Anarchists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-02-2011, 09:51 AM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2011 03:35 PM by Lilith Pride.)
RE: Anarchists
At the moment I am busy, and as I've stated about myself I rarely back up my claims. Here is their resources page which you can verify through, and when I have time I'll look for more validity myself. I found this document when I heard of the recent ruling and was astounded by how long it's been occuring. I will try to get readily viable information for you though unless you manage to link to it first. Glad I mentioned something people were interested in.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/index.html

Just to make sure this is clear, if you ask me to back up a claim I will work my hardest to. I just don't carry the info on hand normally.

UPDATE WITH A CLEAR CITATION
For the Santa Clara railroad case I was citing the verified information is that the judge made an arbitrary comment about the unnecessary need of discussion over the 14th ammendment as far as corporations since everyone is of the opinion corporations are included. Bottom of the page, this is a legal database of the supreme court
http://supreme.justia.com/us/118/394/

most everything regarding this is court cases, and a lot of them are also judges remarks that were on record. However, they are still precidents which companies quickly took to exploit and further. Let me know if you would like me to look up something specific on the topic.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2011, 04:11 PM
RE: Anarchists
Thanks , I'll look into this and ask you further if I need the data.

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2011, 10:11 AM
RE: Anarchists
(12-02-2011 05:33 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  Also, someone mentioned how the nation was being sold out 20 years ago? The nations founding ideals of a government not oppressed by rulers be they kings or corporations lasted about 110 years. Then, the Industrial Revolution along with newer citizens who had never lived with the tyranny of previous generations, began to retract the ideas of people holding the most power as individuals.
http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/corporat...ns_us.html

That was me who mentioned the sell out. And, the industrial revolution is not relevant to the point I was making. During the 1860s Lincoln pretty much made a deal with the devil in order to win the Civil War. The South had better generals and the Union was pretty much an invading army fighting not only the Confederate army but also a guerrilla war in the south and a propaganda war in the north. The Union's victory was far from assured. The north won the war for 2 reasons: 1)factories that could churn out weapons, armaments and clothing; and 2) railroads that could move all these goods to the front. But for those 2 things, the Union would absolutely have collapsed.

After the war industrialists were rewarded by a blind eye towards what they did as they transformed the country, in some ways good and in some ways very, very bad. But, by the end of the century it was enough. Workers started to organize and finally the government stepped in, broke up the trusts, passed laws on competition and against monopolies, and granted workers the express right to unionize. it took 40 years after the War ended but it did finally happen.

What I'm talking about is the basic marriage between business and government that really started under Reagan, took off under Clinton, and became a way of life under Bush. The rules have gone completely the other way now, where anything business wants is assumed to be good for all of us, when all evidence is to the contrary.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2011, 01:10 PM
RE: Anarchists
My statement was that it started well before, after the war there wasn't a renouncement on the idea that the 14th amendment became about businesses. The reason things got to where they were with Reagan is because a lot of the work had been laid throughout America's history. Corporations had been trying to get their way since the beginning of corporations, they didn't magically become integrated in society with Reagan. The arbitrary judgement in Santa Clara was mentioned in plenty of cases after reformations. And, plenty of other pro corporate rulings came before the Reagan administration. This all made the merger that much easier.

Sorry for not naming you BnW, but enough people don't realize how much has happened before the point they look at. Yes newer laws have been that much worse, but this is why the people didn't care that much.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2011, 03:34 PM
RE: Anarchists
Guys, please provide some historical records or references, I need to verify this.

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2011, 07:15 PM
RE: Anarchists
(13-02-2011 01:10 PM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  My statement was that it started well before, after the war there wasn't a renouncement on the idea that the 14th amendment became about businesses.

I don't understand your point here, but I really want to. Can you please elaborate. Also, are you talking about the Civil War still? If so, I need you to explain this and provide me an example or two of what you are referring to. It would help me a lot.

(13-02-2011 01:10 PM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  The reason things got to where they were with Reagan is because a lot of the work had been laid throughout America's history. Corporations had been trying to get their way since the beginning of corporations, they didn't magically become integrated in society with Reagan. The arbitrary judgement in Santa Clara was mentioned in plenty of cases after reformations. And, plenty of other pro corporate rulings came before the Reagan administration. This all made the merger that much easier.

I agree that the process started earlier. For example, part of our health care problems stem from a 1948 (I think) law that basically gave the health insurance industry a "temporary" exemption to anti-trust laws. However, from the end of WWII until the mid-1980s business took a much more stewardship approach to the world. The 1980s is when a real shift in attitude came about and things have gone seriously down hill since then. There was always some nefarious things that went on, but government and business were in much more of a courting phase then a marriage phase. That has changed dramatically in the past 30 years.

(13-02-2011 01:10 PM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  Sorry for not naming you BnW, but enough people don't realize how much has happened before the point they look at. Yes newer laws have been that much worse, but this is why the people didn't care that much.

I don't need credit, I was just stating why I was responding. And, I can't comment on what "enough people" realize or don't realize but I'm a pretty big student of history and think I've got enough of a working knowledge here to speak intelligently on the topic.

gaglamesh - what specifically are you looking for records or references on?

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2011, 11:53 PM
RE: Anarchists
Since Galgamesh is asking for more facts I'll make a statement after getting a good record going on it so that I can hopefully clear up what I'm saying but I'm talking more law than public practice. And, my statement is that this is the point where the 14th amendment began protecting businesses. I'll get references to later cases that use this case as part of their argument. I'm not a lawyer but I looked into corporate personhood after hearing about it because it's appauling to me, and I have to go back through to get references. I'm just talking about the legal side here more so than anything else.

And for the record if I say most people I am usually discussing people like myself, because I will be one of those who wasn't aware. BnW you are much more knowledgable in history than me so I hope I can help you see what I'm talking about, but I'll need some time to put references together for Gaglamesh. (Which will make sure everything I state is a bit more obvious)

If I were a more studious thinker I'd be a better speaker, but I'm lazy. Please forgive me.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-02-2011, 01:48 AM
RE: Anarchists
Quote:but I'll need some time to put references together for Gaglamesh. (Which will make sure everything I state is a bit more obvious)
-I don't get it , what did I do ? Tongue

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-02-2011, 06:22 AM
RE: Anarchists
(13-02-2011 11:53 PM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  Since Galgamesh is asking for more facts I'll make a statement after getting a good record going on it so that I can hopefully clear up what I'm saying but I'm talking more law than public practice. And, my statement is that this is the point where the 14th amendment began protecting businesses. I'll get references to later cases that use this case as part of their argument. I'm not a lawyer but I looked into corporate personhood after hearing about it because it's appauling to me, and I have to go back through to get references. I'm just talking about the legal side here more so than anything else.

I have no idea what this means, but I'm going to take some best guesses based on other things you've said.

First, prior to the Civil War the US was mostly an agrarian economy. There was obviously manufacturing but it had not yet hit full swing. The idea that there was over bearing corporate influence when there were limited number of corporations just doesn't make sense. During the Civil War Lincoln worked with the mills and railroads to help the war effort, and that sort of got the ball rolling with corporate interests dabbling in politics. Lincoln warned against the corrupting influence of corporations prior to his death and made the following comment in 1864:

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." .

I'm not sure what the 14th Amendment has to do with any of this and it certainly did not play a role prior to the Civil War as it was not enacted until 1868 and it has nothing to do with corporations. As for corporations as persons, that is mostly a legal fiction that exists so corporations can pay taxes, appear in court, manage service of process for law suits, etc. It is more of a convenience thing than anything and there is nothing really nefarious about it, or at least there wasn't until the Citizens United case last year that elevated corporations to almost equal status as citizens.

As for corrupting influences, while corporations have certainly had some influence over the years, it has been the past 20 - 30 years when the melding between the interests of a very few rich individuals and our government has really taken off. There is a difference between a government who lets business do what it wants to with minimal (but occasional very strong) interference and a government that actively participates in the looting of money from middle class tax payers. The latter is a much more recent phenomenon.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-02-2011, 07:10 AM (This post was last modified: 14-02-2011 07:41 AM by Lilith Pride.)
RE: Anarchists
Since I'm not yet going for more research this is the 1886 part

Court Reportings from SANTA CLARA COUNTY V. SOUTHERN PACIFIC R. CO., 118 U. S. 394 (1886)
"The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws applies to these corporations. We are all of opinion that it does. "
The case had to do with a railroad being built, and people not liking that fences were being erected. The issue with the case is that since the defending Southern Pacific R. CO was trying to protect their business through the 14th Amendment. The judge made this statement on record and it was kept on record for future cases to base this claim from.

Same court report SANTA CLARA COUNTY V. SOUTHERN PACIFIC R. CO., 118 U. S. 394 (1886)
"The defendant Corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
This is the portion of the 14th amendment which the railroad company used as a defense for their placing fences.

The railroad company won, because of the fences being part of the plan when building the railroad. The only remarkable thing in this case was the 14th amendment statement by the judge. This statement though was used for further claims to amendment rights for corporations. It was this case in 1886 which gave way to 14th amendment rights for corporations.

Citings from http://supreme.justia.com/us/118/394/ which is a supreme court website and has the full court report.

My claim of after 110 years the citizens being more lenient was due to the fact that previous cases were dealt with more agressively. At this point, rulings in favor of corporations began not being overturned. Courts always being a place for corporate interests in the fact that they have money whereas private citizens do not.

I was just expanding the idea of the 80's, because previous legal battles shaped this marriage to come.

I agree with you completely, that in 1887 corporations were not anywhere near as free as they are today. I was simply bringing up the fact that corporate footholds in the constitution have been being made for over 100 years. By the Reagan administration there were already various amendments which gave rights to corporations.

I'm sorry if it came off as me challenging your statement. Prior to hearing about corporate personhood I was someone who thought, these rights were given recently in full. I was just sharing for others who weren't aware that it's been going on for a long time. I am sure I was not the only person to be unaware of this fact prior to research.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: