583
584

The Destruction of America's Middle Class (2010) - Explores a new kind of fascism: The merger of corporations and government whereby corporate power dominates. (youtube.com)

Robingohn が 投稿

全 97 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]profoundWHALE 28ポイント29ポイント  (3子コメント)

Inverted Totalitarianism

[–]roryconrad005 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

nail on the head

[–]Vitriol761 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Some pretty astute observations by the guys who coined that term.

[–]are_you_nucking_futs 37ポイント38ポイント  (35子コメント)

Isn't corporatism a main element of "old" fascism ?

[–]beauty_dior 22ポイント23ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes. Redditors don't know what words mean ;)

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords 17ポイント18ポイント  (27子コメント)

But this isn't corporatism and what the documentary describes is in no way fascism. Fascism was as anti-capitalist as it was anti-communist.

Corporatism is an economic system where workers organize in corporations (which are not the same as big business, think more like cooperatives) in a similar fashion to syndicates. They regulate themselves and work together with business owners and the government to make the rules of the market. After WW2 many European countries adopted this system, like the nordic countries, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands etc. Economically corporatism and fascism as a consequence (since corporatism is the economic model of fascism) are just to the right of worker ownership of the means of production.

Nowadays those many European countries have actually drifted more to the right, with maybe the exception of Belgium, on this model. But even Belgium is more of a tripartite system. Corporatism is a great idea that still allows for the freedom of market of capitalism but with the worker rights and organization of very strong syndicalism.

Here, the wikipedia article is actually pretty good, it talks about it's history (it was first developed by the catholic church for exemple) and development and many of it's forms, some still in practice today.

This is something that I'm always bafled about, people know so little of something that they criticise so much when it's actually a very good and just model of economics. Much more than what we have today, much, much more.

[–]ComradeFrunze 5ポイント6ポイント  (5子コメント)

Fascism was anti-bourgeois, but it still supported actual capitalist means of production, they just hated the capitalist

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I mean, this is technically true. They would've argued that in the end it wasn't capitalist at all because the end all of the means of production wasn't capital, it was to increase the value of the entire nation. This is how fascism applied corporatism, a way to increase value to the entire nation. You can think of classical Italian fascism as authoritarian nationalist corporatism.

But the idea is that the means of production are divided between the state, the workers and the businesse owners. Each has it's role: the state to enforce and regulate, the workers to produce and the business owners to organize and move the value. Each still has a say (an equal say even) on how everything is going to work. This is a less extreme and more capitalist mode of corporatism, tripartism.

In true corporatism, there is less of a push and pull relationship and it's more about the betterment of the people over everything else, capitalists be damned. But more realistically, as capitalists had already so much power in Europe pre and post WW2, a tripartite system was much more feasible without any revolutions, which the West opposed thanks to the USSR and it's revolutions.

[–]TheoGr 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

they just hated the capitalist

You can't have a capitalist means of production without capitalists. Unless robots can own private property, that is. But I doubt robots existed back then.

Fascists were cool with the capitalists; it was a particular type of "finance" capitalist or "banker" that irked them. And that wasn't just a codeword for jews, though sometimes it was and still is.

[–]ComradeFrunze 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly. They just used "anti-bourgeois" rhetoric.

[–]dude_the_dirt_farmer [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

The main sticking point for that 'particular type' was the support of communism amongst it's community, there was a civil war in Germany post WW1 where communists tried to take over, who were led b, organized by, the ....... The Nazis hated communism more than anything.
why can't i even type it
.

[–]TheoGr [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The main sticking point for that 'particular type' was the support of communism amongst it's community

Could be. But I think that was like a secondary reason. Primarily it was because the jews were already a good target after centuries of religious and political propaganda. So the fact that some well-known jews supported it was just icing on the genocidal cake.

why can't i even type it

lol that was actually very funny. But it's OK we are pretty deep in the comment chain, you can get away by writing "jews" once or twice before the brigade appears.

[–]eqleriq [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

corporations are not made by the workers anymore. you're describing modern unions, not modern corporations.

corporations are basically pooled resources that empower collective bargaining. when the 1% have more money than any % of organized worker can ever collaborate to broker power, you see where all unchecked corporate roads lead to the breakdown of free market and collective bargaining.

unsure why you're baffled, look at how the most powerful lobbies work to undermine individuals in favor of corporation.

this is fascist. this is anti-capitalist. it is the last roll of the dice in a long game of monopoly where one person owns everything, the most basic example of how capitalism is just a slow motion fascism.

[–]wojna 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thank you. This whole thread is /r/badpolitics.

[–]Tcxb1 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Shut the fuck up

[–]cowyounow -2ポイント-1ポイント  (8子コメント)

I predict that you're going to be downvoted for breaking the circle-jerk. I'll check in later to see if I'm right.

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I probably will, I hope not, I hope people actually read what I wrote and the article. But this has happened before, sadly...

Makes me sad actually to see people completely dismiss such a good and robust model because of historical prejudices when so many of them complain about our current models and search for better ones... Here is a better one, it works, it has worked in the past. It's, imo, the best model we have ever come up with. But just because a couple of douchebags adopted it too some 60 years ago nobody even considers it.

[–]Icameheretosaythis2u 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

TIL: Hitler and Mussolini were 'a couple of douchebags', description fits, but I think you downplay the level of douchebagginess.

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Never said the weren't two massive bags of icredibly dirty and fucked up douches...

[–]peadith 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Keep in mind a sterile, stripped down dictionary definition of something rarely describes real world operation and condition.

[–]cowyounow -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

Doesn't change anything in this case, even when you look at it with that in mind.

[–]peadith 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

The implication of the encyclopedic (I'm being more generous here, you see) and limited scope discussion of what corporatism is and does, is that it doesn't need Heavy legal restrictions (technically separate, potent, and democratically legitimate government) to be safe for human consumption. That would be a false implication.

[–]cowyounow -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

That's an opinion.

[–]peadith [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

A mighty realistic one. Things like capitalism and corporatism are mere engines. Without a throttle they become unusable and will soon self destruct. As is mentioned elsewhere in this thread, it's been tried before.

I'd like to add that there are indeed special conditions after which idealist notions of these things become practical. For capitalism you need a highly informed public with enough money to work in and buy things according to conscience rather than price alone. For corporatism you'd need shareholders that are concerned about much more than profit margin. Until we indisputably have that, open loop or feedforward will not work. Current laws (in many places) allow for capitalism and corporatism, and let them be except when they try to do something stupid. Until the stupid stops happening all by itself, you need the legal restriction.

[–]TheoGr -2ポイント-1ポイント  (7子コメント)

This is something that I'm always bafled about, people know so little of something that they criticise so much when it's actually a very good and just model of economics.

I am sure it sounds great in theory, but then somebody applied it in reality. Yes, I know, they didn't apply it properly, they misunderstood what it really meant, they misinterpreted the original good ideas etc.

And I am just guessing here, but maybe this is why you are downvoted: People are tired of these excuses.

Edit: On a non-personal note (and please don't take the above as an ad-hominem) we know that an importan aspect of corporatism is for the classes to cooperate. The classes must collaborate for the betterment of the whole. This is a reactionary idea and usually seen in capitalist societies: Class warfare is bad! Or so they tell us.

Now, in capitalist societies we are also told that classes don't really exist, right? Allegedly, the communists are creating these artificial distinctions in order to instigate class warfare. But corporatism actually admits that they exist and argues that they should all know their place and get along. This is impressively honest but also amazingly cynical.

It's so fucking cynical that it never fails to impress me. I mean did they really seriously write that down? They weren't ashamed? So anyway this might be another reason why people here shit on corporatism.

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

No dude, you obviously didn't read my post. It was applied in reality and it worked! It worked wonderfully and it continues to work. The whole Nordic model and Belgium's economic model are based off corporatism and in many ways are corporatist still. After the war many if not most countries in Western Europe adopted corporatism and tripartism (which is an offshoot of corporatism but less leftist) and it helped their economy immensely. It worked and it still works!

[–]TheoGr -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

That's like saying communism worked because the Nordic model has been influenced by socialist values (and it has) and those countries have the whole social democracy thing going on.

So anyway /u/are_you_nucking_futs was right: Corporatism was very important in fascism. Some Nordics took a watered down, specific version of corporatism and further changed it to suit their societies. Of course it worked. The CPC also uses some kind of bastardized capitalism which also works. So what?

tl/dr; Too many logical leaps.

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

There are no logical leaps dude, corporatism is an economic model much older than fascism that was adopted by it for many reasons. But if you dismiss corporatism just because fascism used it you are missing out on a great idea for simple prejudice. The nordic model and the Belgium model, the German model etc. All started out as plain right corporatism. They changed and became what they are today because the goverments started to give more power to the businessess and capitalists and now these models are less leftist and more capitalist (with maybe the exception of Belgium). They are corporatist, but ideas change and mutate to adapt to the times. And in this case, to the worse imo.

In fascist Italy the corporations were called guilds and the government had full authority in the direction of production. Would that work today? No, because we the west do not accept authoritarianism anymore. But that doesn't mean that corporatism IS authoritarian or that it has do be organized by guilds. We are less artisanal, less industrial.

Seriously, read the article on wikipedia. Corporatism is a grand idea with many small and big different ideas within it. It can take many forms, most of which are good because of the main concept of corporatism. The nation is a body (corpus) and we all are part of it, all different but equally important. The head (state), the arms and legs (workers), the nerves and bloodvessels (the capitalists) etc. Seriously, read the article dude.

[–]TheoGr [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

But if you dismiss corporatism just because fascism used it you are missing out on a great idea for simple prejudice

I am accepting a very modified and watered down vague version of it. The same I would do with socialism.

The original idea, in itself, is kind of shitty. And yeah fucking excuse me for being prejudiced against fascism. How dare I? What a terrible person I must be, to hold such prejudice.

Ironically, you last paragraph explains why its a bad idea in a very eloquent way (but obviously unintentionally).

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Well, it's bad for you maybe, but I believe the collective good and betterment of society as a whole should be a people's and nation's main objective.

And I didn't mean prejudice of fascism, I meant prejudice of corporatism. I won't even try to discuss fascism as I know it's a very hard thing to do and I don't even agree with it so what's the point...

But what I'm trying to say is that if you say you support what you support, you support corporatism. There is no watered down vague version of it. There are different applications of it. If you support the Belgian economy, you support corporatism, if you support the Nordic model, you support corporatism. Corporatism is just an umbrella term for many different types of collective syndicalist economies that are united by the idea of organizing through the concept of the nation as a corpus.

[–]TheoGr [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Well, it's bad for you maybe, but I believe the collective good and betterment of society as a whole should be a people's and nation's main objective.

So you understand it's bad for me but you still believe it should be my main objective? Since, you know, I belong in a nation myself. Pretty weird mindset there man.

I can support your corporatism, if you insist on calling it that, only in the conditions of a Nordic country. I need their safety net and their democracy and their culture and their economy in the state it was before they started that shit. Then I support it.

I wouldn't support if for my country (Greece) under no conditions. I'd rather we go back to the Byzantine empire than try this corporatist ideology here, fuck.

[–]stillwtnforbmrecords [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh but I would never want to impose anything on anyone. To me the ideal scenario would be free immigration between all countries so anybody could live and enjoy any model and culture they want.

But now I'm curious, why are you so against corporatism?

[–]I_MELT_STEEL_BEAMS 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Corporatism is fascism as it's the merger of corporate power with the governing powers. At least that's Mussolini's take on it and he pretty much invented it.

[–]BurningChicken [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Mussolini is a type of pasta, you're thinking of Mostaccioli.

[–]explodinggrowing 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Now all we need is someone to come along and meld that corporatism with stout nationalism...

[–]jberd45 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Shhh....don't give them any ideas!

[–]QuestionSleep86 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

http://i.imgur.com/CsQXCSA.jpg

[–]reddit_is_gayest -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

No. That appears to be a deliberately created myth, even going so far as to make up quotes to that effect and attributing them to Mussolini.

[–]bremerdani 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

"In a democratic republic, wealth exercises its power indirectly, but all the more surely." From The Origin of Family, Private Property and State by Friedrich Engels

[–]AdjAdjNoun 8ポイント9ポイント  (4子コメント)

The merger of corporations and government is not a new kind of fascism. It's the definition of fascism. Corporate fascism is a redundant term.

[–]ATownStomp 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, that is not the definition of fascism.

What I've learned by searching for the definition of fascism: Fascism isn't used so much to describe political systems as it is tossed about as a pejorative.

[–]QuestionSleep86 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think the best way to understand it is to look at the root, the "fasci" political organizations that developed in Italy.

Literally "fasci" are bundles of sticks. Of course the symbolism is that the bundle is stronger than the one alone. You can see the symbol of the bundle of sticks both all over the USA and in the old Italian fascist imagery. It carries a similar sentiment to the "e pluribus unum" motto, meaning from many, one. Or the famous Ben Franklin cartoon "Join or Die".

The reason there is such a stigma to fascism is that the natural extension of bundling up, so to speak, is that you use the power it gives you to grow your bundle, abusing both individuals and weaker bundles. The inevitable conclusion is conflict as the imbalance between wealth and power inside the bundle, and outside the bundle creates an effect like osmosis, which can only be overcome with force. In other words the poorer the people outside, the more force the people inside must use to keep them out.

George Washington describes the effect very well:

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”

Though "faction" and "fasci" seem close, they are unrelated words, but in this context they both mean groups. The idea of a "fasci" always splits the world into two groups, those inside, and those outside, so the outcome of fascism is inevitably the despotism that Washington describes.

I hope that answer helps. I think that without a doubt people need the power that comes from working together to conquer some of the things we face in our life, but it is a terrible power that we have to respect and use wisely. Like the power to split the atom, it should only be used to help, never to destroy, never at the expense of others, but only for their benefit.

[–]HoneyYouMeanHunkules 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly. Fascism was dependent on corporations, but were against capitalism, because capitalism is a free market of competition while fascists wanted unchecked, powerful corporations built upon state subsidies, with dirty deals doing both ways.

[–]reddit_is_gayest 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not even remotely close. Go read what Mussolini wrote. He is the one who made up fascism, what he says it is is what it is. And it is nothing remotely like globalist multi-national corporations controlling the government via lobbying.

[–]inspective 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

That's not a new kind of fascism. That is exactly what was going on in Nazi Germany and Italy...

[–]ezralv [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So what industries controlled the Nazis and Fascists?

[–]ShallowPedantic [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Either we stop calling everything fascism or we actually look to what is going on here. This stuff is just as embarrassing as McCarythist conservatives screaming about communism.

Do you consider yourself a proponent of Keynesianism ? Do you think government stimulus should be used to boost the economy in a capitalist system ? Do you think that economic downturns should be dealt with by increased spending instead of austerity ? Do you think the government should have a role in directing indsturial output, managing exports and imports, directing loans to specific sectors of the economy ?

Congratulations, if you take this absurdly open ended definition of what fascism constitutes, all of these things make you a fascist !

Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics. There is scarcely anything to object to in it and there is much to applaud. ~~Benito Mussolini, quoted by James Stachey Barnes in his Universal Aspects of Fascism

Perhaps things aren't actually so simple. Perhaps supporting Keynesian economics makes you about as fascist as supporting basic labor laws makes you a communist.

Instead of alarmist bullshit designed to scare people into being easily manipulated maybe we should make documentaries that actually teach people useful information, and how to use that information.

[–]Potato-Argus [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

This is not a "new" form of fascism. That is the definition of fascism.

[–]themikeswitch [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

yeah... exactly. Not sure why more people don't get this.

[–]The3rdWorld 5ポイント6ポイント  (5子コメント)

I've seen so many almost identical videos, it's not that I don't mostly agree but these videos are bad. The buzz-words ring out like machine gun fire over the Somme, I almost feel we're at that midwar point and I'm getting tired of the propaganda - you don't need to tell me the blighters shooting at me are bastards, we need to be talking about how to win.

To defeat the corrupt money system is actually very easy, it really is, we the working people simply need to establish other means of sharing the benefits of our labour - the most prominent of these at the moment is open source and creative commons, by working together to create things we want to exist the whole human experience can be pushed forward and with everything that's made free and open it's one less economic shackle that binds people and ideas under the rule of money....

[–]RedditIsMetal 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

we the working people simply need to establish other means of sharing the benefits of our labour

We need to do more than just reform. We have to take back what the private tyrannies have stolen. There is just to much accumulated wealth, confiscated land, and hoarded resources to build an alternative system without conquering the old. Besides, it would also be wasteful, and a lot of work to duplicate everything. Hard work we have already done.

[–]The3rdWorld 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

the problem is the old system is built entirely on obsolete technology and long outdated ideologies - mostly those based on morality quite literally from the bronze age, certainly from before this current digital age and woefully inadequate to deal with it's complexities.

Of course we don't need to rebuild everything, we the people can use our inherent power of occupation to simply do whatever the fuck we want - like the hank williams song says 'they can't starve us out and they can't make us run...' we need to adopt modern understandings like those of Gandhi's satyagraha, this is an 'insistence of truth' strategy in which the people collectively defy the government and dare them to show their true colours - once the old lie 'we're the good guys' is broken their ability to justify their actions and hide behind public support is ruined...

This is why they're so scared of things like home solar-power and distributed-networking, when people don't have to pay utility bills they're one step removed from that corporate control, they can't be bullied and threatened with blackouts and price-hikes but also it changes the game from being economic to resource management, they're similar but actually very different, solar-power is like a river that runs into your home and so using that power efficiently becomes it's own sub-game as it were, previously it was all just balance-sheet balancing - go to work earn enough numbers to divide into the bills with a remainder used on entertainment and distraction...

So what happens when you start to think about power-use rather than money-use? We get a whole new range of possibilities that aren't really available before, for a start spare-use-processes become a possibility, the most simple is of course hydrogen electrolysis - two rods in some water, a fireproof balloon, and whenever there is electrical energy not being used or stored is diverted through the rods and the the hydrogen stored for vehicle or heating fuel. This the most simple, battery-level triggered events like automated cleaning tools or yardwork devices are only a small step up though.

So this is one example but the real shake-up is that literally everything is being totally altered by automation, i own a fairly basic CNC machine which i created from open-source designs the next open-source CNC machine i own will be much better and likely much cheaper simply because I'll be able to use my current CNC machine to make many of the parts required for the next one - as the founder of the reprap project famously described once a 3d printer can print 3d printers it'll be an absolute global game-changer, especially if the process can start from things like recycled HDPE and PLA with the later also being made from waste bio-matter like hedge trimmings and etc...

It could very soon get to the point where any person can set up a fully established and featured home, studio and small industrial workshop with less effort than it currently is to make a little log cabin in the woods... This is a reality, it really is, those construction-centre trucks in Command and Conquer will become a reality, they almost are already - the us military 3d prints and fabricates metal tank parts in hastily constructed mobile bases. It will reach the point where you only need to know one person or one charity that will loan you or donate to you a construction robot to build your first-foothold then everything will be able to unfold from there -- this is a reality that could very easily be realised within thirty to fifty years.

Vertical farms in automated basements, plant rubbish robotically discarded in biomass vats that quietly produce PLA to add to the storehouse... It will be possible for everyone to generate everything they need for not just a modern but by todays standards a level of luxury absolutely unheard of - and the resources for this really are plentiful, for a start huge amounts of infrastructure are or are soon to be obsolete including literally megatons of road related metal and minerals, then there are the huge waste pits and trash covered areas of the world which could easily be mined and worked by automata... once everyone has reached a level of resources where by further storage becomes silly and demand is so low there's no market for selling it then people will simply pool resources to work on large scale projects like Mars bases, asteroid mining probes and blue-skies science wonderment....

It could be an absolutely amazing future if we all work for it, or we could just continue to bicker and fight and waste our time hoping someone cool is going to save the day like in the movies...

[–]ATownStomp 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Who did they steal it from? You?

[–]G3RTY 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Check out opensource ecology

[–]totalrockhound 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The merger of government and corporations is just as dangerous as the merger of church and state. The "fascism" however, stems from government control within the context of a so-called free society. Fascism is creeping into both Canadian and American society disguised as socialism. The only thing that can prevent this is to have a Constitution that clearly defines and limits the power of government, both making it accountable and bound by legalities as to what it can and can not do within the context of a free society.

[–]NEVERDOUBTED 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It has nothing to do with an intentional destruction of the middle class.

It has everything to do with a new economy that has risen that the middle class cannot afford to participate in. Corporation don't define things, they simple go after what makes money, and in today's economy, the upper middle class to the rich is where the money is.

The low to middle-middle class is simply being left behind because corporations, and...basically governments, don't care about it. It's like a new type or level of poor. I mean, look at the crap that went down in Ferguson last year. Nothing changed!!!

I mean, you can't live in San Francisco or NYC anymore for less than $3,000 a month. You can't purchase a decent car 5-seater car for less than....$30,000 to $60,000. Average homes prices in most decent hoods are well north of $400,000. Just about anything in SoCal that is cool and safe is close to a million.

So..the person that makes $40k to $60k a year...is losing out on markets to participate in. They just don't exist like they used to.

So yes, there is a becoming a greater and greater division fueled by market dynamics. The U.S. is no longer multiple tiers of income brackets, it's becoming just two. Those two are - 1. you can't afford it, and, 2. You can afford it.

And I know...you want to down vote me. I'm not trying to be mean or judgmental, I'm just trying to help people understand what's happening...and maybe it will help some people prepare for it. We are entering a stage that I call, "the uber economy'. Everything is scaling upwards. It's happeing in China too, big time...and their poor are going to be left behind of it.

[–]EpistemeG 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

As soon as I saw Ron Paul, I figured this was libertarian bullshit and went on with my day.

[–]droplob [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

sounds like they hired the guy who voiced all the corporate training videos at my work

[–]wisefoolery 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is a foolish documentary. There never has been a fair and free nation state. The Spanish, English and the French stole the lands of other's when they inhabited the land and those people may have stolen it from others that we are not aware of now because the history was lost long ago. Simply, one people's steal their properity from other people. It has always been that way and will always be that way because there is no other way. No answers were given in this film because there are none. Might makes right, then, now and always. The U. S. needs to stay in power as long as possible, build the empire, there simply is no other way. Sad, but get over the pie in the sky claims people make that have no basis in a actual solution.

[–]Vitriol761 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank you. I'm not sure why this isn't voted up more.

[–]ThaRealMe 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/4j08gb/the_destruction_of_americas_middle_class_2010/d32oq9l

[–]ReignOfPlague5 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oligarchy.

[–]jhall0162 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

yeah yeah yeah we all know, but who can do a damn thing to stop it

[–]Spawnacus [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

America's going to be like the movie 'Fortress'.

[–]IsItMeyoure_looking4 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

/r/FULLCOMMUNISM

[–]Otolia -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

This has been posted here less than a week ago. And since it's clearly a libertarian propaganda piece, I'm very curious as to OP's motives.

[–]DrMaxCoytus -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Crony Capitalism at its best. But this is flipped - it's government, not corporations that are the issue. As long as government makes laws enforced with guns, I'll be more wary of them thank you very much. More government is not the answer, it's less (as in, not giving rents to lobbyists for huge companies). If government didn't have the power to give these favors out, they wouldn't happen. People want to change human nature and it's sad.

Edit: the middle class is shrinking but more people are moving to higher quintiles than lower

[–]G3RTY 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Everyone is prone to corruption.

[–]harmonigga -4ポイント-3ポイント  (9子コメント)

It's crony capitalism, not fascism. Chill out libertards.

[–]ComradeFrunze 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I am not a liberal, I am a communist.

[–]JonnyLay 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Can you explain the differing line?

[–]arik124 -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

Gov't control the corporations in facism. Corportations control Gov't in crony captilasm.

[–]JonnyLay 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

Isn't government control of corporations socialism?

[–]Hoodiner 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

No. Socialism is when workers seize the means of production, it's not government doing stuff.

[–]harmonigga -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

To an extent, yes.

[–]reddit_is_gayest -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, fascism was very heavily influenced by socialism.

[–]ehartke -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh! If only there was a billionaire to save us.