Refreshing the Tree of Liberty With Patriots, Tyrants, and Multinationals

We've all heard the famous Thomas Jefferson quote written in a letter to William Stephens Smith but if Jefferson were alive today, would he have added multinational corporations to the list of those refreshing the tree of liberty given his distain for the lust for power by some men over other men? How are corporate tyrants or corporate "patriots" really any different than elected tyrants or those that believe what they are doing is their patriotic duty? If corporations have succeeded at anything in that last 100 years, it has been to weaken the power of the government by corrupting the system with lobbyists carrying suitcases full of cash and with their incestuous revolving doors between policy makers and business interests. I guess what I'm asking; is it time to refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of a couple of multinationals to preserve our freedoms? Since corporations are now considered people, are they not also just as capable of being tyrants or patriots?

The tree of liberty...(Quotation)​

From Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia

"I do not know whether it is to yourself or Mr. Adams I am to give my thanks for the copy of the new constitution. I beg leave through you to place them where due. It will be yet three weeks before I shall receive them from America. There are very good articles in it: and very bad. I do not know which preponderate. What we have lately read in the history of Holland, in the chapter on the Stadtholder, would have sufficed to set me against a Chief magistrate eligible for a long duration, if I had ever been disposed towards one: and what we have always read of the elections of Polish kings should have forever excluded the idea of one continuable for life. Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. I hope in god this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted."

- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787

 

18 views on a topic Republicans love to plaster all over their protest signs and toss around regularly as a sound bite in their anti-government tirades but none of them here can actually come up with anything intelligent to say on the subject when the thread involves more than one sentence? I mean guys? This is right up your alley. I wrote it specifically for you! LMAO!!!!

 

And the flipside...corporations have succeeded in lining the pockets of government officials with their suitcases full of cash and their incestuous revolving doors. Considering that Corporations could not and would not exist but for the grace of our government officials, are we really to believe the lip service those same officials pay to wanting to regulate their own creations which benefit them so much?

Personally, I have no issues with regulating Corporations. The same entity that created them should certainly be able to limit them. It is not like Corporations were born with inalienable rights. They weren't created by the Constitution as far as I can tell. They were created to limit the personal responsibility and personal accountability of their leaders in exchange for a return of money and profits. The small businesses owners up the street don't get that perk. They have to be both personally accountable and personally responsible for everything they do in their business. Corporations do not play on the same field so I have no problem with them being subject to whatever regulations are seen as fit in return for that privilege.

 

I don't think that that is the flipside at all; I think that is the same side. I said business forking over cash while you said government officials taking cash. That's pretty much the same thing no matter how you look at it. LOL! But I think we agree that the relationship is not doing the American people any good and that if a few of these giant multinationals and a couple of dozen government officials were sacrificed at the altar, the rest may fall in line out of fear. But who is willing to drive a stake through the heart of the beast? I can’t see a Democrat, an Independent, or certainly not a Republican doing it anytime soon.

Yet corporations are becoming so powerful, that they can dictate the terms these days, not our elected officials. Regulations are a joke when they can just have government agencies like the EPA de-funded or eliminated. The Constitution is irrelevant because it applies to the government not the corporations. I have to wonder about the limited liability of a corporation if they are considered people. Do you know how many convictions there were after the financial collapse? 1, exactly 1. If I ran a large financial firm, I'd risk those odds for the billions I could reap in profits. I guess that all I can say is Welcome to the United States of Corporate America. Long live the USCA! Rah rah!

 

Of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations. America.......America. God shed his grace for them. I love the republican hypocrisy.
Economic collapse? It's those damn liberals. If they'd just let us "real Americans" extract everything we can for ourselves, maybe, just maybe, we'd throw them a bone. Sadly...that's pretty much how the right wing thinks when it comes to wealthy and poverty. They think corporations, and other mega wealthy elites are the key to happiness for all. Trickle down. Yeah...it's trickling alright.
Face it. The wealthy are completely disconnected from reality. They think they should be catered to. They think they're "too big to fail". All of the economic damage that has occurred, and all you ever hear the right saying is that we have to cut spending (on the people that actually need it the most), while bailouts happen, and the same people that caused the near collapse, reward themselves with MORE. All the havoc they created, and they want MORE, and they get it too! Jail?? HA! That's only for poor people, not the elite! The system works just fine, FOR THEM. The even sadder part is that the wealthy people, that of course, don't call themselves wealthy, facilitate the mega wealthy by looking away, because they're too busy "taking their cut". Like I say, the system works just fine for the criminal elite. They're thriving and don't know what the fuss is all about, but they DO know "it's because of those damn liberals and those damn poor losers". Meanwhile, the air in the balloon continues to escape, and the criminals (like those on Wall street and heading corporations) get bonuses, and stock options, versus going to jail for their strip mining of society, and people on the right go right along with it all, taking, stripping, and blame it on everybody else, while the country dies. Inmate #425625768?? Nope! New CEO and President of marketing, with a bonus! All the while the right wing sings their praises, buried in Fox news propaganda while condemning their children to working at Walmart (after the spoiled brats piss away their inheritances first, of course). Jail and homelessness for the poor. Wealth and priveleges for crapitalist criminals.
Ahhh, but it'll be ok. The Tanman has everything under control! Sarah Palin can still see Russia from her house! The right wing can still say, no,no,no! It'll all be just fine I'm sure.

 

BO needs to put his buddy Jamie Diamond in check (Diamond runs Chase & is a big, big-time supporter of lib causes & BO). He's gotten so cozy with the BO admin & the state controlled media that very little has been reported about their recent hi-jinks.

 

I think you mean James Dimon. And I'm sure Chase is thrilled with all the new consumer protect credit card rules the Obama Administration instituted. Unlike Republicans that get into office and ask businesses which regulations do they want eliminated. Now that IS a cozy relationship. You really need to open your mouth and change feet.

 

I wasn't trying to disagree with you. My point about the flipside was just to point out that it isn't just the Corporations in the equation. A=B and I was just pointing out the B side. Just saying that Corporations are doing the corrupting is only one side of the story. The other side is the officials profiting from the corruption. Maybe 2 sides of the same coin would have been a better phrase.

 

It was word play....you know, a multi-millionaire named "Dimon", call him "Diamond". I've know the guy for over 10 years. He's a real piece of work.