For those here who hate capitalism - what do you tell the millions of corporate liberals?

[banned from Kos]

If you have not noticed corporate liberals outnumber corporate conservatives by a fairly wide margin. Remember - Obama raised $700 million privately in 2008 where McCain failed completely.

We own most of Silicon Valley (Apple, Google), new media (Facebook, Netflix, LinkedIn, Amazon). Buffett and Gates are liberals.

We own biotech due to our pro-science pro-ESCR stance.

We own Green Tech - we own old media (Disney, Viacom/CBS, NBC/Comcast - yes CEO Brian Roberts is a Democrat).

Democrats are Big Tent - and everyone above wants the struggling middle class to succeed.

[leftstreet]

1. You say 'we,' so does that mean you're a 'corporate liberal?'

[Blue_Tires]

5. +1

[banned from Kos]

42. Yes, I am/was - very proud to vote for liberals since my first errant vote

(Reagan in 84) but since then I have abandoned the GOP entirely.

I am pro-choice, pro gay marriage, pro-carbon limits, pro EPA, pro ACLU, pro markets, pro stem cell research, pro secularism.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

2. I am a Democrat, but I'm well aware that unless controlled, corporations become the enemy. nt

[banned from Kos]

3. Yes - but Teddy Roosevelt knew that 100 years ago - but teabaggers

do not.

Regulation is 100% necessary.

[banned from Kos]

9. edit - wrong place for comment n/t

[notadmblnd]

12. The thing is- is that they take so much for granted.

They just assume big corporations are going to provide them safe food, safe products or medicine. They quickly forget the animals that died from poisoned pet food from China. Or the tainted baby formula or the defective drywall that rendered homes unlivable. They forget that the safety features on the vehicles we drive or the appliances we use, aren't there because the manufacturer was looking out for us. NO, they had to be required to make them safe. It doesn't seem to occur to them that cheap trinkets they buy for their kids at walmart have been painted with poisonous materials. They forget that those REGULATIONS protect them from greedy corporations whose only concern is profit.:shrug:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

20. Absolutely! nt

[HereSince1628]

4. Are Corporate Liberals People, too??????????????????

Jess Von Derun

[Zoeisright]

6. Who the hell said anything about hating capitalism?

Capitalism is fine, as long as it's regulated. Sounds like a right wing talking point to me.

[mmonk]

7. Neoliberals.

[gratuitous]

8. Hey, don't get in the way of a perfectly good straw man argument

Geez, what is the obsession with facts? You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true, and demagoguery has no use for them.

[Javaman]

10. It was a pretty amazing strawman wasn't it?

I think the op just enjoys flinging poop.

[dkf]

11. You should do a poll on that.

I'd be curious to see the results.

[banned from Kos]

13. you missed the "those here" part - which is undeniable

there is a fucking protest in NY City against capitalism! Michael Moore attacks capitalism!


Capitalism is poorly regulated at times - no doubt. But much to the chagrin of many it is the standard in 98% of the world today.


Face it and regulate it.

[sabrina 1]

38. Wrong, but no surprise there. The 'fucking protest in NYC' is

NOT against 'Capitalism'. It is against Corporate Money in Politics and unregulated Capitalism of the kind that collapsed the world's economy. I am amazed it has taken the people so long to do what the protesters in NYC are doing. And now, spreading around the country thankfully.

[laundry_queen]

58. Michael Moore does not attack capitalism

He attacks capitalism AS IT IS TODAY. Go watch his interview on Pierce Morgan, he explained it last night.

[FarLeftFist]

14. What can we say, we're just smarter than conservatives.

[Arctic Dave]

15. We "own" them?

What is your definition of "own"?

[banned from Kos]

18. Good question - we own the dialog at the Board level

of these companies. Climate change by humans is a given at a Google BOD meeting for instance. Google is backing all kinds of Green Energy projects as well as ESRC and genome projects.

[leftstreet]

19. lol Paging Dr Freud

'at the board level'

:rofl:

[Arctic Dave]

51. I think you misstate what is going on at a corporate board meeting.

Do you have any documents detailing corporate policy and projections for any of this?

It sounds like you are giving credit were no credit is due. I think they are still more concerned about profits, it's just happens that doing "green" things might benefit them.

[The Straight Story]

16. People don't hate capitalism, we hate it when some people have rules and others don't

If I did something that caused the death of my neighbors I can go to jail, if I am company I might get fined a small fraction of what I earned on my actions that caused that death.

If I screw up my finances and lose my house, car, etc I am seen as dumb and lazy, if I am the head of a company that does such I get lots of money and taxpayer bailout.

Etc.

[white_wolf]

17. Well I do hate capitalism and as to some of your examples. I have a few things to say.

Apple can go to hell, since it uses slave labor in China to build its products, the news media that liberals own is pretty much useless. Hell, look at how much time they give the teabaggers. If I recall correctly, Amazon was recently involved in a labor dispute. Yeah, these corporate liberals are really friends of the working class... :sarcasm:

[banned from Kos]

21. good points! May I add?

look at Nike and their sweatshops in Asia! Look at the Euro designers and their sweatshop Cut and Sew operations in the Dominican Republic! Look at the lack of environmental safeguards in China and how Solar mfgs abuse run-off poison in any community!


I agree! That is corporate pathology!

[Taverner]

22. What do I tell them? You guys have suceeded DESPITE Capitalism, not because of it.

[Chan790]

23. Who is this "we"?

My position is the same as its' been for years...to expel them. You can't be corporatist and a Democrat. End of story. You can vote with us...but you can't be a member of the party.

Obviously, I believe in not-entirely-open membership.

[alfredo]

24. There are capitalist and predatory capitalist.

[blindpig]

25. Capitalists are capitalists.

Liberal and conservative are just flavors of capitalist political theory.

Capitalism is the enemy of the working class.

End of story.

[Cal Carpenter]

46. History has shown that it can't be 'regulated' or 'fair

Math shows that it is neither sustainable or rational.

Why people - working class people - cling to it and defend it against their own interests never ceases to amaze me.

[lunatica]

26. Do corporate liberals have a problem with regulated Capitalism?

If yes, then they're only liberal in name.

[OHdem10]

27. Capitalism is only a tool. It can be used for good or for evil.

Capitalism is an economic system and so far the best IF USED
PROPERLY. Unfettered Capitalism is the danger. Capitalism
can work if regulated to benefit all the people and not
just a few chosen ones. From about 1945 to 1970s it worked
beautifully in this country and the MIDDLE CLASS was born.

In the 80s they reset the rules favoring the rich, elites
and Corporations. Therefore the Rich Elites and Corporations
are making out like bandits. Yes, we are losing our Middle
Class. Free Market Principles of Conservative Economic Fundamentalism.

In the period 45 to 70, the Bosses made 20 times the floor
worker. Now Bosses can make 400 to 500 times the flowr
worker.

Capitalism can work and FDR put all the rules in place.
Reagan and GOP changed, repealed the rules and put
in Free MKT Principles.

No one ever discusses this.

[Scuba]

28. I'm pro capitalism, with appropriate regulations. n/t

[MadHound]

29. What is your definition of a "corporate liberal"?

Is that a person, or a paper entity?

[banned from Kos]

31. good question - a liberal who likes his job and is not hostile to corporate

profit when providing a humanistic service.

It would be hard to find such in a meat packer or oil contractor, for instance.

[leftstreet]

34. When profit is used to meet human needs, it's not Capitalism

Jaysus! Doesn't anybody understand the meaning of Capitalism?

[themadstork]

47. A good point.

I think for many capitalism is synonymous with something like "trade" or "markets."

[leftstreet]

49. Exactly

It's frustrating

[MadHound]

39. So much for the meat packing union members then, eh?

To answer your original question, the fact of the matter is that over the past thirty odd years, corporations in this country have been deregulated beyond belief. Democratic or Republican leaning, they have reaped the benefits of this deregulation, and we the people have paid the price. We are suffering the negative effects of that ongoing deregulation. In fact, as we watch corporate crony capitalism spin out of control in various areas ranging from financing to hi tech, we are watching capitalism itself crumbling under the weight of its own excess.

For the good of our society, our country, and yes, even for the long term good of capitalism, we have got to reregulate large swathes of our corporate and economic landscape in order to restore order and balance. If we don't, then capitalism will continue to run out of control and drive this country into the ground, taking us all with it. That isn't a Democratic or Republican thing, that is a survival thing.

As far as your contention that there are "Democratic" corporations, just because they donate money to Democratic candidates, don't bank on that. Most corporations and lobbying interests generally donate to both Republican and Democratic candidates, that way they have an indebted candidate in the office, no matter which party wins.

[Cal Carpenter]

30. People who 'hate'** capitalism

aren't liberals, they are leftists. There is a big difference.

**It's less about emotional reactions but more about critical analysis of material conditions for a leftist. See 'differences between liberal and leftist' for more detail. LOL.

[banned from Kos]

32. +1000 - a vital distinction

thank you.

[sabrina 1]

33. Same thing we tell all Corporate entities, 'keep Corporate Money out

of politics'.

[Deep13]

35. I think you are overstating the case.

Amazon, Apple, Disney at the very least are extreme RW, anti-union companies.

[Angry Dragon]

36. There is fair capitalism and greed capitalism

I wonder which capitalism has taken over this country

[Cal Carpenter]

44. No there's not.

Capitalism by its nature encourages greed and results in massive inequality. Ain't nothing fair about it. Any effective regulation or slow-down of this of this is inevitably short term. If you are moving at a cliff at 100 mph or 90 mph, you're still gonna fall off of it.

[Deep13]

37. I don't tell them anything.

I'll leave that to the collaborators.

[sad sally]

40. If the corporate liberals you include as being the majority of

America's capitalists, and good Democrats, why is there still such a growing disparity between decent wages and benefits for workers (including all those millions in jobs these Big Tenters have shipped to other countries) and the CEO's and other top executives - especially if they're so concerned about the struggling middle class' success? How concerned are they about the tens of millions below the middle class?

As for how much money President Obama has raised - including from these capitalists - it's a sad commentary on American politics that money, money, money is what buys a political office. It's who raises the most money.

There's another capitalist's viewpoint on that - Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, who said in a recent interview that instead of giving campaign contributions to politicians, his fellow CEOs should use the money to create more jobs.

Schultz: In my view, why unemployment has stayed over nine percent is linked directly to Washington, DC. When I examined the cost of what the election cycle was in 2008, which was more than $4 billion, and it's estimated to be in 2012, which is $5.5 billion is gonna be spent on congressional re-election and the presidential election. Just think about that - $5.5 billion when we have 9 percent unemployment in America. And people don't know where their next meal is coming from. The system is completely broken.

[TheKentuckian]

41. That your over-focus on an exceptional 20 or 30 years period in a system hundreds

of years old, in conditions that cannot reasonably be expected to be repeated, excesses held in check by global scale ideological competition, powered by plentiful resources, damage hidden by the veil of time because consequences are not always immediate and expecting it to be repeated and maintained is a willful disregard for reality and a faith based existence.

"We" don't own shit. The companies you paint as "ours" don't do shit for us nor operate for our needs and best interests but rather for profit.

You are blinded from the rule by the glimmer of exception without any semblance of a real plan to put the lightening into a bottle again AND this time on a global scale.

[On the Road]

43. I Think It's Due to a Profound Ignorance About How the World Operates

and what options there are.

A lot of avowed socialists trying to avoid being painted as anti-business say that they support mom and pop businesses, but not large corporations. Well, there is no such thing as a mom and pop airplane factory or steel mill. The alternative is government ownership, and the track record of government-owned businesses is well known.

Corporations are the best employers by a good margin. Anyone working for a small business is going to be much better off working for a large corporation.

The reason a lot of smart executives are liberals is because they see the whole economic picture. The economy cannot grow if the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Corporations cannot sell their products and grow unless their customers make enough to afford their products.

This does not excuse a lot of destructive policies pursued by corporate groups or individuals like the Koch brothers. It is human nature that groups of people will seek their short-term interests. But the scare stories and demonizations do not represent at all what goes on day to day in the world that actually produces things and keeps the world operating.

OK, I expect to be pilloried for this. I don't think of myself as "pro-corporate," but the anti-corporate sentiment here is sometimes just overwhelming.

[themadstork]

45. Government ownership is not the only alternative.

[On the Road]

53. OK, Fair Enough

There are various forms for large organizations -- eg, nonprofit enterprises or companies where the employees control a majority of stock. A lot of those could be expanded, and the country might be better off.

On the other hand, there isn't a real track record of having large institutions like those except at the fringes of an industry. Credit unions are an example. I like credit unions and belong to one. But there is no country that I know of in which credit unions form most of the financial sector, which has a lot of functions other than consumer checking accounts. I'm not sure how well it would adapt to that model or how you would go from one to the other.

A lot of the knee-jerk corporate stuff is frustrating because it's broad-brush and appears to be against the whole concept of corporations and private enterprise. This actually stands in the way of a lot of needed reforms. You have to have a basic level of comfort with the framework in order to be in a position to influence any of those reforms.

It drives a lot of people towards the Republican party and ultimately defending things that they themselves probably don't even support because it's all under the guise of preventing socialism or saving the free market.

In any way form of organization, a certain type of people gravitate to the top. Where industry is run by the government, you have Soviet apparatchiks. Where the military is in control, they gravitate toward those functions. Even in the third sector, the top level of large organizations like universities and the United Way have adopted some of the same characteristics and inflated salaries as the private sector. Changing from one form to the other is useless without understanding economic history, psychology, and the behavior of groups. The answers are there, but most of them are not obvious.

There are times where it's better for the whole structure to be torn down and rebuilt. This is not one those times. There is a whole spectrum of opinion in this country, and it could be best directed by trying to improve and transform. Despite whatever outrages Goldman Sachs or Richard Mellon Scaife might have committed, there are a lot of business people who have their heads screwed on right. Robert Townsend of "Up the Organization" was one them. There are a lot of others who need some a forum and some leadership to do things within the current system.

[themadstork]

61. Thank you

That was a really nice post! Gave me more to think about.

A system where employees control a majority of the stock is my preference, right now. I very recently started trying to learn as much as I can about economic history, so I don't really know yet how viable this is, and I'm not really familar with any possible historical examples. But generally it seems like a model where capital is held in a directly collective way (rather than some sort of appointed vanguard) would be most appealing.

Sounds like I need to learn more about how credit unions function.

[On the Road]

62. And Thank You for Your Reply

I just cringe posting some of those sentiments here, expecting a tirade from someone. I'm a long-term (though not lifelong) Democrat, but I have degrees in psychology and business and have a salaried position for a large telecom company. I try to use it as a vantage point for seeing the whole spectrum of things.

While the founding fathers made some mistakes, one thing they got right was the need for checks and balances. But over time, people with ambition learn how to take advantage of the rules of organizations. For example, boards of directors are supposed to control the executives and make sure they operate in the best interests of the corporation, but this control has become more and more theoretical. Management packs the board with its own friends, and they all approve grossly inflated compensation packages for top management. This is worse, but it's not new. It's compounded by the increase of money in elections, so that large businesses have more influence on government than they used to.

I don't know what the whole solution is, but it's *not* either either opposing corporations on principal or just blowing everything up.

Industry is the work horse that provides the power for the family farm. You can't kill the horse or sicken it without starving everyone. At the same time, the farm does not exist to serve the needs of the horse. That's what's happening now.

90% of what Marx wrote was correct, but he was completely blind to the realities of politics and governance. A revolution seemed to be some sort of event horizon for him which he couldn't see beyond. So when someone actually succeeded in toppling a government, they were left with no road map and a complete power vacuum. One of the first Lenin did was to sacrifice the people who were most passionate and ideological, and selfless.

So that's why I think that the details are important -- continuity, balance, and understanding group psychology. If there is no blueprint for governing large organizations, overthrowing them is going to create the same dangers as other revolutions. And if non-corporate entities start replacing corporations, a lot of thought has to be given to how they are organized, or they will inevitably follow in the paths of for-profit corporations.

And if you don't mind, since you mentioned reading up on things, the first thing on my own list would be "Up the Organization," written by a CEO of liberal sensibilities who actually walked the walk. It's really a series of half-page blurbs on all kinds of different management issues. A lot of it's about how large organizations become destructive or perverse, and how to make them functional again.

http://bit.ly/nO8rYN

[DCBob]

48. Not sure all those corps would be classified as "liberal" but your point is well taken.

I work for a large corporation in international development with a focus public health. We are a for-profit public company which means we need to make money to keep the doors open and keep shareholders happy. I guess that's called capitalism however, most of our employees would probably call themselves liberals and/or progressives.

[begin_within]

50. I would tell them, "Get out while you still have a soul."

[KoKo]

52. These days...since Reagan...if you had or have a soul you are culled early or in Middle Management.

if you aren't or weren't a "Team Player" Code Word for...meaning you didn't look for ways to cook the books, look for the other easy ways (borderline crooked) that would promote your career, spend time shmoozing the boss and toadying to the the CEO,CFO and COO and in general flacking for the United Fund or the personal fave Charity of the Boss.

Yes...there are Corporate Democrats ...but the ones who rise to the top...didn't talk that way (in most cases of the big ones you'd know) until they made it up there and they were very careful how they got there..

[LWolf]

54. You mean the neo-liberals?

I tell them I think they are greedy, unprincipled shits who need to evolve.

[dameocrat67]

55. stop outsourcing, pay your fair share of taxes and stop

trying to privatize public education then we will have no problem. Only when you do these things will I take your claim of caring about the middle class seriously.

[Lucian]

56. There is no way Amazon is liberal.

Not with their horrendous working conditions.

I refuse to believe it.

[lonestarnot]

60. And Disney? Snort!

:rofl:

[chillspike]

57. Work & Production with any other distribution method

is still Work & Production. So what difference if your resources get shared with others as long as you have enough to sustain your own basic needs and comfort? In truth, any extra resources that you don't need aren't really yours anyway. There are other people on this earth besides you.

[uncle ray]

59. how many defense contractors are liberal?

oil companies?