This shit needs to get nationalized and converted to all green initiatives immediately, they’ll never do it on their own.
Government is supposed to exist to protect the people, not the corporate donors. Somewhere along the way (citizens united perhaps?) we lost sight of that.
Citizens United is part of the problem. But it is also simply part of how every corporation runs. And if run in the same way, nationalization doesn’t necessarily fix this issue, especially when led by similar people with similar motives/understanding of the “way things work.”
The board and the executives, which together make nearly every strategic decision of importance, have one legal obligation above all else: their fiduciary duty. The duty to make money for the investors. This is by far their biggest obligation from a legal standpoint. Meeting this one goal means they’re typically protected from nearly any personal liability (apart from exceptional negligence or criminal actions - but even that can be excused if profits are high enough).
Worse yet, trying to get around this legal duty to be purely incentivized by money has proved to be extremely challenging. For example, corporate trustees have been told that even if the trust explicitly wishes to avoid investing in certain industries to avoid harm (such as oil and gas), the trustee must put the goal of maximizing returns ABOVE the trust’s explicit directives to avoid certain industries. It must choose to diversify its investments to the best of its ability, which almost always includes oil and gas, despite the trust creators saying otherwise. If they don’t, they open themselves up to legal liability for lack of living up to their fiduciary duty. How fucked up is that?
This purely profit-driven legal obligation is the root of many, many problems.
But if we can change it, if we can bolster and prioritize the well-being of employees, customers, and society at large - with a strong legal obligation to do so, or at least give companies the ability to set these as legal obligations of their leaders - then maybe things can shift. ESG investing is paving that way forward, but still faces many roadblocks due to the prioritization of fiduciary duty.
It doesn’t have to be this way. It really shouldn’t have ever been this way, but that’s what late-stage capitalism gets you.
Back in the 50’s to late 70’s during massive economic expansion, companies weren’t perfect, but many acted with a sense of civic duty that simply isn’t part of board room etiquette anymore. We can deprioritize money and increase concern for well-being.
Greed and institutional investors have swept across these leadership positions with downright disgusting ramifications, which have now bled deeper into politics (law makers), policy (laws themselves), interpretation of laws (courts, such as Citizens United ruling), and society at large (those living under these laws and their interpretations).
How do we change it? Start with lawmakers, let that bleed into laws and courts, then eventually it’ll allow companies/industries to prioritize something other than profits. Like just maybe the people who live under it all.
if we can change it, if we can bolster and prioritize the well-being of employees, customers, and society at large - with a strong legal obligation to do so, or at least give companies the ability to set these as legal obligations of their leaders - then maybe things can shift. ESG investing is paving that way forward, but still faces many roadblocks due to the prioritization of fiduciary duty.
How do we change it? Start with lawmakers, let that bleed into laws and courts, then eventually it’ll allow companies/industries to prioritize something other than profits. Like just maybe the people who live under it all.
Really appreciate your viewpoint here. I think you’ve accurately described the disadvantages of late stage capitalism, and why it’s led us into this mess. Also, I think you’re right - the solution is to elect lawmakers who will enact legislation to incentivize ethical and responsible corporate actions.
I think the problem we face preventing that, is that the right wing has dragged the Overton window completely off of stage right. American Democrats, policy wise, would be considered conservatives in most other parts of the world. And both sides of the aisle serve their donors above all else. Everyone in DC is massively conservative, and completely disconnected from the reality in which the rest of us live.
The solution to me seems to be a 3rd party, an actual leftist party with the goal of supporting the people. The data certainly supports this - poll after poll shows the American people are massively progressive, with approval ratings on things like Medicare for all, college for all, and taxing the rich above 80% across the board. And for those originalists out there, the founding fathers were quite clear that they felt a 2 party system would be the death of democracy…and imho, they were right.
So, how can we successfully launch a third party when the corporate media maintains its stranglehold on news and communications? Love me some Lemmy, but sadly platforms like this aren’t enough. Not yet anyway. And the oligarchs have been hard at work massacreing the others, twit and reddit being the latest to fall. I’m intrigued by Cornell West’s talk of a People’s Party, but I have to be honest that I don’t take him seriously and it feels like a false flag to stall meaningful momentum.
Can we actually organize at a local level anymore, considering how the culture wars of division have everyone at each others’ throats? Would love to hear more from you about whether you think the answer lies in a 3rd party or changing the Dems from within.
I agree, the shift in even the most progressive US politicians is still center or even center right of the world stage, and more importantly, where we need to be to fix the issue. I also agree the stranglehold of the two-party system with its dark money pools fueled by super PACs and Citizens United leaves very few options for true change. The distance between what the population wants and what the representatives deliver is yet another despicable result of the current situation. But it also leaves room for hope. Despite the media coverage, most people do want progress and a more equitable society that lets people do as they please.
Launching a successful third party at the federal level is one hell of a battle, but not impossible. I’d say it starts at the local level, with municipal and state leaders willing to break from the status quo. The campaigns for these positions can be surprisingly non-competitive. If they can prove their integrity and willingness to fight for what’s necessary, it could attract the right investors (oh sorry, I mean campaign supporters) to potentially make a run for a federal position, starting with the House of Representatives - which is supposed to be the most diverse representation in the federal legislature and is the easiest to break into.
From there, it’s a relentless battle that must be fought by passionate people. As the voter pool shifts with the aging millennials (who aren’t following the usual path toward conservatism as they age) and Gen Z (who is dealing with a terrible hand of cards from the get-go), this will become easier and with a larger following.
Another prong in the tools of change must address the corporate influence. So-called cancel culture can be a bullshit way to being knee-jerk reactions, but speaking with your wallet can be part of the change. It’s difficult because the vast majority of the economy is controlled by a small group of investors and conglomerates, but still, these bean counters care deeply about their beans. Shifting them toward even slightly better alternatives can push the profit-driven focus in the right direction. Look at EVs for a good example. They’re growing because a demand for expensive vehicles is shifting toward electrification, even though the good ole boys resisted forever. One crack in the industry can cause a major shift.
I also think it’s time for a renewal of the labor movement. Wayyyyy too many people are giving up nearly everything for poverty level wages and a futile existence, just so a very small group can add to their giant piles of gold they’ll never use. The truth is that this labor holds some of the most power in the entire economy and country. But it must be unified and willing to fight for better rights. Many people have been convinced that their interests are aligned with the elites rather than their neighbors (trickle down economics), making this a challenge. It’s also tough due to the lack of ability for most people to save an emergency fund mixed with a fundamentally flawed social safety net system (both by design). But once again, these groups have proven their power in the past and it can happen again.
Small steps in the right direction, local leaders, commitment to spending aligned with ethical desires, and a cohesive labor movement can all make the changes we need. It’s not an overnight change, but it can be done. Hope is still valuable.
Really enjoy the optimism in your reply, it’s so refreshing to encounter, thank you!
Definitely agree on the stated challenges, and the strategy seems sound. But of course, there is the big murky problem area…what to do after gaining a foothold in the House? Justice Dems really seem to lose their momentum after getting their seat. The influence and coercion of the established body politic is clearly quite strong, and must be quite difficult to resist once one is awash in it day-in day-out.
I think, as you mention, a solid foundation of investors/supporters is a crucial piece to this puzzle. I wonder if there are specific character traits we should be looking for in those early-career local politicians that would indicate some potential resilience at the federal level. There have been a few solid and sensible pledges I’ve seen floating around over the years, but their non-binding nature means they consistently fall flat.
It is easy to be pessimistic, and I’ve had my more than my fair share of struggles as a result from the current inequality. But by putting things into a bigger perspective, there’s a lot to be thankful for. Many places around the world made massive jumps forward in the 20th century, going against long-standing traditions that typically offered little for the labor class or minority groups. Much of that progress is still here, even if it’s not perfect and even if it’s breaking down more than we’d like. But we can repeat that type of progress, we can bring back the light and overcome the challenges of the 21st century.
I see it as a numbers problem. The likes of Bernie and AOC are paving a new path, and that always means going against the flow with few followers at first. More charismatic people will follow and the rise in passionate voters that are now faced with a much more situation than generations past will accelerate this change. Plus, most of these few recent progressives have leaned more toward trying to call out every injustice rather than pick very specific battles. Nothing wrong with that. But we also need people who are more dedicated to specific issues, gathering support from moderates who are afraid of aligning themselves with those who tend to be viewed as extreme. No matter what, politicians always have to be extremely cautious about who they align themselves with. Hopefully this more targeted progressive focus will come through as leadership changes. Make some real progress on specific issues, backed by both the “extremists” and the moderates.
The elderly taking over our leadership positions has caused a shift toward established thought and strengthened the two party system. But many of these 30+ year career politicians are finally on their way out, basically for the first time since it all started in the 80s. Mitch McConnell, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, etc are all aging rapidly. It’s fucking wild that Biden is poised for another presidential run at his age, and everyone is sick of it. There are sure to be some new leaders that closely follow this establishment track, but we’re also seeing young representatives having a fighting chance for the first time in a long time. It’s tragic how Gen X representatives haven’t had their fair share of leadership time and it seems like they’re the generation that’s going to be mostly skipped over (along with some from both boomers and millennials). But change is coming. Even though these people act like they’ll live forever and have the right to hold power of every generation, nature’s laws are catching up. I don’t wish death on them, but it sure will be nice to have many of these geriatric leaders gone from their positions of power. I’ve worked closely with generational wealth families, and the same transition is happening within many of them too. The old patriarch and matriarchs are passing the torch to a new generation that doesn’t want to be the root of evil. They’re not perfect, but the younger ones (gen X and younger mostly) really do want to see positive changes for the masses.
The Supreme Court is a real problem now too, but it’s also a sign of the coming changes. It is much younger now than before, which would have been great if it wasn’t packed with obvious stooges. Term limits plus adding more seats can change that. So can holding some accountable for their actions, which CAN happen. The court changed quickly over the last decade, and it doesn’t have to be static in this way. This is one targeted fight that progressive politicians need to take on right away. And with the bullshit rulings coming from the court that go against public opinion, the support for these changes will continue to grow.
This shit needs to get nationalized and converted to all green initiatives immediately, they’ll never do it on their own.
Government is supposed to exist to protect the people, not the corporate donors. Somewhere along the way (citizens united perhaps?) we lost sight of that.
Citizens United is part of the problem. But it is also simply part of how every corporation runs. And if run in the same way, nationalization doesn’t necessarily fix this issue, especially when led by similar people with similar motives/understanding of the “way things work.”
The board and the executives, which together make nearly every strategic decision of importance, have one legal obligation above all else: their fiduciary duty. The duty to make money for the investors. This is by far their biggest obligation from a legal standpoint. Meeting this one goal means they’re typically protected from nearly any personal liability (apart from exceptional negligence or criminal actions - but even that can be excused if profits are high enough).
Worse yet, trying to get around this legal duty to be purely incentivized by money has proved to be extremely challenging. For example, corporate trustees have been told that even if the trust explicitly wishes to avoid investing in certain industries to avoid harm (such as oil and gas), the trustee must put the goal of maximizing returns ABOVE the trust’s explicit directives to avoid certain industries. It must choose to diversify its investments to the best of its ability, which almost always includes oil and gas, despite the trust creators saying otherwise. If they don’t, they open themselves up to legal liability for lack of living up to their fiduciary duty. How fucked up is that?
This purely profit-driven legal obligation is the root of many, many problems.
But if we can change it, if we can bolster and prioritize the well-being of employees, customers, and society at large - with a strong legal obligation to do so, or at least give companies the ability to set these as legal obligations of their leaders - then maybe things can shift. ESG investing is paving that way forward, but still faces many roadblocks due to the prioritization of fiduciary duty.
It doesn’t have to be this way. It really shouldn’t have ever been this way, but that’s what late-stage capitalism gets you.
Back in the 50’s to late 70’s during massive economic expansion, companies weren’t perfect, but many acted with a sense of civic duty that simply isn’t part of board room etiquette anymore. We can deprioritize money and increase concern for well-being.
Greed and institutional investors have swept across these leadership positions with downright disgusting ramifications, which have now bled deeper into politics (law makers), policy (laws themselves), interpretation of laws (courts, such as Citizens United ruling), and society at large (those living under these laws and their interpretations).
How do we change it? Start with lawmakers, let that bleed into laws and courts, then eventually it’ll allow companies/industries to prioritize something other than profits. Like just maybe the people who live under it all.
Really appreciate your viewpoint here. I think you’ve accurately described the disadvantages of late stage capitalism, and why it’s led us into this mess. Also, I think you’re right - the solution is to elect lawmakers who will enact legislation to incentivize ethical and responsible corporate actions.
I think the problem we face preventing that, is that the right wing has dragged the Overton window completely off of stage right. American Democrats, policy wise, would be considered conservatives in most other parts of the world. And both sides of the aisle serve their donors above all else. Everyone in DC is massively conservative, and completely disconnected from the reality in which the rest of us live.
The solution to me seems to be a 3rd party, an actual leftist party with the goal of supporting the people. The data certainly supports this - poll after poll shows the American people are massively progressive, with approval ratings on things like Medicare for all, college for all, and taxing the rich above 80% across the board. And for those originalists out there, the founding fathers were quite clear that they felt a 2 party system would be the death of democracy…and imho, they were right.
So, how can we successfully launch a third party when the corporate media maintains its stranglehold on news and communications? Love me some Lemmy, but sadly platforms like this aren’t enough. Not yet anyway. And the oligarchs have been hard at work massacreing the others, twit and reddit being the latest to fall. I’m intrigued by Cornell West’s talk of a People’s Party, but I have to be honest that I don’t take him seriously and it feels like a false flag to stall meaningful momentum.
Can we actually organize at a local level anymore, considering how the culture wars of division have everyone at each others’ throats? Would love to hear more from you about whether you think the answer lies in a 3rd party or changing the Dems from within.
I agree, the shift in even the most progressive US politicians is still center or even center right of the world stage, and more importantly, where we need to be to fix the issue. I also agree the stranglehold of the two-party system with its dark money pools fueled by super PACs and Citizens United leaves very few options for true change. The distance between what the population wants and what the representatives deliver is yet another despicable result of the current situation. But it also leaves room for hope. Despite the media coverage, most people do want progress and a more equitable society that lets people do as they please.
Launching a successful third party at the federal level is one hell of a battle, but not impossible. I’d say it starts at the local level, with municipal and state leaders willing to break from the status quo. The campaigns for these positions can be surprisingly non-competitive. If they can prove their integrity and willingness to fight for what’s necessary, it could attract the right investors (oh sorry, I mean campaign supporters) to potentially make a run for a federal position, starting with the House of Representatives - which is supposed to be the most diverse representation in the federal legislature and is the easiest to break into.
From there, it’s a relentless battle that must be fought by passionate people. As the voter pool shifts with the aging millennials (who aren’t following the usual path toward conservatism as they age) and Gen Z (who is dealing with a terrible hand of cards from the get-go), this will become easier and with a larger following.
Another prong in the tools of change must address the corporate influence. So-called cancel culture can be a bullshit way to being knee-jerk reactions, but speaking with your wallet can be part of the change. It’s difficult because the vast majority of the economy is controlled by a small group of investors and conglomerates, but still, these bean counters care deeply about their beans. Shifting them toward even slightly better alternatives can push the profit-driven focus in the right direction. Look at EVs for a good example. They’re growing because a demand for expensive vehicles is shifting toward electrification, even though the good ole boys resisted forever. One crack in the industry can cause a major shift.
I also think it’s time for a renewal of the labor movement. Wayyyyy too many people are giving up nearly everything for poverty level wages and a futile existence, just so a very small group can add to their giant piles of gold they’ll never use. The truth is that this labor holds some of the most power in the entire economy and country. But it must be unified and willing to fight for better rights. Many people have been convinced that their interests are aligned with the elites rather than their neighbors (trickle down economics), making this a challenge. It’s also tough due to the lack of ability for most people to save an emergency fund mixed with a fundamentally flawed social safety net system (both by design). But once again, these groups have proven their power in the past and it can happen again.
Small steps in the right direction, local leaders, commitment to spending aligned with ethical desires, and a cohesive labor movement can all make the changes we need. It’s not an overnight change, but it can be done. Hope is still valuable.
Really enjoy the optimism in your reply, it’s so refreshing to encounter, thank you!
Definitely agree on the stated challenges, and the strategy seems sound. But of course, there is the big murky problem area…what to do after gaining a foothold in the House? Justice Dems really seem to lose their momentum after getting their seat. The influence and coercion of the established body politic is clearly quite strong, and must be quite difficult to resist once one is awash in it day-in day-out.
I think, as you mention, a solid foundation of investors/supporters is a crucial piece to this puzzle. I wonder if there are specific character traits we should be looking for in those early-career local politicians that would indicate some potential resilience at the federal level. There have been a few solid and sensible pledges I’ve seen floating around over the years, but their non-binding nature means they consistently fall flat.
It is easy to be pessimistic, and I’ve had my more than my fair share of struggles as a result from the current inequality. But by putting things into a bigger perspective, there’s a lot to be thankful for. Many places around the world made massive jumps forward in the 20th century, going against long-standing traditions that typically offered little for the labor class or minority groups. Much of that progress is still here, even if it’s not perfect and even if it’s breaking down more than we’d like. But we can repeat that type of progress, we can bring back the light and overcome the challenges of the 21st century.
I see it as a numbers problem. The likes of Bernie and AOC are paving a new path, and that always means going against the flow with few followers at first. More charismatic people will follow and the rise in passionate voters that are now faced with a much more situation than generations past will accelerate this change. Plus, most of these few recent progressives have leaned more toward trying to call out every injustice rather than pick very specific battles. Nothing wrong with that. But we also need people who are more dedicated to specific issues, gathering support from moderates who are afraid of aligning themselves with those who tend to be viewed as extreme. No matter what, politicians always have to be extremely cautious about who they align themselves with. Hopefully this more targeted progressive focus will come through as leadership changes. Make some real progress on specific issues, backed by both the “extremists” and the moderates.
The elderly taking over our leadership positions has caused a shift toward established thought and strengthened the two party system. But many of these 30+ year career politicians are finally on their way out, basically for the first time since it all started in the 80s. Mitch McConnell, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, etc are all aging rapidly. It’s fucking wild that Biden is poised for another presidential run at his age, and everyone is sick of it. There are sure to be some new leaders that closely follow this establishment track, but we’re also seeing young representatives having a fighting chance for the first time in a long time. It’s tragic how Gen X representatives haven’t had their fair share of leadership time and it seems like they’re the generation that’s going to be mostly skipped over (along with some from both boomers and millennials). But change is coming. Even though these people act like they’ll live forever and have the right to hold power of every generation, nature’s laws are catching up. I don’t wish death on them, but it sure will be nice to have many of these geriatric leaders gone from their positions of power. I’ve worked closely with generational wealth families, and the same transition is happening within many of them too. The old patriarch and matriarchs are passing the torch to a new generation that doesn’t want to be the root of evil. They’re not perfect, but the younger ones (gen X and younger mostly) really do want to see positive changes for the masses.
The Supreme Court is a real problem now too, but it’s also a sign of the coming changes. It is much younger now than before, which would have been great if it wasn’t packed with obvious stooges. Term limits plus adding more seats can change that. So can holding some accountable for their actions, which CAN happen. The court changed quickly over the last decade, and it doesn’t have to be static in this way. This is one targeted fight that progressive politicians need to take on right away. And with the bullshit rulings coming from the court that go against public opinion, the support for these changes will continue to grow.
Whenever this sentiment comes up I usually think of Dodge v Ford first.
Basically your customers aren’t important, your employees aren’t important, your value as a company isn’t necessarily important.
The only importance is shareholder value.
Great example, and really highlights the importance of a new perspective on capitalism which could incentivize social responsibility