2016-07-08 Democracy overtaken by Corporatocracy = coup d’état. Citizens fight to regain democracy = Revolution (insurgency) . Corporatocracy fights to hold on = counter insurgency.
Many of us have concluded that big business is running the show. We have corporatocracy, not democracy.
If that is the case, by definition, there has been a coup d’état by stealth in Canada (and in the U.S.).
From 2010-09-13 RCMP identify coup d’etat as threat to Canada, Ottawa Citizen.
“Military historian Edward Luttwak says, “A coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder”, thus, armed force (either military or paramilitary) is not a defining feature of a coup d’état.”
Yes – that is what we have. You know it more intimately if you have been in the trenches fighting
- to protect your local water supply from pollution or “bottling”,
- to figure out why we even have to fight against the introduction of GMO wheat when consumers nor farmers want it,
- or against GMO salmon,
- or, name your area.
Most Canadians know it – – all you have to do is start a conversation on the subject and the other person will chime in with their concurring observation.
Leonard Cohen sings it , “Everybody knows . . .”
So now we have that on the table,
In Canada today, a “developed” country, we have the communications and means to empower ourselves.
The corporatist situation exists and continues because we accept it: Simplisticly stated, rulers cannot rule unless we agree to let them rule. We are much more numerous than they.
Coup changes government without changing social system i.e. replacing Yanukovich with Poroshenko in Ukraine just substituted one oligarch with another without changing oligarchical Capitalist society.
Revolutions change social systems. Examples are numerous
- French and English bourgeois revolutions abolished Feudalism / Absolute Monarchy and established Capitalism / bourgeois democracy.
- Russian revolutions:
- 1905 – Absolute Monarchy to Parliamentary Monarchy,
- February 1917 – Monarchy to Republic / bourgeoise Democracy,
- October 1917 – bourgeoise Democracy to Socialism,
- 1993 – Socialism to bourgeoise Democracy.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
ELABORATION (originally a response to Yeoshi).
. . . However, I think you are talking about RESISTANCE (not The Law).
(I have been twice to the Museum of Non-Violent Resistance in Berlin, and once to Robben Island in South Africa where Nelson Mandela was imprisoned for 27 years. I think we need to know Resistance better. There are a number of postings on this blog, for example related to Mahatma Ghandi. “Empowerment” is a related category.)
What you call the New World Order, I call the Corporatocracy. We know who the worst offenders in the Corporatocracy are. The RESISTANCE, the intention to move us onto a different path, to develop better ways, is in response to them. (Maybe we should be thankful to the Corporatocracy for setting us in motion?! Ha ha!)
Once we decide we don’t like to be governed by a system that is concentrating all the wealth in the hands of the already-wealthy, that we are absorbing the costs while they offshore their money to avoid kicking in their fair share, – – – the list goes on and on – – – governments that govern on behalf of corporate interests, failure to problem-solve because it might affect “returns on investment”, the huge amounts of money taken from the public purse to benefit these corporations who are corrupt and without scruples, actions that undermine democracy, set citizen against citizen according to race or religion or bank account, destroy the environment . . . Once we decide “no more”, once we no longer agree to be ruled by “them”, the game SHOULD/COULD be over; we are numerous, they are not. (Alas! there are other factors.)
In the world it is not usually one thing or the other, but a combination of factors. A “both and” situation. It seems to me that when people understand the role of governance (the transition from more democratic to more corporatist governance and values), they know that the solutions lie in working together (the many millions of us).
I am reminded – – Tom Flanagan from the University of Calgary who was closely aligned with the Harper Conservatives was interviewed about the threats to their agenda. I understood his response to basically say that the forces fighting to stop the poisoning of the water and air, to work aggressively to ameliorate climate change – – the Indians and Environmentalists – – were weak. His written analysis: no danger they would start working together, hence they posed no threat. I was kind of shocked that he was so far off the mark. Everything I was witnessing was of the First Nations, Environmentalists, Conservationists and “Survivalists” forming close bonds working together.
We’ve made progress in giving the usurpers the boot. But first,
LINGUSITICS (Language is important!):
As discussed in RCMP identify coup d’etat as threat to Canada, we would be said to be in revolution against the corporatocracy that took away our democracy.
To the usurpers, the ones now ruling (“corporate globalization” is another term used) – – to them we would be “insurgents” . . . or “insurrectionists”.
Those are the names applied by Western media to people who resist in countries outside western democracies. (People in countries that have been colonized – – they are insurgents against the Colonizers. But really they are only people trying to take back their countries.) Yesterday I heard the word “rebels” used. What are the nuances? Insurrection – – insurgency – – revolution – – .
Insurrection is an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion or resistance against civil authority or an established government. (Is that what is happening in the U.S. today? the killing of 5 police officers in Dallas, Texas after the long string of black men shot and killed by police? with the recent live-streaming of the killing of Philando Castile)
Insurrectionist – a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions) freedom fighter, insurgent, rebel. I guess you’d have to say it sure meets the criteria of “armed” if it’s in the U.S. They are awash in weapons of all kinds, and with lots of people trained and experienced in using them (killing) – – the veterans of year after year, of war after war, going back to Viet Nam and beyond and continuing forward.
About Insurgency: When insurgency is used to describe a movement’s unlawfulness by virtue of not being authorized by or in accordance with the law of the land, its use is neutral. However, when it is used by a state or another authority under threat, “insurgency” often also carries an implication that the rebels’ cause is illegitimate, whereas those rising up will see the authority itself as being illegitimate. … No kidding! But moving on,
Yes, the Corporatocracy is going to fight back because they don’t like to lose their power and control, status and wealth. The fight-back by the usurpers would be called “counter-insurgency” – – military or political action taken against the activities of guerrillas or revolutionaries.
See how the language makes the ones who are fighting for democracy into “the bad guys“? It comes from a history of colonialism, whether European, American or Canadian. A partial list of excellent leaders, democratically-elected who wished to stop the exploitation by corporate interests backed by a foreign government is at 2016-03-22 There are two sides to the story. Why do we hear only one? (Terrorists & Context: CIA – examples Mossadegh, Lumumba, Arbenz, Guevera, Allende).
What was at stake? (What IS at stake – – it hasn’t changed):
- people (cheap, impoverished labour)
- resources (oil, land for growing mountains of cheap (canned) pineapple to market in first world countries, …) and
- environment (poisoning of land, air and water)
Mossadegh, Lumumba, Allende, democratically-elected leaders who fought for the interests of their people, became dangerous revolutionaries in the eyes of the people in the U.S and their allies. (Simply through propaganda, through collaborative media.)
The same propaganda tool was attempted by former prime minister Stephen Harper and his Conservatives when “environmentalists” became enemies of Canada financed by foreign interests, as they claimed. I should be locked up, same as my fellow activists and others by association.
Citizens who challenged the exploitation and poisoning, who stood to defend democracy, became “terrorists” as when the anti-terrorist squad of the RCMP was deployed over the incidents on the EnCana pipeline, Dawson Creek (story on this blog).
Fight for civil rights – – you are threatening the power, control and wealth of a ruling elite and their minions who are very comfortable where they are.
The imperialists use the same tool the Nazis used: language that creates enemies and bad guys. Polish people were “vermin”, the justification for Nazi invasion. Mossadegh, Lumumba, Allende – – – revolutionaries who had to be eliminated or removed. “Environmentalists”, people who protest trade deals designed to suit the corporatocracy – – jail them.
Spread over a number of years,
- coup d’état – corporatocray infiltrates democracy, takes over the reins of government by stealth using money, revolving doors, quislings and other means (think SPP)
- revolution or insurgency – (the word carries innuendo of “bad guys”) Citizens resist, they do not agree that business interests and values should be running the show
- counter insurgency – corporatocracy wants to hold onto power and control. They mobilize “a counterinsurgency force” against the forces fighting to restore democracy.
In Canada the counter insurgency includes (some of you will add your own examples – there are lots more to choose from):
2008-11-28 Follow-up on Montebello, Police provoke Violence at SPP protest (2007)
2012-06-10 G-20 Summit, Toronto. And kettling, a tactic of police. ALSO 2010-06-24 G20: Canada’s billion-dollar summit mystery, Toronto Star
The Police tactics at Montebello and the G-20 Summit in Toronto were extensions of the counter insurgency against citizen mobilizations over the World Trade Organization (WTO) which is the Corporatocracy, the SPP, in different garb. Battle in Seattle, WTO, SPP.
It is easier for me, propagandized as I am to view “the West” as the “good guys”, to use the “insurgency” language for conflict in developing countries (over “There” where the bad guys live, not “Here” in the land of “the Good”) .
When I try to see what is happening in my own country, it is more difficult. But after working with our network for more than 15 years, battle after battle, what becomes obvious is the corporate power behind-the-scenes with the accompanying corruption of governance and values. Corporatocracy’s coup d’état over democracy, insurgency and counter insurgency, are indeed the right words to describe the Canadian (and American) situation.
We need to use the proper LANGUAGE. The right words bring clarity and the ability to have productive discussion.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
PROGRESS IN GIVING THE USURPERS THE BOOT:
There is more than one way to skin the cat. As I see it, the Corporatocracy is slowly crumbling under the varied guerilla attacks against them.
1. Many of the UKers who voted to exit the European Union did so because they objected to . . (what?) .. they didn’t have a word for it. The symptoms they gave were those of a Corporatocracy (or New World Order (NWO) as Yeoshi calls it). The UKers had an opportunity to give the boot to unaccountable, undemocratic corporate governance and they used it. See 2016-06-29 Post-Brexit results: Is governing by referendum democratic? Reply to CBC The Current. (Corporatocracy, Linguistics.) and 2016-07-07 Maude Barlow: Brexit, CETA and the right way to create trade agreements. Corporatocracy.
2. A non-violent, Rule-of-Law way to take down some of the leadership of the NWO Corporatocracy: In the wake of the recent UK Iraq War Report, Tony Blair AND the people with whom he launched an illegal War will be again shaking in their boots. They are drawing ever closer to being prosecuted. Roots Action has already launched a petition calling for the prosecution of Blair. Roots is American-based; they see that if we can together push hard so that Blair DOES get prosecuted, then Bush, Cheney and the others will not be far behind. It is worth it for all of us to sign the petition and encourage others to do the same. The link to the RootsAction Petition is on http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=16915. Take down the leadership.
3. Lockheed Martin Corp plays a central leadership role in the Corporatocracy. And the lead role in Surveillance and war. As I read it, you (Yeoshi) don’t agree to let them play their leadership role, and I don’t, and hundreds of thousands of others don’t either. We will not allow the building of detailed files on individual citizens.
4. The March Against Monsanto is another arm of the rebellion.
5. All the multiple groups working on the transformation (from larvae to butterfly) are the health of the new world we are creating.
We have Occupy, Idle No More, Black Lives Matter, All Lives Matter, the determination not to re-elect the Conservatives under Stephen Harper (a component of the Corporatocracy), HaveNoFear, Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, Glen Greenwald, as I say hundreds of thousands, no millions . . . all skinning the cat in their own way. Alongside us, in our way. The cat won’t survive the insurgency (the guerilla warfare).
You do not need killing weapons to fight a war.
Rulers cannot rule unless we agree to let them rule.
Events tell me We have reached the point where we are no longer willing to be ruled by the corporatocracy.
The insurgency and counter insurgency in North America have been underway, started decades ago.
We will to have our democracy back. There are too many of us compared to them, not to castrate them.
P.S. Arising from Comments posted below, please see also 2016-07-13 Corporatocracy, Democracy: Be careful what you ask for. … Or, no time for timidity?
The following info is regarding the invasion of Canadians’ privacy, and includes a scary fact regarding our internet use.
1.US Pushes Canada to Ease Privacy Laws http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/04/03/canada-us-privacy-laws_n_5083034.html
2.See the following scary privacy issues for Canadians at
(The following excerpts are quotes from this website link, which includes links to other sites).
a. Some 90 per cent of Canadian internet traffic is routed through the U.S.
b. “Unbeknownst to most Canadians, Canada has laws on the books enabling monitoring that are very similar to the controversial provisions of the USA Patriot Act.” Canada has its own version of the NSA as well — the Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC), an extremely secretive government agency responsible for monitoring foreign communications related to Canada’s national security. The agency can officially only monitor Canadian communications when a foreign party is involved.
c. But CSEC’s no-spying-on-Canadians rule apparently disappears when the agency is asked for help from other agencies
d. “The NSA has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants … which allows officials to collect material including search history, the content of emails, file transfers and live chats,” the Guardian reported.
e. That has raised concerns among privacy rights advocates that Canadians’ personal information may be getting caught up in the U.S.’s programs. Many experts say there is no “if” here; because of the integrated, international nature of online communication, it’s inevitable Canadians’ communications are being collected as part of the U.S. programs.
f. The website link above also refers to the “5 Eyes” which you have been discussing
Many thanks Steve. These are important additions to understanding the full picture on Privacy of Personal Information versus Spying & Surveillance by Governments. I must remember that the Huffington Post has a good vault of articles on this subject. (Remind myself: search Huff Post on “CSEC” and “NSA”.
I posted the full text of both articles on “The Battles” for backup purposes. (Sometimes URL’s become invalid.)
The second article was published in 2013. In 2014 the Huff Post published an article that says “Well actually, the NSA doesn not spy on Canadians. The Five Eyes nations (Canada is one) are exempt. The article continues – – but really we aren’t exempt from the list of countries that the NSA spies on because the Five Eyes countries have agreements amongst themselves. If domestic laws don’t allow the country (Canada, for example) to spy on its citizens, one of the other countries does the spying and reports.
Alas! I don’t have time just now to consolidate the spying& surveillance versus privacy issue.
«Rulers cannot rule unless we agree to let them rule.»
A very nice statement.
In Canada we are all ruled in some form or another; via taxation, by government, by police, etc. We also rule each other by mutual consent. Here is a simple example to illustrate mutual consent; drivers going down the two-lane highway agree to drive on their respective right side for the benefit of both. The issue is not that we agree to be ruled but the results of the rules being applied. Is Stats Canada’s application of the Statistic Act rule to access your Revenue Canada Income Tax returns to find your income level a good rule; I do not think so. Whom do you have to thank for that fiasco; your parliamentarians that fail to answer your emails by just ignoring them.
We revolt if the burden we are asked to bear gets too much, such as excessive taxation, removal of our human rights, removal of our basic constitutional rights, removal of employment opportunities, etc. the list is endless. People refuse to be ruled when the cumulative effect of each of those steps because too great to bear and we lose hope.
In Canada the gradual removal of our freedoms has taken place ever since the founding of the Bilderberg Group. Then another player, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) created after world war 2 to affect repairs to those countries invaded or bombed by Germany. Then we find the International Monetary Fund (IMF). We also get the International Criminal Court (ICC). We get multilateral and multinational trade agreements; NAFTA, TPPA, etc. and much more. The aggregate of those elements and thousands of others make it such that what humanity is facing now is the New World Order that Bush senior was so happy to announce in one of his speeches. What Sandra likes to call the corporatocracy.
From Wikipedia: corporatocracy, a term used to refer to an economic and political system controlled by corporations and/or corporate interests.
In my personal view, Canada, the US, the UK, France, the E.U., all can be said to be corporatocracies and I have skipped many.
The financial collapses of Iceland, Greece, Argentina and I have missed many is no accident. This is done by design. This is my speculation of course but in the case of Greece we see the IMF imposing severe austerity measures on the country and its people. A serious mistake was for Greece to accept loans from the IMF. They cannot repay the loans at all. It is akin to try and pay a credit card bill with another credit card; it is committing financial suicide at some point. What is interesting in most of the collapse cases is that private industry does nothing to help, they keep their profits and to hell with the rest of the people in the country. If they can they leave the country; i.e. the automotive industry moving to Mexico in the U.S.
The IMF is in fact destroying the social fabric of Greece, it is a test run for the New World Order. The severe austerity measures include reducing pension payments and increasing contributions, firing thousands of civil servants, privatizing (selling to corporations) all kinds of state owned or public owned enterprises to private for-profit companies. In the long run, the social benefits to the population are severely reduced, jobs are very hard to find, etc. It falls into chaos.
In Canada, a notable sell-out was Petro Canada, which was once owned by the people of Canada In Ontario there is a move to privatize Hydro One and Hydro Power Generation; if it comes to fruition we shall be in really deep… Another small example was the leasing of Ontario’s highway 407 to a private consortium for 99 years if I recall correctly. Highway 407 is a toll highway and a small part of the toll collected goes to the province coffers
Another example of governments over-extending their power is the entire Nuclear industry. Without gazillions of taxpayers money wasted at the nuclear industry it would not exist. All levels of government clam to this day it is clean safe energy; shall we discuss 3-mile island, Fukushima Daichi (a catastrophe that will last 100s of thousands of years and kill millions upon millions), and Chernobyl (also to plague humanity for hundreds of thousands of years). The US has the greatest quantity of nuclear reactors, all will blow up if the sun ever lets off a massive Solar event that will destroy all electrical generating power in the US for at least one year or more, yet the planners are doing nothing to mitigate that eventuality. Cancer will never be cured by mankind.
Back to reality.
The democracy model has changed to a profit at any cost model. Hence that model, according to economists, requires endless production, endless consumption, endless production of garbage, endless growth, to the exhaustion of all natural resources and water resources. We now know that the model is on a suicide path. That is clear with the Alberta Tar Sands. The industry so hates the word TAR.
Only revolution will change the profit at any cost model. All trade agreements are based on the above tenets and they are not sustainable. Some wise people, as an example, figured out that the continuing exploitation of forests unabated will deplete them forever and they will never recover; so some smart people are planting trees.
However, as another example, South America countries are planting mono-crops to produce vegetable oil displacing agricultural lands, other crops and so on; another example of insane consumption for profits at any cost.
I am greatly puzzled as to how change will occur. Canada’s government officials, the totally unresponsive parliamentarians and the irritable senators are just a waste of our vote sadly. They all kiss the corporatocracy’s behind with fervour.
Thanks Sandra for putting together this overview of the state of the world.
I would like to add to the list of allies that are in the trenches with us, who understand the present state with the Corporatocracy taking control of our democracy. They have written books, speak out at forums and gatherings, and they can be found by just a google search. They will not be found on main stream media as they speak of truth, morality and social justice – values that consumer capitalism is trying to eliminate. And they are speaking of Revolution.
Here is my partial list, and I will start with a few Canadians –
David Suzuki, Naomi Klein, John Ralston Sol (I hope that that is the correct spelling), Maude Barlow, Jeff Rubin, Elisabeth May, Andrew Nikiforuk
and from over the border –
Noam Chomsky, Chris Hedges, Tom Goldtooth, Joseph Romm, Thom Hartmann, Robert Jensen (from Austin Texas), Wynona la Duke, Bill McKibben, Chalmers Johnson (deceased but his books ring truth), John Perkins, George Monbiot (from the UK), and there are so many more.
So we are not alone and it only takes 3.5% to change the world! Dianne
You are so right on! Many thanks Dianne!
Thanks for this Sandra- excellent reflection !
George Bernard Shaw used three concepts to describe positions of individuals in Nazi Germany: intelligence, decency and Nazism. He argued that if a person was intelligent, and decent, he was not a Nazi. If he was decent and a Nazi, he was not intelligent. And if he was intelligent and decent he was not a Nazi.
Now replace Nazi with, Corprocrate and identify them as the supreme evil of our time.
Profile: quiet, well-read, small c “conservative”, community-minded, kind and thoughtful Grandfather from rural Saskatchewan.
Thanks for your input Bev. I still have to shake my head at this place where we have arrived. The sunny part – – we are in good company!
Good outline summary Sandra.
But when pondering revolution we need be careful what we ask for. It would be prudent to have an established outline of a social/economic/political system that could replace the corporatocracy that currently feeds us and sustains social order: Even on their terms it’s better that the chaos within a world where the human footprint is in deep overshoot.
Don’s Comment generated an exchange. I made it into one posting. Please see:
http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=17033 Corporatocracy, Democracy: Be careful what you ask for. … Or, no time for timidity?
Sent: July 14, 2016 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: Rulers cannot rule …
Yes, no doubt this (takeover) has happened. But be careful.
Not every citizen is totally informed about the details of every issue…and you get Brexit.
If every citizen assumes that they are capable of judging every issue you tend toward chaos…which is discussed in the July/August 2016 of THE ATLANTIC (Monthly),”What’s Ailing American Politics”
We are at the moment the most enriched time in the history of the world, caused in part by the problem you perceive. If this is a problem for you, what is your solution, keeping in mind most of us like having a good health system, housing, food, entertainment? Even the “poor” are well looked after compared to times past.
Thanks Jean – – I will look up the Atlantic Monthly article.
You raise the same question as Don.
http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=17033 Corporatocracy, Democracy: Be careful what you ask for. … Or, no time for timidity?
Sent: July 11, 2016
Appreciated the construction of Rulers Cannot Rule. Have you read or watched Preempting Dissent? Most of it went over my head but I found it worthwhile especially the discussion of “faith-based” politics.
The inherent inequality among the betting public allows the self-interest of some to financially trump the self-interest of others, accelerating a system that concentrates the “winnings” into fewer and fewer hands.
The irony here is that the logic of the system is essentially a distilled version of the neo-liberal economic project that has valorized privatisation, individual needs over common goods, and resulted in massive concentrations of wealth, primarily in the northern hemisphere.
Faith-based politics then become an extension of this global project, an attempt to further inhibit the introduction of reason and rationality into an irrational process. p. 71-72
For me, faith-based politics is like the snake in the Jungle Book saying “Trust Me.”