And that’s a “corporation”. Imagine if it was run like a “business” with no board, no stockholders, no one to check the whims of the man in charge, no matter what a moron he is. And with laws in place that limit punishment no matter how much damage he does.
Still following Smith, it is also wise to attend to the “vile maxim” to which the “masters of mankind” are dedicated: “All for ourselves and nothing for other people” — a doctrine known otherwise as bitter and incessant class war, often one-sided, much to the detriment of the people of the home country and the world. – Dr. Noam Chomsky
The rising opposition to the neoliberal assault highlights another crucial aspect of the standard convention: it sets aside the public, which often fails to accept the approved role of “spectators” (rather than “participants”) assigned to it in liberal democratic theory. Such disobedience has always been of concern to the dominant classes. Just keeping to American history, George Washington regarded the common people who formed the militias that he was to command as “an exceedingly dirty and nasty people [evincing] an unaccountable kind of stupidity in the lower class of these people.”
In Violent Politics, his masterful review of insurgencies from “the American insurgency” to contemporary Afghanistan and Iraq, William Polk concludes that General Washington “was so anxious to sideline [the fighters he despised] that he came close to losing the Revolution.” Indeed, he “might have actually done so” had France not massively intervened and “saved the Revolution,” which until then had been won by guerrillas — whom we would now call “terrorists” — while Washington’s British-style army “was defeated time after time and almost lost the war.”
!['Tom The Dancing Bug' Turns 20: Ruben Bolling's Award-Winning 2017 [Interview]](https://assets.gocomics.com/uploads/blogs/blog_image_large_4068_7479_Tom_The_Dancing_Bug_20th_Anniversary_201706271720.jpg)
Alabama Al about 4 years ago
Do you know what is the generally accepted term for a government run like a business? “Dictatorship.”
Skeptical Meg about 4 years ago
And that’s a “corporation”. Imagine if it was run like a “business” with no board, no stockholders, no one to check the whims of the man in charge, no matter what a moron he is. And with laws in place that limit punishment no matter how much damage he does.
That would really be a disaster.
wrd2255 about 4 years ago
I like the part where the Board can remove a lousy CEO…if they actually do it.
Kilrwat Premium Member about 4 years ago
It’s as though he had looked through a crystal ball!
willie_mctell about 4 years ago
Run like a Trump property.
mfrasca about 4 years ago
Internalize the profits.
Socialize the costs.
braindead Premium Member about 4 years ago
Another cartoon beyond the understanding of the Trump Disciple.
GaryCooper about 4 years ago
“Government should be run like a business.” Maybe like Enron, or the Trump Taj Mahal?
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] about 4 years ago
“The Masters of the World” by Noam Chomsky (2016)
Still following Smith, it is also wise to attend to the “vile maxim” to which the “masters of mankind” are dedicated: “All for ourselves and nothing for other people” — a doctrine known otherwise as bitter and incessant class war, often one-sided, much to the detriment of the people of the home country and the world. – Dr. Noam Chomsky
The rising opposition to the neoliberal assault highlights another crucial aspect of the standard convention: it sets aside the public, which often fails to accept the approved role of “spectators” (rather than “participants”) assigned to it in liberal democratic theory. Such disobedience has always been of concern to the dominant classes. Just keeping to American history, George Washington regarded the common people who formed the militias that he was to command as “an exceedingly dirty and nasty people [evincing] an unaccountable kind of stupidity in the lower class of these people.”
In Violent Politics, his masterful review of insurgencies from “the American insurgency” to contemporary Afghanistan and Iraq, William Polk concludes that General Washington “was so anxious to sideline [the fighters he despised] that he came close to losing the Revolution.” Indeed, he “might have actually done so” had France not massively intervened and “saved the Revolution,” which until then had been won by guerrillas — whom we would now call “terrorists” — while Washington’s British-style army “was defeated time after time and almost lost the war.”