A quick, brilliant post

[superconnected]

Found this post on a site today:

"The problem is that corporations like Monsanto have too much money!! The corporate form of business is not beneficial to society. It allows for the accumulation of too much money without accountability. This money buys power and influence. Individuals can't have the same influence on our world (unless very united) as corporations.

There is no democracy with corporations.

Furthermore, I think it is time we citizens vote on the issues ourselves without having a 'representative' to deal with. This would eliminate corporate influence. The technology is there which would make this possible.

Because of corporations we don't have clean air, water or food. These should be a 'given.' The Senator from my state always votes for big business against the environment, etc. I would think if individuals could vote on issues themselves, the environment, etc. would stand a better chance of surviving."

-----------------------
I found the comment on an anti montesanto - Genetically Modified foods site.

http://www.mercola.com/2006/jan/4/how-monsanto-poisons-science-at-the-cost-of-your-health.htm

[superconnected]

1. bump

[malaise]

2. Kick n/t

[Reterr]

3. kr/eom

[mrcheerful]

4. Well I had one tree hugger tell me that if we all clean up our polluting ways

that would be a good example to corporations and they would do their fair share of cleaning up. Never mind the fact that under Reagan a law was passed that allowed a business to sell their unused pollution quotas to other businesses.

Edited to add, hugging trees is not a bad thing, unless you stop dealing with reality.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

5. Neither quick nor brilliant.

The great advantage of representative Democracy is that it means that the issues are being voted on by people who know at least a little about them, and have at least semi-coherent platforms.

Direct democracy would lead to tax cuts and spending rises, to wars being declared far more regularly, fought atrociously and then ended as soon as they started going sour, to further erosion of minority rights, to much lower standards of proof and evidence in courts, and - crucially - to much more power in the hands of the media.

Representative democracy is great, because it guarantees government for the people, and to some extent in accordance with a strategy dictated by them, while leaving the tactics in the hands of professionals.

The man in the street may or may not be capable of running the country, but the men in the street very definately aren't.

[superconnected]

6. What good is representitive democracy when they're bought.

[manic expression]

7. Representative democracy

in a capitalist society means that the government is effectively run by and for the rich. You think we actually make a difference when we vote or march? We don't. Without the free market, this influence would be compromised and people would have far more of a voice. Furthermore, the party structure dilutes and muffles the voice of the people, as you need backing from one of the two major parties to have a shot at getting any power. Therefore, the electoral process should not include any party participation. However, the biggest problem with representative democracy is that it ceases to be a representative once the rich and powerful make their views the only ones heard. Ignoring the fact that our governmental institutions are an outgrowth of the bourgeoisie and capitalism themselves, the bourgeoisie (and to a far lesser extent, the petty bourgeoisie) are the ones who really have any respresentation in a capitalist society.

On another note, direct democracy can and has worked. The Paris Commune (which used a system that combined the two ideas, with delegates who were instantly recallable by those they represented) is one good example, along with the Spanish collectives during the Civil War.

[Straight Shooter]

11. Dear Donald: I think bush in the White House blows your theory out of the water.

A dog in the street would do a better job of running the country than he has.

Representative democracy as an abstract principle sounds wonderful. In reality, it's turning into a partisan nightmare.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

13. One dog might, a pack wouldn't.

Bush is bad. A referendum on every issue would be even worse.

[Straight Shooter]

14. We agree to disagree, then?

:hi:

[pretzel4gore]

8. one good thing about bush

he, and his gopigs, have exposed some very basic flawss in how our society works, with no way forward (unless we go wanna over the cliff) but to entrust the 'opposition' despite the fact the 'opposition' re the democratic party has been forced to the far right, leaving a huge demographic unrepresented, voiceless. All through the culture, this liberal left constituent has been left w/out anything (except for indie music, movies, maybe AAR, Pacifica radio left etc)..bush and the greedy pig has made the msm and the official story and the sop and all the acceptred norms abnormal, so abnormal it looks perverted, and the dishonesty has finally struck a cord: if we drift with only the right having control, then we will go over the edge, and our planet might well die. It's almost tempting to say to the pigmedia 'hey, you're right, there aint no global warming, and let's defund government regarding society's needs until it isn't a factor..' etc
every old person in america who has ever supported a rightwing political party/agenda should be shot and pissed on....esp. the 'baby boomers'

[midnight]

9. This is Brilliant.

Let's use the Technology to have our voices represented.

[screembloodymurder]

10. I agree.

It's a simple solution.

[OneBlueSky]

12. as some of us have been saying for a long time, corporations are the root cause . . .

of virtually ALL the critical problems facing our nation and the planet -- the war, global warming, environmental destruction, the healthcare crisis, election fraud, etc. . . and NONE of these problems will be solved unless and until we reclaim citizen control over corporations and STRICTLY regulate their actions -- and their profits . . .

[TexasLawyer]

15. corporations are fine

they just can't be more powerful than the government and its people.

That is the essence of Mussolini-style fascism, and unfortunately that's about where we are in the United States.

[WHAT]

16. I like that...

people are looking for a way that enables them to discuss issues. Anymore, any discourse about issues is regulated to "Do you want a peanut butter and jelly or a peanut butter and banana sandwich?"...you know, the choices you give to kids so they think they have a say. Controlling the issues, I think, is a big part of the disenfranchisement. Then there is "spam of the day" which is another device for avoiding issues by presenting false ones.

I thought is was kinda cool the other day when Arendt's essay had to do with reorganizing political participation such that voter participation was centered on issues reflective of expertise...anymore, I am distrustful of "expertise" that is tied into a career path that is actually all about touting control...too mandarin, armoured with vested interest in maintaining place. But, the big thing was thought on reorganization to include discussion of issues.

Anyway, I think something needs be done to focus on issues...defining them, discussing them, proposing solutions. And I think people's instincts are right in proposing organizational changes as a means of grouping scattered focii. Limiting input might have led to the incompetence we see all around.

Good for You...whoever poses solutions to the problem.