Government is...

[BigBallinStalin]

If you "reject that the government has a mind or any goals at all," then please explain how all organizations do not have a "mind or any goals at all."

[PLAYER57832]

If you "reject that the government has a mind or any goals at all," then please explain how all organizations do not have a "mind or any goals at all."

Why would I explain something I neither said nor agree with?

[BigBallinStalin]

player, i'm not saying that the government is a corporation because i think that other corporations are currently in control of our government.

i'm saying that the concept of government matches the definition of a corporation.

I understand. I disagree. There is a fundamental difference between the two.

A corporation is a legal entity that is created under the laws of a state designed to establish the entity as a separate legal entity having its own privileges and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business.

a government is created by laws of the state (in our case, the constitution) and is a separate legal entity which has its own privileges and liabilities. a government conducts business (taxes in exchange for services) with its customers (citizens).

The fundamental difference is one of responsibility. Corporations are specifically designed to sheild the power-wielders from most negative consequences of their decisions. Where they do have responsibility is to make profits for stockholders. That was not always the case, but it now is, particularly when it comes to the big guys. I mean, just think about it.

Do you see BP heads in Jail? Even setting aside that they are not technically based in the US (even their US subsidiaries, though are essentially unpunished). YET.. now look at Enron. Who was held to greater accountability and why? Enron was punished because they had the "gall" to interfere with investor profits. BP.. they merely destroyed life as we know it on the Gulf of Mexico for generations to come (and that is NOT an exaggeration!). If Mexico even came close to doing that to us, do you seriously think it would just be let pass? We have done some pretty nasty things to Mexico, but if we caused that much damage, we would likely be at war. Frankly.. war would not be needed, whoever was reponsible here would be impeached quicker than you can bat an eye. Even if some managed to stay in office, their effective power would be moot.

Now to be clear, to some extent, I was talking esoterically. That is, we don't now and never truly have had a government fully responsive to the real people of the country.

doesn't the fact that our government negotiates with corporations (just as two businesses negotiate a business deal) reinforce this claim?

Nope. Government negitiats with citizens in one sense (the good sense). However, in this case I probably should not say "negotiations" so much as "capitulations". Sure, there was a big show of all the banking officers been held accountable at a meeting where they were all "forced" to take TARP money.. and again, more hoopla about GM, etc. Except.. how did it really fall out? Who really took the hit, who is paying for it and who took the blame. WE took the hit. WE are paying for it and Obama mostly is given the blame (at least by his opponents, but even some of his "friends" -- at least on the surface).

also, i reject your assertion that corporations are better at brainwashing people than politicians are.

LOL... who creates and pays for the political ads and why? anymore, its almost entirely large corporations... and the "debates" you see are mostly about social issues, not the real substance that will actually change things. Its no cooincidence that the "debate" over abortion and homosexual marriages are being ramped up just when the economy is poorest, when people are almost ready to extract blood from corporations, nor is it a cooincidence that the most corporation friendly supreme court was voted in amidst a lot of hoopla about race, abortion and the patriot act.. but almost nothing about corporate constraints, corporate personhood, etc.

as a matter of curiosity, do you agree with me that the primary goal of a government is to retain power?

I reject that the government has a mind or any goals at all. However, politicians certainly want to stay in power. They are not equivalent to the entire government in this context, though.. not at all. And that is a big part of the problem with much of this recent rhetoric.

When things are bad, you create an enemy. Immigrants, commies, the "elite", now its the government. All are lies. The real threat is none of those, but the ones pushing all the buttons to try and make people believe those are the enemies.

What angers me the most, though this is another topic, is how so many are using the church to do their dirty work.. and it absolutely IS very, very dirty.

[PLAYER57832]

BBS -- first explain where I said that government and organization are synonyms.

Now stop being stupid.

[rockfist]

At its best a necessary evil...at its worst an insufferable tyranny staining the face of our planet.

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS -- first explain where I said that government and organization are synonyms.

Now stop being stupid.

Explain how the government is not an organization...

or "stop being stupid."

[PLAYER57832]

BBS -- first explain where I said that government and organization are synonyms.

Now stop being stupid.

Explain how the government is not an organization...

or "stop being stupid."

It is ONE TYPE of organization.

Red is a color (colour for the Brits here ), but not all colors are Red. Red generally means "stop", but not all colors do. In fact, green generally means "go".. and yellow "caution". (at least in street lights and signs).

So, the government does not have a mind or goals. Some organizations do, but the government does not.

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS -- first explain where I said that government and organization are synonyms.

Now stop being stupid.

Explain how the government is not an organization...

or "stop being stupid."

It is ONE TYPE of organization.

Red is a color (colour for the Brits here ), but not all colors are Red. Red generally means "stop", but not all colors do. In fact, green generally means "go".. and yellow "caution". (at least in street lights and signs).

So, the government does not have a mind or goals. Some organizations do, but the government does not.

If an organization has no goals, then why is it even organized to begin with? Wouldn't the organization dissolve without any goals at all?

[PLAYER57832]

BBS -- first explain where I said that government and organization are synonyms.

Now stop being stupid.

Explain how the government is not an organization...

or "stop being stupid."

It is ONE TYPE of organization.

Red is a color (colour for the Brits here ), but not all colors are Red. Red generally means "stop", but not all colors do. In fact, green generally means "go".. and yellow "caution". (at least in street lights and signs).

So, the government does not have a mind or goals. Some organizations do, but the government does not.

If an organization has no goals, then why is it even organized to begin with? Wouldn't the organization dissolve without any goals at all?

The US government is, in that sense, not really one organization, it is a combination of several competing interests. Ideally, they are supposed to compete against each other and come out with something that benefits the whole, but that depends on the individual pieces operating appropriately. We have seen a huge subversion of all that.

Even so, it is not the government itself that has goals, it is the people in power behind the government. Since they change, it is not appropriate to speak of "the government" as having a mind. Instead, you have to talk about the goals of the various entities that make up and have power within government.

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS -- first explain where I said that government and organization are synonyms.

Now stop being stupid.

Explain how the government is not an organization...

or "stop being stupid."

It is ONE TYPE of organization.

Red is a color (colour for the Brits here ), but not all colors are Red. Red generally means "stop", but not all colors do. In fact, green generally means "go".. and yellow "caution". (at least in street lights and signs).

So, the government does not have a mind or goals. Some organizations do, but the government does not.

If an organization has no goals, then why is it even organized to begin with? Wouldn't the organization dissolve without any goals at all?

The US government is, in that sense, not really one organization, it is a combination of several competing interests. Ideally, they are supposed to compete against each other and come out with something that benefits the whole, but that depends on the individual pieces operating appropriately. We have seen a huge subversion of all that.

The government is one organization with various components. To say that the government is not an organization implies that there is no distinction between the aggregate of one government's components and other aggregated components of "now non-existent" organizations (e.g. a culture, a business, an industry, a society, a tribe, or even a human being). A human being according to your interpretation of "organization" wouldn't be one organization because it's composed of these multiple parts. For us to speak of a human being, we'd have to mention its various cells, and the competing interests within the brain. But, we don't have to, because an organization is just an aggregation of its various components. This doesn't mean that an organization doesn't exist.

People use the word "organization" because it saves time--it's an all-encompassing term of the components within which compose the organization.


Regardless of the government's internal competing interests, the government, as one organization, does have at least one goal: survival, which is maintained through power and "enough" legitimacy. Regardless of all the different pro-government sub-organizations and individuals of which the government is composed, that organization still has at least that one goal.

If it had no goals, then it wouldn't exist, because there would be no purpose for the organization.

Even so, it is not the government itself that has goals, it is the people in power behind the government. Since they change, it is not appropriate to speak of "the government" as having a mind.

Since the government does have at least one goal, the people of the government would still align themselves ultimately to that one goal.

Instead, you have to talk about the goals of the various entities that make up and have power within government.

I'm not going to say "all the individuals and their respective sub-organizations within the organization of the US government" every time I want to use the word "US government." That's not necessary for our purposes here.