George Bernard Shaw nailed the concept of corporate greed in his drama "Major Barbara," which first appeared on stage in London in 1905 and then in a movie released in 1942.
In it, the author described how industrialists profit from warfare and even encourage it as a way of selling more munitions.
Americans like to think that in a democratic society, voters control how government acts. The conflict is whether voters endorse a liberal political party that favors the general population or a conservative party that says corporations will extend benefits to the general population.
At least, that's what some corporations say.
Reality, however, has an odd way of infringing on the stated dreams of what people say they are working for, and compares that to what they actually do.
There are indeed some corporations that provide extensive benefits to employees both during their work years and in retirement. Other workers depend on government programs such as Social Security pensions to help them during their senior years.
The problem arises when corporate leaders and their political allies claim they will provide benefits to workers, and this differs from what they actually do provide. Much of this conflict was resolved some 80 years ago when the Democratic government of President Franklin D. Roosevelt installed a variety of benefit programs.
Some corporations, however, and their right-wing political allies did not approve, and that disapproval continues even as millions of Americans depend increasingly on government-run programs for household welfare.
So is it possible that these corporations, in the name of free enterprise, want to dismantle government benefit programs -- which rely on corporate as well as personal contributions -- so these contributions can be passed on to shareholders?
Modern America was built on the belief that free enterprise can be beneficial to all. But if government favors corporate free enterprise over an individual's freedom to choose which program they prefer, then the nation may face a problem.
Political parties are often based on preferences of their followers, whether these followers be individuals or corporations. This leads to varying popularity of political parties -- sometimes the population favors a liberal party and other times a more conservative group.
America has seen this variation reflected in major elections for decades. As election season nears its height, this summer will see these opposing viewpoints advertised in campaign messages in increasing frenzy.
Come November, American voters will show their preferences as they choose representatives for the next two years in Washington as well as in many state elections.
Historically, many off-season elections such as the one upcoming have seen voters choose to counterbalance White House preferences with those favored by members of the opposition political party.
That noted, will we see liberal policies favored by Democrats overturned by more conservative action preferred by Republicans?
Stay tuned.
In it, the author described how industrialists profit from warfare and even encourage it as a way of selling more munitions.
Americans like to think that in a democratic society, voters control how government acts. The conflict is whether voters endorse a liberal political party that favors the general population or a conservative party that says corporations will extend benefits to the general population.
At least, that's what some corporations say.
Reality, however, has an odd way of infringing on the stated dreams of what people say they are working for, and compares that to what they actually do.
There are indeed some corporations that provide extensive benefits to employees both during their work years and in retirement. Other workers depend on government programs such as Social Security pensions to help them during their senior years.
The problem arises when corporate leaders and their political allies claim they will provide benefits to workers, and this differs from what they actually do provide. Much of this conflict was resolved some 80 years ago when the Democratic government of President Franklin D. Roosevelt installed a variety of benefit programs.
Some corporations, however, and their right-wing political allies did not approve, and that disapproval continues even as millions of Americans depend increasingly on government-run programs for household welfare.
So is it possible that these corporations, in the name of free enterprise, want to dismantle government benefit programs -- which rely on corporate as well as personal contributions -- so these contributions can be passed on to shareholders?
Modern America was built on the belief that free enterprise can be beneficial to all. But if government favors corporate free enterprise over an individual's freedom to choose which program they prefer, then the nation may face a problem.
Political parties are often based on preferences of their followers, whether these followers be individuals or corporations. This leads to varying popularity of political parties -- sometimes the population favors a liberal party and other times a more conservative group.
America has seen this variation reflected in major elections for decades. As election season nears its height, this summer will see these opposing viewpoints advertised in campaign messages in increasing frenzy.
Come November, American voters will show their preferences as they choose representatives for the next two years in Washington as well as in many state elections.
Historically, many off-season elections such as the one upcoming have seen voters choose to counterbalance White House preferences with those favored by members of the opposition political party.
That noted, will we see liberal policies favored by Democrats overturned by more conservative action preferred by Republicans?
Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment