literally sleeping next to my mother that night or trying to lay down with her and then definitely awake holding on to her and hearing everything as it happened, I actually haven’t thought about the fact that she was right there for a long time till it just came to me now, it made me really emotional to try to remember what she said, I think she even called out to him like “Daddy no” a few times right before he shot himself, or as he shot himself. I can’t believe how anybody could have been subjected to an experience like that, it makes me really question as I am writing about it now whether I should have gotten up and implored him to stop too or if I even was awake enough to, I remember thinking like it was just another fucked up night he was threatening something drastic and severe. I’ve never questioned that before. I know she had definitely said “Daddy no” a few of the worst really drastic times when violent episodes happened between our parents, it was definitely something she would have said in that situation. I’m somewhat ashamed that I can’t remember that now even though I definitely used to be able to remember what happened that night.

I remember getting up in the morning and high fiving my brother about getting three days off from school.

I felt really guilty about that around the time I got out of college and this girl I knew real well and kind of looked up to told me I would never fall in love, and I believed that she knew what she was saying and mind fucked myself for a while.

I know I was trying to keep my brother from feeling bad, I don’t remember if he was awake or asleep during the whole thing, but I also remember being sincerely relieved about not going to school and not wanting to bother with the whole situation and just saying fuck it and be over with it and just peacefully sit and play video games with my brother.

I was told by word of mouth today at work of a conspiracy theory about the connection of some participants in the Libor scandal to the school shootings that occurred in Massachusetts and in Sandy Hook.

Supposedly the shooters or someone killed in the shootings were the sons of a couple of people who were related to the scandal.

One of these fathers was relieved from duty to testify in court because he was so grieved by the involvement of his son in the shooting. I think that was the Sandy Hook shooting. This basically prevented the court from making that father testify and expose names of some of the people involved in the scandal. The other father had a similar situation in which the grievance got him out of something.

I thought, well I could kinda see that, I mean the banker capitalists involved in this scandal have a lot to fear from the prison systems. They would be brutalized and anally ravaged by all the people who they pissed off by being greedy stingy propertarian anti-social fucks. 

These are the people who persist on the laws and massive system of violent enforcement that allows them protection of property and their massive accumulation of property, have created the prison situation into which they might be driven.

Their slender bodies and shitty background would render them extremely vulnerable in a place where many people have been forced into or believe in or are provoked to living a life of violence.

It is the accumulation of property and protection thereof which has largely instigated and expanded such systems of fostered and concentrated violence. Without this motive, it is actually pretty hard to determine whether they are necessary to exist at all.

The above anecdote is interesting because it is a case that accentuates the dynamic between property motivation, the drive to accumulate and keep, and the drive to avoid the punishment and exclusion that are the tools used in the protection of that same property.

The drive to accumulate with knowledge that the accumulation will be protected can cause a person to subvert society to accumulate more than what the society perceives that it can safely sustain, which is many times more than it can actually sustain.

This mechanism of subversion, distinct from the sole drive to accumulate, exacerbates the occurrence of violence within the society and the necessity of violent and exclusive systems of property protection.

Why does propertarianism even exist?

The social contract has manifested itself in many forms and arrangements over the course of human history. One form of social contract that has been perceived to be advantageous is the contract of property ownership between groups.

Property can be shared among groups or owned by a single group, but it is the property ownership that is respected and enforced with authority. The authority of one group in a breach of the property ownership contract can be held over many aspects of another group’s livelihood, including the authority to physically punish or deprive livelihood or terminate life. The deprivation of livelihood defined in property ownership contracts can focus on the effects of the property itself, like as in starvation when food is the property transferred from one group to another or destroyed, or could be based on some rational or cultural principal. By the way, when I say groups I am referring to any arrangement of societal participants, down to a single person or part of something. A group can consist of one person. A group may be considered a group or a certain group even though it has not agreed to participate as such.

The social contract. 

Social contracts can be struck by any societal groupings between each other. Many times these agreements will authority the transfer of authority over some aspects of life from one group to another under defined circumstances. This can include authorization of violence of members of one group over the other.

Social contracts in practice are struck as new information about the relationship between the social groups is discovered. When enough information becomes available about the perceived importance of regulation between groups to some or all members, some or all members of the groups can be stimulated into action which results in the formation of a contract.

Contracts can be terminated, by one or the other group. Contracts can be terminated by either group. When enough information about the perceived importance of terminating a contract has been accumulated, some or all members of the groups can be stimulated into action which results in the termination of a contract. 

Contracts such as adherence to a group can be considered. One of these contracts may be impacted very strongly by the effects of other contracts, namely because adherence to a group involves adhering to the social contracts that group has become engaged in. Adherence itself may be loosely defined and have complex implications in the meaning of adherence to different members across the group or transcend temporally.

The important thing to note about the social contract as it is being defined here is that it is something that exists even though it may not be agreed to be referred to as such, and is thus inescapable.

The ability to break these social contracts in a coordinated way as to avoid violence from being part or the coordination and to avoid violence when a previously upheld contract starts to result in violence happening, or other undesirable things, can be beneficial to society overall.

Maybe as more information is gained as to the effect and necessity of violence or other forms of forcible deprivation we may decide to terminate contracts involving property ownership and maybe create more flexible, breakable contracts that do not involve property ownership.

What kinds of motivations are there to accumulate if you can’t ever guarantee that your accumulation will be protected for yourself or your group?

Would this result in more or less violence or more or less strict contracts?

When we see advertising, particularly supply side or supply influenced advertising, we are seeing essential distortion of the free market.

Most advertising techniques we know of are actually aimed at this goal, of distorting the FREE MARKET to gain an advantage and ultimately some extent of control over other FREE MARKET participants.

Hey what happens if somebody drops a bomb in this fucking cage? We’re all gonna get trapped trying to get out!

 ~                  

Of course, advertising can be conducted in a way that provides concise information about the makeup and objective value of the product, but most of the advertising we see masks or distorts the real properties of the products it represents.

Distortion may still happen even if it is not attempted, or consciously understood or rationalized as such or if it is even actually beneficial to the supplier.

On a large scale, this may be determined to be a serious distorting force within the free market. The less consumers know about what they are consuming, you’d think the less optimal decisions they’d be capable of making about their market interactions, namely purchases and investments.

What are the effects of mainstream confusion within a large society, or a dangerously large society?

What kinds of tools or substantive authority or ability do consumers have to counter the attempts at information hiding now?

What I’d like to know more about is how people traded in ancient times. What kinds of techniques were created and implemented during trade to ensure both sides had the information they felt they needed to make the optimal trade.

At how many different levels did this happen? I’m sure people who were heavily invested in any form of trade as some sort of career or obligatory job must have prepared and developed techniques to counter attempts at information hiding by the other side. Did the end consumer always get deceived about the products’ value and composition or were there attempts made to hide the true character of products in order to make the trade happen?

Smiley360.com will never censor your speech and we want you to know that we value any feedback you have about any product. 

Smiley360.com will never refuse or hide any offer from you based on any speech you have previously made about anything.