Should bribery be protected speech?


#1

Should bribery be protected speech?

Being paid to censor and propagandize:
When we talk about money as speech we are talking about bribery as protected speech. On Right in the US it’s the whole political agenda and it’s getting expressed in a fight over the internet as the internet threatens that agenda. The investment backers of the cable and telecom industry are asserting that they should be paid for interfering with communication and further that this should be the basis for their making more money and asserting more control over communication. They insist that government provide them a return on equity and grant them a defacto right to censor and interfere with communications. It’s possible that part of the reason telecom in particular has felt so empowered is critical role in long term domestic spying programs. Its bribery or ‘well funded campaigns’ that the telecom-cable industry is using to promote bribery.

The last thing we want is more telecom and cable investment:
We have the means to make cable and telecom obsolete. This is potentially true obsolescence like what the auto did to the buggy and not like what the auto did to railroad. This holds unless we think there is value to continued propaganda and the “necessary lie” ideology. Where does the “necessary lie” end?

Cable and telecom in the US in particular argue that turning them into proper dumb pipes (which they should have been all along) would dissuade future investment by crimping their expected returns. But we obviously want them to be dumb pipes and at the same time we don’t want or need more investment in a system that isn’t now a dumb pipe and at best might only be dumb temporarily or intermittently.

Bribery as protected speech:
This seems like the main issue of our time. It’s also the core of the Right’s political ideology which is that people with money should be able to control society- at the very least that the .001% should have 51% of the vote power. They don’t like democracy because that gets in the way of a right to oppress which they are convinced they’ve somehow earned. Any proposal that runs counter to their increased wealth and power has them trying to pass themselves off as a victimized minority (a false minority.) They believe in slavery through money. It’s reflected in the dumbed down corporate interest compliance based public K1-12 education system, Supreme Court rulings since the 70s and the Right’s recent concerted attempt to destroy the internet.

With transparent open source distributed automated entities widely spread across a wholly end user owned and controlled open internet we should be able to get rid of the Right. The Right’s whole game is to ‘freely’ use its money to tell what it considers to be necessary lies to conserve and expand slavery. In the US and elsewhere when the Right rigs an election or does a false flag action or calls for whistle blowers to be prosecuted (it’s only the phony left that supports this) it can count on captured media to censor and discredit attempts at exposure. Stop that and you get rid of the right.

This isn’t a dichotomous argument, the right has reached it historical end point and is primed to be eliminated by transparency applied to “necessary lie” ideology. The Right’s purest expression is that some people are better than other people as determined by money and on that that basis they should rule. If you don’t accept that transparency is enough then not also that money itself is being re-engineered, its being voucher-ized to prevent the very abuses that all the Right to exist.

The Right is the result of a propagandized world view, a learned helplessness religion based on fear. Its conditioning people to reflexively act against their interests. Ideas like corporate feudalism are much too kind. The right is pure and utter bullshit. I


#2

I agree with a lot of this and think the phrase “Corporate Feudalism” is an apt description of the end point in Capitalism we have reached. I probably wouldn’t confine or ascribe the problem to the “Right” as you say, but recognise that Republican/Conservative policies do tend to play along with the Corporate Feudalism. However, the issue for me is that the Corporations have hijacked all parties and governance - whether the Right or Left, the Governments now represent the interests of the Corporations and Banks (who have them by the balls on an international level), rather than the people.
The underlying issue really though is the Monetary and Capitalist systems. The Elites behind the money supply (major international banks etc) just periodically move the financial instruments/funding/investment etc to where they will get most return. For decades this has been in the West but is now moving to the East. To be honest these financial Elites now have Governments in a master/slave relationship - governments just want to avoid being picked off and raped by these Elites really.
Who knows, maybe Bitcoin really is a Western Government innovation to disentangle it from the system…just a thought? The West seem very Bitcoin friendly (Europe, USA etc), whereas the East don’t (Russia, China etc) and the money/investment is going East.
Maybe the fightback against the real problem has begun and the Elites are going to prey in pastures new? Who knows.


#3

Yes, that’s a good point. I wondered about Apple Pay in the States and Russia showing up anti bitcoin so soon. The capture right/left does seem to hold. Elizabeth Warren used to be a Republican, and its possible her views haven’t shifted much, but today she is cast as being at the far end of the left in the States. Obama appears to be to the right of Regan on some things. Would Regan have gone along with the NDAA riders without need pressure to resist. Obama at one point seemed to set to sign NDAA riders that would have allowed the actual military to disappear people without a paper trail and without civilian authorization- as if that could ever be authorized! It was probably some sort of retroactive cover up- they are already doing this or that is the implication. But we need people screaming in consensus that a million 911s would not be worth this BS.


#4

What a rant… I’d like to write an equally long reply, but I’ll just stick to this first question (I hope it was really a question and that you want an honest answer).

Bribery is not speech and if you tried to understand what bribery is, you’d probably be less misguided.

The offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of something of value for the purpose of influencing the action of an official in the discharge of his or her public or legal duties

Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/bribery

What you’re failing to understand is that sheeple readily sell their votes to the highest redistributionist bidder, so they’re culprit number 1. After they vote in the Democratic or Republicans elites into the office, those instantly get to work and keep doing more of the same (redistribution, but now instead from the middle class to the poor, from the middle and poor class to their corporate sponsors and unions).

Democracy makes this kind of bribery possible.


#5

We are all supposed to be using Newspeak aren’t we…it’s a common thread…

Bribery is Speech
Taxation is Theft
Abortion is Murder
Sponsorship is Torture
Democracy is Totaltarianism
Government is Buggery…Ok, made that one up…but all the rest have been said.


#6

@alkafir, its a new kind if poetry.

@janitor, can I go to lunch now? can I retire or have the retirement I thought I earned? can I still have an A grade from my 3rd grade treacher if I dont do 100% of what she asks or is that a F grade? Can I be accepted and not leave in fear if I dont fit into the straight jacket norms pretend elites have created. We already have a society where a minority of elites rule, its preditory as increasingly everything requires permission from a minority of elite masters.


#7

A couple thoughts on this.

  • Democracy is dead once lobbying is introduced. One cannot really prevent lobbying from being introduced from democracy therefore democracy inevitably gets corrupted and dies.

  • Yes I believe that I should be able to buy and sell anything. It makes sense telecom would want to be paid for manipulating data and selling propaganda. This is why we need a mesh network and maidsafe so we aren’t relient on big telecoms.

  • Corporatism is not the same as capitalism. Corporatism does not like competition. Capitalism thrives on it. Corporatism is based on limited liability and not taking responsibility for one’s actions. Capitalism one is always responsible for one’s actions and has no limited liability, that’s what keeps a capitalist honest. Corporatism is basically a form of fascism as it relies on government involvement. Capitalism is pure voluntary exchange, organization and interaction between private individuals.

  • Capitalism by it’s very nature centralizes power in the form of money. Any quid pro quo economy that honours what one has instead of what one gives will do this. People think that taxation, socialism or communism will change that. No it won’t. Communism too is a quid pro quo economy. And more to the point you don’t get more pie by cutting it into slices, no matter how small they are. And on top of this people keep buying product instead of production. Production is what creates true wealth.

I’m a bit iffy on this because with DAOs you’d be getting rid of the left as much as you’d be getting rid of the right. I could make that same statement you did about government and say that by widely distributing DAOs we’d get rid of the need for government and promote private freedom of the individual. So in a sense widely distributed DAOs would promote the Right. They’d hurt corporations but that wouldn’t get rid of the right since as I explained corporations do not define capitalism or private exchange. In fact the Right and individualism might grow with the advent of DAOs because they will be a replacement for corporations and government alike and allow for the free expression of one’s individuality and for the free exchange between private individuals. It all depends on how you define this “Left” and “Right” bullshit. Personally I find the concepts of Left and Right to be obsolete and pointless.

See this is a prime example of why I don’t like Right vs Left discussions because you get increasingly vauge definitions about what “right” and “left” are. It’s like talking about religion and saying “All Christians believe such and such” or “All Buddists believe this and that” or “All Muslims are like this” or “all Wiccans are like that”. It’s a bloody stereotypical generalization that gets increasingly more diluted and distorted the more you flap your gums. Not all of the Right even supports corporations in the first place so can it, what the hell do you know in the first place to be making your initial judgements and assumptions?

And to address your arguement, if your meaning to label those in favor of voluntary action as “the Right” then no it’s not that those with more money are “better” but rather they simply have more power. When you are in an environment with finite resources and an ever increasing population you can do one of two things: create competition for resources or you can constantly reduce the amount of resources you distribute to each member of the community. Back the the pie being cut in ever smaller pieces but yet getting no more pie analogy. What gives people a right to rule? Power. Don’t kid yourself on that one. At the end of the day no matter how good your intentions are, how fair you are, how humanitarian and nurturing you are the game of kings is played with blood. If you want to rule then you’re playing with power and that’s the only currency that matters. There are many forms of it but at the end of the day that’s what ruling over another is. This whole notion of “democracy” is a farce. It’s still the utilization of power. And no it doesn’t mean “might makes right” because you can’t rule with might alone. People will not follow a leader that rules through force alone. Generally people do not like tyrants be they centralized or not so you need to maintain your mandate of heaven (meaning maintain your moral image, keep on the people’s good side and don’t be an asshole). As I said, power takes many forms: militant, political, spiritual, and yes economic as well.

This just made me laugh because if you replaced the word “Right” with “Left” or even just “sheeple” you’d get pretty much everyone. This is how most people operate because of the public educational system. They’re trained from childhood to be afraid of authority and to submit to it. They’re trained to obey. They’re trained to do what they’re told. They’re trained to go to work and consume. I’d call that a learned helplessness religion based on fear.


#8

Yes Warren, you’re free to do whatever you want as long as you respect property rights of others.

Here on the forum you’re accepted and noone can reject you because you’re on private property and you’re behaving according to the rules set by the owner.
Were you on a collectivist Web site they could ban you for whatever reason they please and declare that to be in the interest of the community and you’d never know what hit you.


#9

That depends. There is a third option if we can get DAOs up on end user owned networks. But there is a comment by Blindsight I have to look at, saying they might not be a panacea. I am a little worried. DAOs are my new rainbow, what if there is an obvious upfront hole.


#10

DAO’s will free many as in the ability to opt in to a whole plethora of different legitimate(to me not necessarily a gov) and transparent systems. seems revolutionary for sure. But that doesn’t take away the fact that if you live somewhere that uses the dollar that you are still the slave. instead of a human serving it to you cold it will be a computer program that inherently lacks empathy. Maybe that’s sliiiightly better? haha. I keep seeing people bring up the seasteading option that i’ve been following for quite some time and i think that is the best option that will bare the most fruit. otherwise we may just have our own small communities in rural areas with these systems in place but still functioning within a bigger and more coercive system that we currently reside in.


#11

DOAs will run according to the rules they’re programmed with. Just like there are some programs that are closed source and draconian so too will some DAOs and some programs are open source and focused on freedom so too also will be some DAOs. Oh and @Warren please stop misspelling my name. It’s Blindsite not Blindsight. It’s a pun and play on words.