Is Corporate America a Cabal?

[coberst]

Is Corporate America a Cabal?

Webster says ‘Cabal—artifices and intrigues of a group of persons secretly united to bring about an overturn or usurpation in public affairs—plot’.

Quickie from wiki:

“The banking cabal refers to a conspiracy theory regarding collusion between bankers, financiers, and other associated individuals of extreme wealth to manipulate the strings of commerce, politics, and media in order to serve their common interests. The primary source of their money and power is described as the use of fractional reserve banking and fiat money to surreptitiously steal wealth from the rest of society via inflation of the money supply and by levying interest on sovereign debt.”

I claim that many of the leaders of CA (Corporate America) have been involved as a cabal in America for at least two decades. This cabal has been and is presently plotting and accomplishing to create a public policy in America that best suites their self-interest. The present financial melt down has resulted from this plot and has resulted principally as a result of that segment of this cabal that control the American and worldwide financial aspects of the world economy.

When I set out to understand some particular matter I start with some model of what I think is the answer I am after. From this point I modify my papier-mâché like intellectual model until I reach some kind of understanding for the question I posed to myself in the beginning.

The question I started with many years ago was ‘How does my world operate’? My metaphor is bullfight. I would call this my world view but more appropriately it is my nation view because I only know my nation, the United States.

The Matador waving a red cape to manipulate a giant muscular bull is my understanding of how my world functions. The bull is the people; the Matador is the oligarchy that controls the people through various ideologies.

I recently watched the DVD copy of the movie “The Insider”. This depicts the story of Jeffrey Wiegand, former executive of Brown & Williamson Tobacco, who decided to make known to the world the facts of Big Tobacco.

The movie clearly demonstrates the power of the big corporations and the pain they can inflict on any person who attempts to reveal their secrets. Comparing the DVD movie to the TV show the “Sopranos” I decided that there is little difference between the two modes of operation except for the fact that the actions of the Sopranos are often illegal whereas the actions of the corporations are most often legal.

I think that both shows are valuable viewing for the public because both shows peel back the surface layer of reality to expose the layer that is not obvious to the common sense realism we perceive life to be.

In the last few days we have seen, read, and heard various members of the business media explaining how they personally and their particular operation are not responsible for the “sneak” attack by AIG upon or way of life. They use such excuses as not having subpoena power with which to ferret out secret information.

For decades the business media has been acting as cheerleaders for Corporate America instead of being the watchdogs that bark thus alerting the residents whenever something suspicious approaches our house.

It should have been evident to any Critical Thinking individual who is responsible enough to keep up with current events that the leaders of Corporate America had acquired great power with little accountability. The great power is discernable when we recognize that there were obviously few if any checks upon their behavior when we see that they were able to constantly increase their income to levels that are obscene by any reasonable measure.

The corporate CEOs were free to take what they will in monetary reward. They thereby made it plain to even the casual observer that they could do pretty much whatever suited their personal interests. If we place a normal individual into a position of great power uninhibited by oversight is it any wonder that these individuals will continue to push the envelope of self-interest?

CA (Corporate America) has developed a well-honed expertise in motivating the population to behave in a desired manner. Citizens as consumers are ample manifestation of that expertise. CA has accomplished this ability by careful study and implementation of the knowledge of the ways of human behavior. I suspect this same structure applies to most Western democracies.

A democratic form of government is one wherein the citizens have some voice in some policy decisions. The greater the voice of the citizens the better the democracy.

In America we have policy makers, decision makers, and citizens. The decision makers are our elected representatives and are, thus, under some control by the voting citizen. The policy makers are the leaders of CA; less than ten thousand individuals, according to those who study such matters. Policy makers exercise significant control of decision makers by controlling the financing of elections.

Policy makers customize and maintain the dominant ideology in order to control the political behavior of the citizens. This dominant ideology exercises the political control of the citizens in the same fashion as the consuming citizen is controlled by the same dominant ideology.

An enlightened citizen is the only means to gain more voice in more policy decisions. An enlightened citizen is much more than an informed citizen. Critical thinking is the only practical means to develop a more enlightened citizen. If, however, we wait until our CT trained grade-schoolers become adults I suspect all will be lost. This is why I think a massive effort must be made to convince today’s adults that they must train themselves in CT.



“Thomas R. Dye, Professor of Political Science at Florida State University, has published a series of books examining who and what institutions actually control and run America. to understand who is making the decisions that affect our lives, we also have to understand how societies structure themselves in general. Why the few always tend to share more power than the many and what this means in terms of both a society's evolution and our daily lives. they examined the other 11 institutions that exert just as powerful a shaping influence, although somewhat more subtle: The Industrial, Corporations, Utilities and Communications, Banking, Insurance Investment, Mass Media, Law, Education Foundation, Civic and Cultural Organizations, Government, and the Military.”

Newsletter Info

[gmc]

posted by coberst

It should have been evident to any Critical Thinking individual who is responsible enough to keep up with current events that the leaders of Corporate America had acquired great power with little accountability. The great power is discernable when we recognize that there were obviously few if any checks upon their behavior when we see that they were able to constantly increase their income to levels that are obscene by any reasonable measure.




To succeed you also need a culture where anyone criticising such a concentration of power gets demonised as being a dangerous radical.



The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. ”



— Franklin D. Roosevelt, "Message from the President of the United States Transmitting Recommendations Relative to the Strengthening and Enforcement of Anti-trust Laws"[9]


Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.


What's happened in recent times is not a big surprise. Many have predicted and warned against it-there were many who also warned against what would happen if financial institutions continued the way they were with no regulation of their activities. How did the liberal voices of dissent and freedom become so marginalised and discredited is one historians will be poring over a hundred years from now. I have my own theories but I am curious to see what you think.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1161664 wrote: posted by coberst



To succeed you also need a culture where anyone criticising such a concentration of power gets demonised as being a dangerous radical.





Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961



What's happened in recent times is not a big surprise. Many have predicted and warned against it-there were many who also warned against what would happen if financial institutions continued the way they were with no regulation of their activities. How did the liberal voices of dissent and freedom become so marginalised and discredited is one historians will be poring over a hundred years from now. I have my own theories but I am curious to see what you think. I have just heard on the news that HBS bosses are saying they were intimidated into not asking questions. Oh that'll be it then. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[gmc]

oscar;1161668 wrote: I have just heard on the news that HBS bosses are saying they were intimidated into not asking questions. Oh that'll be it then. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


Well if know you will lose your job and have trouble finding another with lousy references (realistically if you are a bank executive there are not many places to go and no on wants a trouble maker and a discreet phone call can scupper anyone's chances at interview) and you have your own mortgage and family to worry about a climate of fear can be very hard to fight against. That's why you are supposed to have outside regulators and company auditors-it's a recognition of the fact that self regulation is a bully's charter. Your mate gordon let the banks get away with it. The FSA have been too scared to take on the banks and have been turning a blind eye to their malfeasance and letting them the the way regulation was implemented with the bank being very much left unaccountable. We had regulators that didn't understand what they were supposed to be regulating and decided to just trust those they were supposed to monitor. Come to that what were the other directors doing while all this was going on?