Are Some Multinational Corporations Benevolent?

[T Smith]

Posted by SKAWF (here)
when a brand or a business rises above a certain level of... stature,
it is bought up or taken over by the big boys.

i even extend that to other area's too.
such as unions, charities or large groups which are there to represent the people.

This is absolutely correct, in my estimation. There may be an element of benevolence in corporations, but at some point, per the natural laws of corporate evolution, this element will be gobbled up. There are even some benevolent (I use the word loosely, grant it) small commercial banks who operate honorably within their mission statements to service the financial needs of their communities. The founders of the bank may be in it for profit (and put aside the more philosophical consideration of whether the practice of banking and charging interest is ethical) they aren't evil, per se. However, these small banks cannot compete with the the big banks (and multinational corporations) who truly are above the law, and who profit by outright fraudulent activity and by receiving welfare subsidies from the taxpayers. The smaller banks who by comparison appear upstanding and benevolent, eventually fail, get bought out, or merge with the bigger criminal corporations that control the system itself.

One could argue Whole Foods was once a benevolent corporation before the inevitable degradation that accompanies corporate growth. Now? Not so much. And Whole Foods isn't even among the 1400 biggest corporations SKAWF is taking about.

[SKAWF]

Posted by DevilPigeon (here)

Your first paragraph reminded me of a couple of "ethical" companies bought out by some large players - 'Green and Blacks', manufacturers of organic chocolate (bought out by Cadburys) & 'Innocent', makers of 100% fruit smoothies (bought out by Coca Cola)...

I think both purchasing companies claimed not to interfere in the ongoing running of the respective purchased company, whether this is the case or not I don't know... But it makes you wonder.

The insidious thing to me is that unless you investigate or look for any fine print, you'd never know these formerly small [ethical] companies were now part of a global parent brand.

whenever i go shopping now, i always read the ingredients list, and check to see who the parent company is.

for example.... i'm fairly sure that Walls used to make cart d'or ice cream,
i was in waitrose the other day, looking at some...
its now owned by unilever!

[Carmody]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)

Corporations have a corporate "charter", a specific set of rules that they must adhere to to remain legal as a corporation. This is not something I have studied extensively, but my understanding is that some psychiatrist or psychologist examined the rules of corporate charters and found them to be literally in-line with a diagnosis of sociopathy. "Take no prisoners" kind of mentality. I also understand (loosely) that the corporate charter specifies that the pathway toward the highest returns for investors/shareholders MUST be maintained. Corporations thus may not, by law, make decisions that are beneficial to the Earth or to their workforce or to humanity - if it affects shareholder returns negatively. When I heard about this, it was in reference to a new type of corporate charter, "B corporations", "B" for beneficial, and it is written into their charter (so shareholders know in advance) that profit is not the only motive, that they will pursue both profits and be beneficial. Maybe it is altruistic BS, maybe a ruse for tax advantages or to hide more from shareholders - or maybe it really is a much more sane way to legally declare a corporation.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Y888wVY5hzw

[Carmody]

Posted by SKAWF (here)

Posted by DevilPigeon (here)

Your first paragraph reminded me of a couple of "ethical" companies bought out by some large players - 'Green and Blacks', manufacturers of organic chocolate (bought out by Cadburys) & 'Innocent', makers of 100% fruit smoothies (bought out by Coca Cola)...

I think both purchasing companies claimed not to interfere in the ongoing running of the respective purchased company, whether this is the case or not I don't know... But it makes you wonder.

The insidious thing to me is that unless you investigate or look for any fine print, you'd never know these formerly small [ethical] companies were now part of a global parent brand.

whenever i go shopping now, i always read the ingredients list, and check to see who the parent company is.

for example.... i'm fairly sure that Walls used to make cart d'or ice cream,
i was in waitrose the other day, looking at some...
its now owned by unilever!

Tom's of maine, toothpaste, no flouride. Bought by Colgate-Palmolive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%27s_of_Maine

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by T Smith (here)
My own personal understanding is that what we see at play is a multi-dimensional phenomenon.

That's for sure .

I view it as self-organizing layers. There are the physical layers from atoms to galaxies. There are the biological levels from cells to the bodies of plants and animals to their ecosystems. There are the organizational levels from tribes to large corporations to the grand earthly civilizations, and likely galactic civilizations. There are the technology levels from stone hammers to silicon chips and inter-stellar UFO's. There are conceptual levels, from simple yes or no, to full language, math, science and the grand mystical schools of thought, and likely beyond.

It's not just "us" individuals, it's not just within us (and all else a hologram), it's not just this or just that.

All the layers build on those below, and influence those below. In turn the entities formed at one layer become the "atoms" for higher layers. The entire set of layers is itself constantly evolving and adapting, with some layers more persistent or distinctly defined than others. Given my math background, I prefer thinking of this set of layers as a dynamically changing partially ordered set, where each element is one of these self-organizing layers. The blood circulation system of warm blooded mammals is just one such element, one self organizing layer, amongst a vast number of such.

Corporations are not just tools, nor just assemblages of individual people. They take on a life of their own. The corporation is to the tribe, as the internal combustion engine is to the horse.

The question of whether a city worker adding fluoride to the drinking water is "good" or "bad" is a bit more subtle. The worker is both (1) doing their job, which is admirable if the job is being done well, and (2) responsible for some reasonable effort to notice when their "job" has turned harmful. Most of us, most of the time, are to a considerable extent "doing our job", and our ability to cut through all the disinformation and act in the "ideal way", on all levels (if even such way exists) is limited. A city worker who overlooked numerous readily apparent signs that their job was much more harmful than good would be quite negligent. But this is not a black and white matter.

We get in to conceptual trouble when we try to explain effects apparent in one layer (for example, physical body reactions to something we read here) without a clearly developed model of what the other related layers are. I don't find "5D entities" to be such a clear model . It's not just spirits, aliens, psychopaths and humans. The entities of many of the higher layers are not manifest in a direct one to one relation with some "physical" entity in a lower layer. I doubt that that which "reincarnates", if such there be (I simply don't know) is limited to embodiment in a linear sequence of human bodies.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Carmody (here)
Tom's of maine, toothpaste, no flouride. Bought by Colgate-Palmolive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%27s_of_Maine

No flouride, true.

But it does have other ingredients, such as glycerin and sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), that I'd rather not have in my toothpaste. Take a look at earthpaste .

[Dennis Leahy]

(re: post # 25)
Hot damn, Paul has gone mystical on us!

:~)

(I'm not making fun; I'm celebrating!)

Dennis

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
Hot damn, Paul has gone mystical on us!

Well ... yeah ... partially ordered sets are pretty mysterious

[Tangri]

Posted by Carmody (here)

Posted by SKAWF (here)

Posted by DevilPigeon (here)

.

Tom's of maine, toothpaste, no flouride. Bought by Colgate-Palmolive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%27s_of_Maine

Halagel Tampa florida
No Flouride

http://www.sbi.gos.pk/pdf/ihc2011/6-...20Champion.pdf

[Carmody]

As for corporations..well.. you can't create the perfect field of play for sociopathic low empathy behavior and expect that those types won't show up. In short order, only the most nightmarish will be found at the top of those structures. Like the biggest bully and killer in town, eventually running any gangs. no real difference.

That the west was foolish enough to formalize it and accept it, is the issue. which was just a license to take it even further.

People, especially the low empathy types, are bored easily and due to the self centered behavior, they desire to always turn the screws tighter and to turn the temperature up. That their latest screwing of the world has to be better and higher than their last.

Not long after, you end up with a fascist state, then the totalitarian state and the ensuing bloodbath. You end up with the equivalent of Pol-Pot or Caligula.

Like water pouring down a drain (crap flows down hill), corporations view and see democracy and republicanism as a thing that is to be infiltrated and taken over from the inside, or at the very least, to work with in a way that allows the corporation into a window of control or controlled consumerism. Which is slavery -enforced behavior and conditions. Infiltrating democracy is EASY and profitable beyond belief. the nature of politics and politicians makes it so. Brothers of a type, they are -corporate types and politicians. They get to hide, these corporations, when they collude with governments...to be unseen....and own it all. Best of all worlds. But..they each want..MORE, so it gets worse. And worse. And worse.

Ultimately it is a system of seeking and finding power, always hungering for more.

Which is why capitalism, unhindered, turns to fascism, which turns to totalitarianism, which leads to bloodbaths and Caligula types and situations. Caligula was a person who had people, live.. skewered on pikes, as dinner entertainment. Regularly. That corporations turning into fascism (fascism: governments colluding with corporations, secretly, against the will and against the benefit of the public), tends to look identical to communism (observing from the outside), which is why you see the canard or communism being flown in the face of the citizens of the us, when it is really --creeping fascism. It is not communism at all. It is fascism that you face. Obama is not a communist, he's a fascist. The knife is the same going in, though. Power people (sociopaths) collude with the government, to take over. The end.

democracy and republicanism is for those who pay attention and work to make sure that corporations and the people who are in them, do NOT take over the country.

You hit them until they are down... and you continue to hit them.

Rust never sleeps, their minds operate this way, 24/7. they will never stop seeking methods of infiltration, control, and power...until their genotype no longer exists among us. It really is that simple.

To say the opposite that Orwell said in 1984: "Freedom is a boot stomping on the face of a sociopath. Forever."

Leave no holes in your defense, your thoughts, your motions, actions and your stance. Always.

Rampant capitalism, infiltrating democratic systems, and slipping into fascism... is the LAST warning you have before it goes down into a bloodbath. This is where you stand today, in the USA and parts of the western world. And that flag is waving pretty damn hard, the warning signs are about as huge as they ever could get, right now.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Carmody (here)
... the LAST warning ...

That was an important post.

[DevilPigeon]

Posted by SKAWF (here)

Posted by DevilPigeon (here)

Your first paragraph reminded me of a couple of "ethical" companies bought out by some large players - 'Green and Blacks', manufacturers of organic chocolate (bought out by Cadburys) & 'Innocent', makers of 100% fruit smoothies (bought out by Coca Cola)...

I think both purchasing companies claimed not to interfere in the ongoing running of the respective purchased company, whether this is the case or not I don't know... But it makes you wonder.

The insidious thing to me is that unless you investigate or look for any fine print, you'd never know these formerly small [ethical] companies were now part of a global parent brand.

whenever i go shopping now, i always read the ingredients list, and check to see who the parent company is.

for example.... i'm fairly sure that Walls used to make cart d'or ice cream,
i was in waitrose the other day, looking at some...
its now owned by unilever!

Unilever are BIG players now it seems, got their grubby chemical hands on pretty much everything. It always brings a wry smile to my face when (for example) seeing an advert on tv for what any rational person would assume to be a high-quality/respected brand food item, only at the end to see the "unilever" brand logo flip down (as it does) in the top-right corner of the screen.

They're not unique, there are other "chemical" companies that are parents of brands/products that you wouldn't logically associate with... Johnson & Johnson have their grubby fingers in a lot of pies, Proctor & Gamble likewise, these are the obvious ones.

I find it odd that a company that produces cook-in sauces also makes the stuff that I clean my toilets with!

There can be no other conclusion than greed and power. Pure, unadulterated. I've no real problem with any company that specialises in a product/sector, but when diversification to totally unrelated product groups happens, then that's my only conclusion.

[Hervé]

Well, since Paul's gone over the bend here...

There is something very misunderstood about corporations or companies, manufacturing plants, communities, leagues, associations, lodges, clubs, groups, cliques, etc... and that is that they are founded by a number of individuals agreeing on a common dream, vision, purpose, goal, etc...

And that's where the crux of the matter resides: it's being given life, first in the dream/astral/mental world, then being made to land in the 3D/physical reality as a birth/inauguration ceremony.

In other word: it's become ALIVE!

Now, switching to the Aboriginal point of view of a Steve Richards:

EVERYTHING IS ALIVE!

... through an example he gave in his interview with Randy Maugans:

Steve: Okay, okay. One of the interesting things I look at here is you’ve got to understand how homeopathy works and osteopathic frequencies work. And, you know equal force against equal forces become null and void. Interesting. So, I look at this, Aboriginal culture says, ‘everything is alive.’ So, I had a woman that comes into me from Chile. Doesn’t speak good English. Her daughter said, “my mum can’t sleep, she’s on two lots of sleeping tablets and can’t sleep.” I said, ‘well that makes sense, she’s got two separate entities in there, they both need to keep her awake before she feeds them.’ Everything’s alive.

So what happens is for these drugs to be created they’ve got to have an intent behind their creation. The first is the law of intent and [, the second,] the law of agreement. So what is the intent in the creation of that drug and what’s its intent? It now becomes a life-form that needs to survive like anything else. Therefore, an anti-depressant means it has to keep you depressed so you’ll feed it. And when you feed it, it will make you no longer depressed. It got it’s food source, thank you very much. Another life-form taking over the vehicle. Stunned.

Everything’s alive. And that’s where we go back to the drugs. When these drugs are created there’s an intent in the creation of those drugs, and they’re alive. They need to survive like everything else. Because, they are... they are atoms with memory stored in them. But what I’ve found is when you hit something where there’s equal force, [it] crumbles: null and void.

Quite often on the table, I’ll say to people, whoa, whoa, stop. Get out of that, that’s your head-space. Whoa, hang on, that’s your soul, I acknowledge that, get out of the soul, be in the Spirit. And, other times, lots of life-forms come out and they try to justify why they should exist. The drugs are really good. They often state that they’re spiritually aware, it’s a life form trying to justify its existence in the being.

That's the mystery... these corporations are LIVE entities!

Being live entities they cannot help but conjure whatever it takes to stay alive and survive as growing LIVE ENTITIES. Outsourcing to wit

And that's the difference between "us" and TPTB: they know what they are doing... we don't.

They know what they are doing because they know what a thought form is and start their lodges with an eggregore/thought form. They know that, that thought form/eggregore/tulpa/golem has a life/mind of its own and they know what it's gona do to survive and stay alive as well as what to do to direct/steer it.

So... Rockefeller's big pharma... imagine the fractalian repetition of staying alive from the scale of the corporation and its board of directors down to the pill one takes...

Reeling yet?

Then it gets compounded when the size of corporations allows for the inevitable rise of psychopaths into their upper hierarchy as described in that "Twilight of the Psychopath" paper...

Accordingly, if "we" want to win, "we" better know what we are fighting against!

The guys who founded the "US of A" knew what they were doing in that respect: they dreamt of a very big entity/eggregore and fed it as much as they could for generations to come.

That entity they dreamt of and gave life to is the real WHITE HAT!

Me think it's time to acknowledge it?

[Carmody]

that would be a great t-shirt, would it not:

the number 1984, printed backward, across the top of the shirt (the reverse 1984)

And then, as a quote: "Freedom is a boot stomping on the face of a Sociopath. Forever."

Then, on the back:

"This Is Not George Orwell"

I'd wear that one.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
Corporations are not just tools, nor just assemblages of individual people. They take on a life of their own.

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
There is something very misunderstood about corporations or ...

And that's where the crux of the matter resides: it's being given life, first in the dream/astral/mental world, then being made to land in the 3D/physical reality as a birth/inauguration ceremony.

In other word: it's become ALIVE!

Yup. Fancy meeting you around this bend .

[T Smith]

Posted by Carmody (here)

Like water pouring down a drain (crap flows down hill), corporations view and see democracy and republicanism as a thing that is to be infiltrated and taken over from the inside, or at the very least, to work with in a way that allows the corporation into a window of control or controlled consumerism. Which is slavery -enforced behavior and conditions. Infiltrating democracy is EASY and profitable beyond belief. the nature of politics and politicians makes it so.

Hi Carmody,

These sentiments are something I've meditated on frequently in recent months. To expand further, if you were to serve as counsel on fashioning a Constitution of a hypothetical Republic, what checks and balances or safeguards (if any) do you think a fledgling democratic Republic might erect in the fabric of its founding constitution that might keep the governing body impervious from being infiltrated from the inside and ultimately conquered by consumerism and corporatism? Is this concept an oxymoron? I often wonder what the Founders of the United States, who truly were a brilliant group of minds and the direct cultural product of the Western Enlightenment, would do as a redux, were they to see how their little experiment of self-government by and for the people unfolded over time, and had they had the luxury of witnessing the specific failures the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America. You are quite right the United States, circa 2013, is in its last stage before a full-fledged bloodbath ensues the likes of which we haven't been seen since the reign of Caligula, Pol-Pot, etc. Are there any checks and balances you can think of to avoid the current pit falls of the encroaching fascism we see today?

As a side comment, I concur with every point in your post from which the above quotation was taken. Spot on with your analysis of fascism and corporatism.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
That was an important post.

On the other hand, "the Anglo-American financial oligarchy is in serious trouble" (Joseph P. Farrell).

[T Smith]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Paul (here)
That was an important post.

On the other hand, "the Anglo-American financial oligarchy is in serious trouble" (Joseph P. Farrell).

It would seem that they are. But I wonder if that really just translates to mean, in the final equation, that we serfs are in serious trouble...

[modwiz]

Posted by T Smith (here)

Posted by Carmody (here)

Like water pouring down a drain (crap flows down hill), corporations view and see democracy and republicanism as a thing that is to be infiltrated and taken over from the inside, or at the very least, to work with in a way that allows the corporation into a window of control or controlled consumerism. Which is slavery -enforced behavior and conditions. Infiltrating democracy is EASY and profitable beyond belief. the nature of politics and politicians makes it so.

Hi Carmody,

These sentiments are something I've meditated on frequently in recent months. To expand further, if you were to serve as counsel on fashioning a Constitution of a hypothetical Republic, what checks and balances or safeguards (if any) do you think a fledgling democratic Republic might erect in the fabric of its founding constitution that might keep the governing body impervious from being infiltrated from the inside and ultimately conquered by consumerism and corporatism? Is this concept an oxymoron? I often wonder what the Founders of the United States, who truly were a brilliant group of minds and the direct cultural product of the Western Enlightenment, would do as a redux, were they to see how their little experiment of self-government by and for the people unfolded over time, and had they had the luxury of witnessing the specific failures the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America. You are quite right the United States, circa 2013, is in its last stage before a full-fledged bloodbath ensues the likes of which we haven't been seen since the reign of Caligula, Pol-Pot, etc. Are there any checks and balances you can think of to avoid the current pit falls of the encroaching fascism we see today?

As a side comment, I concur with every point in your post from which the above quotation was taken. Spot on with your analysis of fascism and corporatism.

The founders spoke of the banking system as being more of a threat than any standing army. They knew who and where the enemy was. The enemy knew who and where their allies were too. Congress.

[jackovesk]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
It has been suggested that perhaps some of the multinational corporations are not the monsters that people like me make them out to be. Maybe they are privy to information that we are not, and they are actually acting wisely for the Earth and her inhabitants - including mankind.

Another possibility is that the corporate boards are doing great harm, but it is not from sociopathic greed, but rather from their own misunderstandings about ecology and humanity. For example, maybe they believe transhumanism is a good thing ("enhanced humans"), or maybe they believe that transhumanism is inevitable, so make the most of it and prepare humanity for the transition.

I am stuck in the notion that multinational (or supranational) corporations are strictly malevolent, greed-driven, and sociopathically will use any means to an end - and that end is the acquisition of money. power, and control. Convince me otherwise.

Dennis

Firstly, you must remember 'Corporations' are an 'Entity'...

Secondly, you must single out just 'Who' are the 'Controllers - Major Shareholders' of the Corporation...

Thirdly, are these 'Controllers - Major Sharehlders' 'Affiliated with & Fund' any Global Govts, Think Tanks, No-Bid Contracts, etc...?

Finally, if these 'Corporations' have recently moved 'Offshore' or 'Outsouced Jobs' and have 'No Regard' for their employees, only the bottom line...?

I would have re-phrased your OP 'Heading' into...

"Name me just (1) 'Mulitinational Corporation' that does'nt fit within the criteria 'Above'..?"

PS - Oh I forgot...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q