Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Internet freedoms restrained - SOPA/PIPA/OPEN/ACTA/CETA/PrECISE-related updates
IainB:
I'm just amazed, of all the sources of oppression, it's ... music and motion pictures? Really?! Not to commend an evil job well done, but really?! Of all the moneyed sources out there, it's those two that have managed to totally lock all of politics?!
-TaoPhoenix (October 30, 2012, 07:54 AM)
--- End quote ---
As @Renegade says:
...It's not just the entertainment industry...
--- End quote ---
Probably the most likely - and certainly the simplest - explanation is provided by the GCS "Good Corporate Psychopath" model. (Sorry, "GCS" being used phonetically.)
Go back to basics: the GCSes are those legal persons created by Western legal systems and which are effectively more powerful and in possession of apparently greater lobbying and voting rights than the consumers - the latter being the legal persons called "voters" (QED).
The GCSes that succeed do so because they focus remorselessly on their primary objective of max. return to shareholders - continued survival with max. profitable revenues - above all else. They hang on to that objective like grim death, hacking down all opposition in their paths. Nothing else matters. This is what they must do, according to the laws governing their incorporation (QED).
Thus, if a corporation that has as one of its mottoes "Do no evil", then it is, by definition, an anomaly and an aberration, and the motto will necessarily - nay must - become just another cliché without substance, regardless of how high-sounding, humane or philanthropic it might have been when first announced. It will revert to meaningless corporate BS where it arguably rightly belonged in the first place.
So, though it is disappointing, there are no surprises really when we read that Google Ties the Knot with Warner Music Group
Of course they would - must - do something like this.
And yes, it is "...music and motion pictures..." - really! It is arguably obvious that it has to be so, as they are part of the **AA, a syndicate of GCSes with a strong common interest, combining their resources to succeed in their role as GCSes.
We can be assured that they are not doing this out of a sense of bonhomie, camaraderie, mutual philanthropy or loving-kindness. The GCS model is perfect and intact. This is all as it should be. "We" made it that way. If they need to be dishonest with each other or stab each other in the back with callous disregard to make max. profits, then they will do so and without compunction - they're psychopathic, remember?
So, when you read about something like this: “Six Strikes” Evidence Re-reviewed to Fix RIAA Lobbying Controversy
..."A lack of transparency is also at the origin of the current controversy as TorrentFreak learned that other than the RIAA, none of the CCI partners were aware of the link between Stroz Friedberg and the RIAA. It’s not unthinkable that CCI would have picked another company to start with if the RIAA had disclosed this relationship."...
--- End quote ---
- you might be able to fall about laughing (as I did) because of the apparent naivety of the journalist. Why would the RIAA not wish to keep mum about the relationship for goodness' sake? It would surely be obvious to all but the most obtuse that to have their plant on the inside would mean that the odds would be stacked more highly in their favour.
The GCS model is here seen working perfectly, again.
TaoPhoenix:
Oh I'm sure there are lots of evil geniuses out there. I guarantee Monsanto has a few!
But of the industries that are leading directly to measures which "conveniently" overstep the stated mandate, it's Entertainment that keeps showing up, along with the War On Terror and Protect the Kiddies finishing the triumvirate. Gene patents are icky, but they don't seem to immediately lead to "we must examine blood samples daily to be sure you are not eating illegal corn."
IainB:
But of the industries that are leading directly to measures which "conveniently" overstep the stated mandate, it's Entertainment that keeps showing up, along with the War On Terror and Protect the Kiddies finishing the triumvirate. Gene patents are icky, but they don't seem to immediately lead to "we must examine blood samples daily to be sure you are not eating illegal corn."
-TaoPhoenix (October 31, 2012, 05:20 PM)
--- End quote ---
Yes, but the explanation for that could be that there is a natural real/potential alliance over common ground between:
* (a) The profit objectives of commercial interests (GCSes), and
* (b) the expansion of State-control objectives of that much bigger "GSO" (Good Psychopathic Organisation), the State.- thus, wherever such a natural real/potential alliance exists, you will probably see collaboration between, for example:
* the State GSOs - e.g., EPA, Homeland Security, TSA, Judiciary, Police - and
* other GSOs - e.g., PPA, GreenPeace, WWF, UN, WHO, IPCC - and
* commercial GCSes - e.g., Big Oil; Big Tobacco; Big Media; Big Pharmacy; Big Food; Big Research (Monsanto and others); Big Internet/Marketing (Google).
These will necessarily/probably only be alliances of convenience, and you can bet that the collaboration will be obscured/hidden as best as possible (e.g., the UN's and IPCC's "impenetrably transparent" processes) and oiled by borderline or arguably corrupt/unethical practices, and typically motivated by revenue expectations in one form or another - e.g., carbon trading (a tax); royalty payments (another kind of tax); research funding (sharing of tax revenues); market share protection (a revenue guarantee); administration funding (sharing of tax revenues).
If you want to spot this happening, just apply Cadbury's "Ethical rule of thumb":
"The rule of thumb is that, if a business process can not stand the hard light of scrutiny, then there is probably something unethical about it". - Sir Adrian Cadbury (Chairman of the then Quaker family-owned Cadbury's) in his prize-winning article on Business Ethics for Harvard Business Review circa 1984.
--- End quote ---
This helps to explain why organisations put so much effort into delaying/rejecting FOI (Freedom Of Information) requests, with some GSOs even spending hundreds of thousands of what was originally taxpayers' money in stalling/defence tactics in the Courts. Avoidance/fear of discovery.
Putting your "own people" in as plants/political appointments and using a "revolving door" for appointments is all part of the game - stack the odds in your favour.
As an illustration, see Fed.Govt.+MPAA here, and coincidentally I read the other day that the UK's Labour party apparently have "placeholders" (Labour plants) on the Boards of almost all of the major charitable institutions in the UK. Now why would they do that? :tellme:
"Becase we care about charitable work."
--- End quote ---
Yeah, right.
Renegade:
Oh I'm sure there are lots of evil geniuses out there. I guarantee Monsanto has a few!
But of the industries that are leading directly to measures which "conveniently" overstep the stated mandate, it's Entertainment that keeps showing up, along with the War On Terror and Protect the Kiddies finishing the triumvirate. Gene patents are icky, but they don't seem to immediately lead to "we must examine blood samples daily to be sure you are not eating illegal corn."
-TaoPhoenix (October 31, 2012, 05:20 PM)
--- End quote ---
I think the media reports on the MAFIAA are simply much more accessible to people, and easier to understand. Consequently, they receive a lot more attention.
For other places where the evil geniuses overstep the bounds of law and morality, things often get pretty murky pretty quickly. The problem is that what they are doing is much more difficult to understand, and it then receives much less media attention.
For example, take Monsanto's BT corn. It's a biological weapon. It is not food. But they pass it off as food.
BT corn is engineered as a hybrid with the BT bacteria (from which it gets its name). The BT bacteria creates a toxin that ruptures the stomachs of insects, which kills the insect. This is now in "corn", and insects that eat that corn, die. But the corn doesn't stop producing the toxin, and when you eat it, it still creates that toxin. The really scary part is that the "corn" can infect the natural flora in your stomach, causing them to adopt that same trait, and to start producing the BT toxin. Now, the natural flora in your body produces the same toxin that ruptures the stomachs of insects and kills them. Nice.
There are lots of studies on this showing how GMOs are toxic. There is also a massive effort on the part of Monsatan to discredit any and all research on GMOs that doesn't say exactly what they want.
So, you're left with the situation where you are being sold chronic bio-toxins that self-replicate inside your body, and you have governments that fully support you being poisoned, and even trying to deny you the right to know which "foods" contain the toxins. (Check out "prop 37" in California.)
I'll leave out the obvious connections for how poisoning people is profitable. (You don't make money from people that are healthy.) And leave out the connection for how a sick population is less likely to be involved in public life, e.g. politics. etc. etc. etc.
The difference between the evil geniuses in the MAFIAA and Monsatan are really only a matter of *how* they are evil. They approach things very differently, but the net effect is the same: Your destruction.
TaoPhoenix:
More copyright fun:
http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-pirate-ordered-to-pay-1-5-million-damages-for-sharing-10-movies-121101/
BitTorrent Pirate Ordered to Pay $1.5 Million Damages For Sharing 10 (porn!) Movies
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version