Quote:
Originally Posted by bhunter
Seem to me that the left is doing quite well in garnering corporate support. The Citizens United decision was correct IMHO. Political speech ought not be hindered by legislation. The right of people to assemble in groups and associations, which BTW is exactly what a corporation or union is, and put forth their political view ought be sacrosanct under our form of government. There is a big difference between a corporation's ability to compel and a government's. My trust is with the myriad of distinct and competing corporations over a monolithic central government.
|
If it is wrong for a union to use dues money to contribute to political campaigns, (Something the right has been whining about for decades.), then how is it right for my employer to take the fruit of my labor and use it to support political candidates? (In both cases, doing so without my concurrence. Just because the board of piglets supports a given candidate does NOT mean that I do.)
My trust is with people I at least have a chance to vote for (As imperfect as they may be.) and not some extremely small, autocratic group of unelected oligarchs. Because you know damn well there is some collusion at the top of the corporate world. The oil and auto industries have been perfect examples of this over the last century.
Corporate executives are not elected by the general populace, they are picked
solely by their cronies.
And anyone who has EVER worked for a large, or even medium sized corporatioon knows this doesn't always have anything to do with
competence. I know you will disagree, but the corporate structure is closer to dictatorship and top down rule than the U.S. Goverment has ever been. It in no way even closely resembles a Democracy, nor even Representative Republic.
That was the point of this entire thread. Those people once had what they now seek.
What happened?
Rebellion against corporate tyranny.
That's what.
Do we have to do it again?
Dave