The Left Right Paradigm is Over: Its You vs. Corporations

For a long time, American politics has been defined by a Left/Right dynamic. It was Liberals versus Conservatives on a variety of issues. Pro-Life versus Pro-Choice, Tax Cuts vs. More Spending, Pro-War vs Peaceniks, Environmental Protections vs. Economic Growth, Pro-Union vs. Union-Free, Gay Marriage vs. Family Values, School Choice vs. Public Schools, Regulation vs. Free Markets.

The new dynamic, however, has moved past the old Left Right paradigm. We now live in an era defined by increasing Corporate influence and authority over the individual. These two “interest groups” – I can barely suppress snorting derisively over that phrase – have been on a headlong collision course for decades, which came to a head with the financial collapse and bailouts. Where there is massive concentrations of wealth and influence, there will be abuse of power. The Individual has been supplanted in the political process nearly entirely by corporate money, legislative influence, campaign contributions, even free speech rights.

• Many of the regulations that govern energy and banking sector were written by Corporations;

• The biggest influence on legislative votes is often Corporate Lobbying;

• Corporate ability to extend copyright far beyond what original protections amounts to a taking of public works for private corporate usage;

• PAC and campaign finance by Corporations has supplanted individual donations to elections;

• The individuals’ right to seek redress in court has been under attack for decades, limiting their options.

• DRM and content protection undercuts the individual’s ability to use purchased content as they see fit;

• Patent protections are continually weakened. Deep pocketed corporations can usurp inventions almost at will;

• The Supreme Court has ruled that Corporations have Free Speech rights equivalent to people; (So much for original intent!)

None of these are Democrat/Republican conflicts, but rather, are corporate vs. individual issues.

For those of you who are stuck in the old Left/Right debate, you are missing the bigger picture. Consider this about the Bailouts: It was a right-winger who bailed out all of the big banks, Fannie Mae, and AIG in the first place; then his left winger successor continued to pour more money into the fire pit.

What difference did the Left/Right dynamic make? Almost none whatsoever.

How about government spending? The past two presidents are regarded as representative of the Left Right paradigm – yet they each spent excessively, sponsored unfunded tax cuts, plowed money into military adventures and ran enormous deficits. Does Left Right really make a difference when it comes to deficits and fiscal responsibility? (Apparently not).

Click here to read the commentary.




This is probably just preaching to the choir for many ATS'ers, but it should be obvious that a canidates running platform is what matters and not their political affiliation. Look at Ron Paul, and Ralph Nader for example. Some of their views couldn't be further apart, yet they are united by their distrust of this corporate run Plutocracy.


Many Americans are beginning to wake up, but a lot of their outrage is misdirected by groups like the "Tea Party." This anger is being used by politicians for political gain while the real problem is being ignored.


How can we ever be free when we our born into a world of debt, dangling like marionette's at the hands of an invisible puppet master?

Right you are bro....

Unfortunately by the time the average Joe realizes whats going on ...... it will be too late. And they'll be wearing a custom collar with a bar code.


.... the future is grim indeed.

reply to post by v1rtu0s0


Yeah, its real bad now. When I went to a few stores for food the prices were just retardedly expense compared to a few weeks ago. The gas prices now is $3.79 for regular and it keeps going up. Revolutions are hard to come by now and we need them more then ever before since we need one desperately just to be able to put food on the table.

its the world vs itself

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

Actually a better classification is the people vs. corporate-government alliance. That is what we are facing, corporations would never have been able to grab so much power had the government not given it to them, which they undeniably did. During the 1920s Coolidge and Harding both worked very close with the business leaders yet those same business leaders never had as extensive power as they do today.

Yet at the same time today we like to slam businesses for failing to be truly American and support our nation and the workers. This sends us flying into the loving arms of government, which is in turn doing backroom deals with the very same corporations which send us into government arms. It is a perpetual cycle created by the ignorant voters when they thought voting for the New Deal Democrats of the 30s-60s would provide them with a higher standard of living by greatly expanding government authority which in turn linked the two powers into a power unification structure.

Today it is extremely difficult to distinguish where the corporations end and government begins. With the government policies they have virtually bulldozed all of the businesses which are not multinationals or the government work force. This creates a dual monopoly of power between the international bankers/businessmen and the government. Every time we attack a corporation we turn to government, every time we attack the government we turn to corporations, how come we have not realized that we should attack both and demand that both have their powers seriously curtailed?

Enough of our anti-business and anti-freedom regulations, taxation, bureaucracy, intrusions, monopoly, and the like which perpetually keeps us in shackles to the power elite in Washington and New York. Policies which could and should be enacted will not ever be enacted if we do not recognize that government and business today are basically one and the same, except for the businesses which are not global.

As someone who runs a rather large corporation, I quite disagree.

I think the problem is really corruption. That may be found in individuals and companies alike.

Moreover, it appears the newest threat is a general belief that the government should control or regulate everything-- companies and individuals alike...

The whole system smells like a Banana Republic.

I'll tell what we should do is put tariffs on any foreign made goods coming into the country. Let's do away with free trade. If we had to make things for ourselves,(it's something we're capable of doing, we used do do it), we'd be better off if we did. That would make a corporation think twice about shipping jobs overseas. And for the corporations that have shipped jobs overseas, if the tax climate here is so awful, move to where all your factories are, good riddance. If we started making things for ourselves though, I think that would be our best bet.

reply to post by alonzo730


I agree with you on everything you have stated except for one point. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the entire world, 35%, and some of the harshest regulations in the West. Tariffs on all imports should be implemented we fully agree on that but at the same time we cannot honestly expect businesses to open their doors wide open and invest more in this country when we have policies that are actively against the interests of business growth domestically.

Up to that point we agree, but when you suggest if they do not like a harsh political and economic climate which harms competition and innovation due to constant government interference, that is nonsensical and part of our current problems.

I like the graph, it is well thought out. Not perfect, but perfection may be impossible. Consider.
One sticking point is always going to be "what exactly constitutes government"?
Like, the military for instance. If the military is private as opposed to public, is it still a military? When do you call the armed forces of a country MERCENARIES?
I mean, they do the same things, with very minor differences, namely motivation. Are our armed forces military, or mercenary?
If the corporations write the laws, and control the "military", then THEY become GOVERNMENT as opposed to private/individual interests. (So, while many believe the Nazi's were on the side of LESS government, ie, the "right", as this graph illustrates, were they really?

A better graph would have individuals and private businesses (whether they be corporations or whatever PROVIDED that they operate in a free market under the rule of LAW) on one end. All alone, collectively, with a document that proclaims the LAWS that govern men and property that are FAIR AND JUST.
On the other, all of those that would enslave them, (think, corporations with absolute power), and all of those that empower those that would enslave them, including, those that don't mind being slaves...like, the MERCENARIES that enforce CORPORATE "laws".

The other big sticking point are Unions. Unions SEEM to be for the working man.
You cannot put unions on the side of individuals and private businesses. Unions are government, and they are not much different than corporate run government. The "free" market is thrown to the dogs. So, before you complain that the government is attacking unions, remember that governments are supposed to REGULATE, and protect the citizens WITHIN that country from economic abuse. If you feel the need to be unionized, government has let you down. You are just aligning with another government.

Principle knows only TWO sides. Right and wrong. Individual freedom within a lawful and equitable framework, or tyranny.




Pretty simple really.

reply to post by v1rtu0s0

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power. Benito Mussolini

Will the average American wake up in time?

A free America... means just this: individual freedom for all, rich or poor, or else this system of government we call democracy is only an expedient to enslave man to the machine and make him like it. Frank Lloyd Wright

Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws. Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Communism has never come to power in a country that was not disrupted by war or corruption, or both. John F. Kennedy

Domestic policy can only defeat us; foreign policy can kill us. John F. Kennedy

It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear. Douglas MacArthur

Government in the U.S. today is a senior partner in every business in the country. Norman Cousins

Fully agree with your post v1

Corporations are allowed to get away with things that would have ordinary folk locked up in jail for a long time, for a while now in the UK there has been a growing movement to expose the mass tax dodging that goes on by large corporations (all within the law of course) that means that one third of the UK's largest companies dont pay ANT tax at al in the uk

Or like in this case a company like Vodaphone can get 6billion wiped off of their tax bill

Originally posted by Misoir
Actually a better classification is the people vs. corporate-government alliance. That is what we are facing, corporations would never have been able to grab so much power had the government not given it to them, which they undeniably did. During the 1920s Coolidge and Harding both worked very close with the business leaders yet those same business leaders never had as extensive power as they do today.

I agree. The problem is that corporations legally have the same rights as a person, as you alluded to, making them super powerful people who basically run the country by controlling the government through their lobbyists influence.

Yet at the same time today we like to slam businesses for failing to be truly American and support our nation and the workers. This sends us flying into the loving arms of government, which is in turn doing backroom deals with the very same corporations which send us into government arms. It is a perpetual cycle created by the ignorant voters when they thought voting for the New Deal Democrats of the 30s-60s would provide them with a higher standard of living by greatly expanding government authority which in turn linked the two powers into a power unification structure.

Good point. The government, during the Clinton Era, passed NAFTA, which essentially sends jobs out of the country.

I think the New Deal if a great idea in theory, but lacking in practice.

Enough of our anti-business and anti-freedom regulations, taxation, bureaucracy, intrusions, monopoly, and the like which perpetually keeps us in shackles to the power elite in Washington and New York. Policies which could and should be enacted will not ever be enacted if we do not recognize that government and business today are basically one and the same, except for the businesses which are not global.

There is a fine line between free market and monopoly. It seems that the nature of the free market lends itself to becoming monopolistic. So the question is, how do we curtail this without limiting freedoms and looking at the government for assistance?

reply to post by v1rtu0s0


Starred and flagged Virt. Its them against us, not Rep vs Dem - all those SOBs are just interested in enslaving us. Thanks for shining some light on the truth.

I agree with the corruption angle, but I believe it all stems from the monopolistic aspect of corporations. A monopoly is essentially a free market dictatorship.


As Misoir suggested, it's not that we rely on the government, or corporate monopolies, we should reject both.

Originally posted by loam
As someone who runs a rather large corporation, I quite disagree.

I think the problem is really corruption. That may be found in individuals and companies alike.

Moreover, it appears the newest threat is a general belief that the government should control or regulate everything-- companies and individuals alike...

The whole system smells like a Banana Republic.

Good point. It's very subjective, and one could argue that there is a left and right for liberal and conservative, and the top and bottom would be elitist and populist.


reply to post by Stewie

Originally posted by davespanners
Corporations are allowed to get away with things that would have ordinary folk locked up in jail for a long time, for a while now in the UK there has been a growing movement to expose the mass tax dodging that goes on by large corporations (all within the law of course) that means that one third of the UK's largest companies dont pay ANT tax at al in the uk

Not really.

Many corporations pay a tremendous amount in taxes, as does self employed individuals and mom and pop operations. Look at Disney, for example, they pay an effective 40% tax rate. Add the other fees and it is higher.

Then look at GE, another huge corporation. They have an effective 3% tax rate. What is the difference? GE ships high quality jobs to China and is in bed with the Obama and the U.S. government. Disney has high quality jobs in Burbank (although the toy products are Chinese made as well.)

Its not corporations or business in general, its those that are in bed with the government.

When a select amount of corporations and the government collude, we get fascism. Fascism is especially devious because the more people cry about corporations in general, the more regulation and taxes get placed on corporations not in bed with the government. It is a fact that many insider corporation actually support increased regulations and taxes because they know they will be able to bypass them but their potential competition will be stuck in the swamp.

We not only need to get out of the left-right thing but also be more focused on those that are screwing us over while leaving the many other productive people alone.

reply to post by v1rtu0s0


From my study of economics and American political history corporations only became monopolistic when the government interfered on their behalf, creating legislation specifically to help corporations that they wanted to. The free-market inevitably keeps corporations and banks from reaching monopolistic levels. When we learn that regulations, which are said to help the consumer and defend the worker, are actually tools used by the government in collaboration with big business to control the economic and regulatory process to assist them in monopolizing power and wealth then we can finally wake up.

Every new regulation which people like to scream is "socialism!" is actually the government creating more laws to help big business. They dupe the lefties into thinking that they are "helping the consumer" when in fact each new regulation they pass is designed to harm the consumer and help the elite.

If we were to halt all government interference in business and banking tomorrow most people would think those corporations and banks would have a field day when in fact they would have a heart attack knowing their cash cow is gone, their safety net is obliterated, and their power has been ripped away. Regulation hurts medium and small banks/businesses but it greatly helps the large corporations gain even more power.

Why do you think from 1921-1929 when the government barely got involved in any regulation of business that there were hardly any monopolies and small businesses thrived unlike any time since? 1929 came and Hoover took over, he began to implement activist government policies such as regulations, interference in certain industries, and took a lead role in decreasing poverty, all of this culminated in the Stock Market Crash which he used once again to justify even more government regulations and intrusion.

The Great Depression did not occur because "government let businesses do whatever they wanted", government did let businesses do what they wanted up until Hoover became President and took an activist role. Businesses and the workers were wealthy and expanding until Hoover came in and ended their freedom, this led to the meltdown. The Liassez-faire approach did not lead to the crash, Hoover leaving the Liassez-faire approach for activism did.

Unfortunately these idiots (Hoover and Roosevelt) did not understand that it was exactly the interference of government which caused the Great Depression which they only made significantly worse and prolonged, especially Roosevelt.

I did not read any posts outside the OP. I don't know if this was addressed but....

Why the # is fascism put where it is?

reply to post by SpectreDC


That does seem a bit strange. Again, the chart is subjective, so I agree that facism doesn't nessasarily belong there.

I agree, that corporations being in bed with the government goes against the whole free-market ideal and is a substantial problem.

That said, I truly believe that, in many cases, the consumer has more power than they may realize.

Misoir and I had a similar discussion in another thread. The power of choosing where your dollars go has the potential for a huge impact on corporate policy. So, there is no real need for tariffs if the consumer understands that buying locally, and keeping the dollars in circulation within their communities is in everyone's interest.

Believe me, if everyone refused to buy imported goods, the corporations would make sure that the goods be produced locally.

The hard pill for most to swallow, is that, yes, you may be paying more for a locally produced product, but it must be understood that the extra money stays in the community, is recirculated, and has the potential of ending back in your pocket. The dollar that is shipped off to foreign countries has no chance of finding its way back.

Money is power, people just have to learn how to wield it!

the Billmeister