Corporate Tyranny

Seneca III sends these ruminations on the shape of things to come, from the Dystopia Formerly Known as England.

Corporate Tyranny

by Seneca III

Corporate tyranny is the cancer at the heart of what is consuming our degraded civilization. The nations of Europe, the USA and indeed the whole world are groaning under despotic fiscal and social diktats implemented and sustained by the Central Committee of the NWO on which corporate beneficiaries and their bag-carriers have many seats. This whole unworkable construct is supported by an international banking cartel with a rotating paper debt, both sovereign and civil, that not only exceeds global GDP but is in fact a multiple of it.

Thus the inherent fragility of this system is moving it toward criticality, as it depends largely on dishonest and avaricious financial legerdemain supported by the application of political jackboots onto the necks of the worn and weary. The heart of this system is a draconian form of globalism which, because it is being imposed before a time when our species is sufficiently mature to collectively, willingly and peacefully encompass it, cannot succeed. Consequently, when this whole appalling house of cards collapses, it will do so suddenly and totally. The narrow escape we had in 2008, an ‘escape’ engineered by printing fiat money, or ‘Quantitative Easing’ as the corrupt and complicit political classes called it, has abjectly failed because inserting yet more pathogens into a gaping wound, be that wound either physiological, financial or social, will not cure an infection.

Hence, after the brutal depredations of the coming European and North American Liberation Wars, and when all the corporate and political predators, their Muslim and sub-Saharan foot soldiers and the well-meaning but naïve enablers and protectors of these evolutionary recidivists are either dead or gone, we will probably see business and life in general conducted on a much smaller, slower, bucolic scale, a scale more localized and more specific to a locale and its collective needs and inclinations.

It should be a simpler, more measured and loosely focused existence with a sound work ethic, but also time for unhurried family life and constructive leisure supported by a strong communal moral compass. What necessary technical, engineering, administrative urban and industrial conurbations as are necessary should be fewer and much smaller than at present, acutely efficient and firmly but fairly administered in terms of civil order and social conduct. They must not be permitted to live lives more indulgent, more healthy nor more privileged than those whose labours on the foundations of such a culture sustain them.

Government at any level must be as small as is workably possible and never a sinecured repository for hordes of the dependent and otherwise unemployable.

Without exception, educators must be required to educate not indoctrinate; there can be no compromise here, and the penalty for polluting young minds must be death.

Finally, I would like to add that despite the fact I am unlikely to live long enough to experience it, such a world lives strong in my dreams. For I, too, have dreams, even though I am in the late Autumn of my years and will never see them come to pass.

— Seneca III, in what is left of my beloved England this 18th day of September in the year 2018.

For links to previous essays by Seneca III, see the Seneca III Archives.

25 thoughts on “Corporate Tyranny

  1. The high tech industry is leading the charge in shutting down any opposition to the neo-marxist utopia that the overclass has in mind for us. This is all motivated out of the kindness of their hearts, of course.

    Frame game has been releasing some great videos on independent research he’s done on the depths of evil Google and Facebook have been engaged in:

  2. Hope for the future is localized control. A sort of New England shire type community. Food sources from people with whom you can shake hands, police more concerned with helping cats out of trees than smashing in doors, churches taking the place as welfare providers, a government small enough and close enough to warn or dissolve with a dozen armed men should the need arise.

    • That only works in relatively ethnically homogenous areas where their is a shared set of norms of behavior and high trust.

      Of course tribalism is also common in ethnically homogenous areas when trust is low. In an era of scarce resources and low social trust plus ethnically mixed populations, I think tribalism or rule by local warlord is the most likely outcome.

      • Babs, it’s not “ethnically homogeneous” here, but there are subsets across which many individuals interact. So tribalism exists here at least potentially – particularly if an outside group were perceived as threatening.

    • ” a government small enough and close enough to warn or dissolve with a dozen armed men…”

      Here’s the problem. Governments have to deal with at least 3 levels of security: external threats by other countries. organized, internal threats such as armed disputes between states, and individual security.

      The founding fathers of the Constitution had to wrestle with these problems. The Articles of Confederation made a union between more-or-less equal states, under a very weak confederation. The confederation was proving unsatisfactory for two reasons:
      1) External threats by other countries, Britain, France, Spain and down the road, the Barbary pirates, required a unified and professional military;
      2) States themselves were having disputes between them, almost devolving into armed conflict on a few occasions.

      Therefore, they changed the confederation of loose, equal states into a federation of quasi-independent states under the ultimate authority of the central government, hopefully limited by constitutional constraints. The first things the new government did was cut out the blackmail payments to France and England, and then raise a navy to face down the systematic pirating of US commerce by the Barbary Muslims.

      What we’re seeing today is the breakdown of the constitutional provisions mandating the independence of the state government on every matter not specifically covered in the constitution. We’re also seeing the breakdown of the separation of powers prescribed by the constitution, with the judiciary taking on executive powers, and the legislature basically paralyzed on its legislative function.

      We’re also seeing the unfettered growth of the federal bureaucracy injecting itself into almost every individual and corporate decision.

      These abuses may be the inevitable result of the federation form of government with a central authority. But, the inevitability of corruption does not mean that it was not needed. One analogy I can think of is taking cancer drugs; most cancer drugs are poisons themselves, and undoubtedly serve to shorten the life span of the individuals using them. But, without using them, they’d be dead immediately. So, the drug is the necessary lesser of two evils.

      Similarly, a central government of some power is the necessary condition for a people and culture to exist more than a few years before being absorbed by a state or country better organized militarily. The central government may itself become cancerous and threaten your existence as a people, but you’ve at least bought a few hundred years, in the worst case.

      Any solution that uses the central government to mandate some condition or another, such as

      What necessary technical, engineering, administrative urban and industrial conurbations as are necessary should be fewer and much smaller than at present, acutely efficient and firmly but fairly administered in terms of civil order and social conduct. They must not be permitted to live lives more indulgent, more healthy nor more privileged than those whose labours on the foundations of such a culture sustain them.

      simply adds to the problem of an all-powerful, unaccountable, tax-funded bureaucratic authority.

  3. Your writing is great but I’m not sure I agree that corporate tyranny is mankind’s bete noire. Think of all the alternative obsessions and interests man could have: every weekend we could spend our time at some colliseum watching people being slaughtered; we could be fascinated by warfare; we could always be interested in growing our empire; we could endlessly watch sports; we could be obsessed with consuming books and theater and music or making love. Therefore, it seems business is not a bad obsession of man…because it is trying to find needs of others and filling them. Admittedly it is trying to create needs too, but look at primates in general: they are always collecting stuff. It is in our genes. I do agree, however, that perverted capitalism where markets are rigged and businesses are allowed monopoly or monopsony formation…that this can degrade our freedoms.

    • Monopsony – a market with only one buyer. I’m indebted to you for introducing me to that word.

      In my opinion, the tools we currently have to prevent some of the worst abuses of YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, PayPal, etc, have not been used.

      For example, the literary depository exclusion mandates that a service uncritically publishing letters or articles is not itself liable for libel or slander, because it serves as a resource for free speech. However, if it filters its communications, it becomes liable for lawsuits because it’s communications can be seen as an expression of approval.

      In other words, Gates of Vienna is technically liable for libel because its letters are filtered, but the comment thread for Fox News articles are not, since anything goes.

      The judicial system could easily act to make Facebook, Twitter, etc liable for slander damages if they’re found to eliminate posters, postings, or accounts on the basis of content. Suddenly, they’re in the situation of having to monitor everything, not simply for political correctness, but for libel against individuals. This might the the social justice warriors something to think about when they want to “slant” towards the progressive.

      Similarly, it is not illegal to possess a monopoly in US markets. What is strictly illegal is to use your position of monopoly to influence the market. When YouTube or PayPal suddenly wipe out the past archives and subscriber lists of broadcasters they don’t approve of, I’d say there is hardly any more blatant use of monopoly power to shape the market. A few billion or hundred billion dollar damage awards, enforced, against highhanded and arbitrary actions such as abruptly canceling the Vdare account with PayPal, may also make the social justice warriors think twice before acting to deliberately damage a customer.

      The problem with many so-called solutions to corporate tyranny is that they involve a huge increase in the power, authority, and discretion of the bureaucratized, federal government, a prescription for disaster if ever there were one. You give the government the power to directly punish, say, Twitter for censoring some content, it’s not a long distance at all for the government itself to be making the determination of what is and is not appropriate to publish. Voila. You have the OSCE all over again.

  4. Since I, as well, am in the last quarter of my life I can but hope that simpler time comes. But, I can think of two stories: A canticle for Liebowitz and Something Wicked this way comes. My job is to do the best I can to leave things more tenable for those who may come after me. England seems not to be the one I knew. Even the USA seems to have become too strange a place these days. So, do what you can to make a difference, while you still can.

    • To quote Alissa, a commenter at Geller Report:

      “We’re at war. We all must do what we can to help. We’re all going to die one day so make sure you go knowing you did your very best to fight terrorism and protect your turf especially for your children and grandchildren.”

      • Any suggestions for behavior in this battle space you describe? Millions of families are just trying to thrive or survive; they have no weapons – nor can they – to “fight terrorism and protect their turf”.

        If they did, what would that behavior look like? Who would be doing what, precisely?

        This sounds like localized behavior where people know one another and actually interact in some meaningful way. Like volunteering, or attending church if that’s your choice to belong. Or starting neighborhood groups where knowledge of one another is more than a distant wave.

        Our culture has been moving towards increasing atomization for almost three generations now. We’re anonymous to one another; children move so far away from parents that getting back home means the expense of flying, of being tracked through airports in a soul-less mass. In fact, airport terminals and being packed like sardines into questionable tin cans after mauling by TSA gorillas have become emblematic of our current culture.

        If this is a war, the best thing we can do for our kids is to keep our children and grandchildren close enough to have a “turf” to protect.

        • I have a few suggestions for legislative goals:

          1) Complete freedom of association in all walks of life: employ who you wish, rent to who you wish, educate who you wish, sell to who you wish, allow real estate brokers and property sellers the discretion to limit their customers for certain areas.

          Yes, this would allow whatever KKKers who are not in the FBI to actually discriminate, if they wish.l

          2) Eliminate all government welfare and non-security benefits, including public education, indigent medical care, food stands, rent assistance, unemployment insurance, Medicaid, Medicare, etc. This would vastly decrease the incentive for immigrants.

          3) Eliminate the ability of the President or executive to engage in military actions outside the US unless directly attacked or a declaration of war by Congress is passed.

          Note, I said these are goals or objectives. They can be achieved politically and you can work towards them without being successful, but at least you’re in the fight.

      • Michael – Thanks for quoting 3:85. I hadn’t appreciated the (possible) significance of the word “never”.

        I’m sure you know that all the online copies of the Reliance have been taken down by the translator. Except this one, but if you want to copy text from it better hurry, it’s not likely to be there long:

  5. Great piece. Yes, the rule of cash über allies is destroying us all. When this is all collapsed and the new way takes over, we should reinstate the old social hierarchy like before; with the wealthy bourgeois mercurial class at the bottom, where they belong.

    • 😊😊😊
      “Thou rascal beadle, hold thy bloody hand!
      Why dost thou lash that whore? Strip thine own back;
      Thou hotly lust’st to use her in that kind
      For which thou whipp’st her. The usurer hangs the cozener.”

      Shakespeare: King Lear: Act 4 Scene 6

      • I’d call myself a classic liberal rather than socialist. Regarding our friend Seneca III, I was thinking more William Morris or John Ruskin than Karl Marx.

    • Mark – I got the same impression. I expect the inhabitants of Seneca’s post dystopian utopia will “work in the morning, fish in the afternoon and read Plato in the evening”.

    • I have to agree.

      What necessary technical, engineering, administrative urban and industrial conurbations as are necessary should be fewer and much smaller than at present, acutely efficient and firmly but fairly administered in terms of civil order and social conduct. They must not be permitted to live lives more indulgent, more healthy nor more privileged than those whose labours on the foundations of such a culture sustain them.

  6. What was foretold 2000 years ago has come to pass. Folks will be folks and greed has a belly that is never full, and has to share the table with death, who is also never full. They will visit the fruit of their ways upon their own head. It would be best for us to stay out of the way and avoid their company as much as possible.

  7. Charged, succint essay. As someone entering the summer of his life (35) I share these sentiments, that of the guillotine’s blade slowly descending upon our collective necks. Some of what’s here is similar to James Kunstler’s writing, the scaling back and focused rebuillding and reconnecting on a local level (but better written). It will take a T. Kaczynski level collapse of the industrial society for the European identity to rebloom. It seems our history to this point has quickly been forgotten within one generation, in a deliberate way, a way that todays educators have overwritten the minds of the young with acceptance and passivity, not in protecting their lands and their future.

  8. The law treats a corporation as a person distinct from its members. In reality the corporation is not a person. In reality the corporation does not even exist; what exists are the members and the assets. The law (or rather, the legislator) is therefore attempting to live a lie (or to force all those subject to that law to live a lie).

    When you attempt to live a lie, reality has a habit of biting you on the bum. This is now happening. It is time to correct this. The first step should be to abolish limited liability, but ultimately it is corporate legal personality that must be abolished.

Comments are closed.