Home | About | Donate

Just 100 Companies Will Sign Humanity’s Death Warrant

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/10/15/just-100-companies-will-sign-humanitys-death-warrant


Now I’m going to ask, who is the only candidate gleefully telling these oligarchs that he’s coming for them, welcomes their hatred, and that they shouldn’t even exist?

It ain’t Weasel Words Warren, I’ll tell you that effin much.


Since environmental responsibility isn’t in their vocabulary, We the People must rewrite the laws and bend politicians to fit our worldview.

Or, break them in half.


From the article:

“The higher-ups at those organizations control our governments, and therefore, our day-to-day lives.”

And those higher-ups all have names and addresses…


YEA!! The fact that SANDERS …said that…is amazing.


Now…you’re talkin’ …


I suggest that we start first and foremost with writing new law at the local level, working our way up to amendments to our State Constitutions which all include the Right of Local Self Government and the Rights of Nature. And in our spare time - hah - hit the streets with Extinction Rebellion and directly interrupt the forces of Capitalism, Oligarchs, and the Political Elite who have been driving this train of ecological destruction and the extinction of life on Earth.


Yay, serious but humorous humor

“The corporations that are screwing up your life, tainting your water, polluting your air, buying up your favorite coffee shop and turning it into a gas station, sucking your tax dollars up through subsidies, and all the while paying their employees a warm can of farts per hour—those corporations are the same ones creating the climate catastrophe.”

“Humanity’s Death Warrant”…"[A]ll the while paying their employees a warm can of farts per hour"…I like it…I like it…


Notes on “our rulers don’t care” that you got involved in non-disruptive marches, only the disruptive ones have an impact: funny, but see David Roberts’ political analysis for Vox

This serious, funny guy, with his giddy, anarchic humor gives spirit to us progressives. Buuut…

  1. Unless - in Wobblie/anarchist fashion - disruptive protests are taken up by and actively supported by those disrupted on their way to work - I don’t see such actions throwing a monkey wrench in the gears of capitalism (Kind of akin to Che Guevara’s point that guerilla warfare could only work if supported by the peasantry.)…hence, I don’t see “our rulers” caring about those actions either…

  2. So imo we’re thrown back on the “electoralist” political means available at this historical moment:

“Here’s the only way [the climate protest movement embraced by Sanders] works: You develop a vision of politics that puts ordinary people at the center and gives them a tangible stake in the country’s future, a share in its enormous wealth, and a role to play in its greater purpose. Then organize people around that vision and demand it from elected representatives. If elected representatives don’t push for it, make sure they get primaried or defeated. If you want bipartisanship, get it because politicians in purple districts and states are scared to cross you, not because you led them to the sweet light of reason…That’s the only prospect I know of for climate action on a sufficient scale.”

Don’t know David Roberts’ work for Vox? Please read - solid, ongoing coverage, plus he’s one of the best at explicating climate change science in the framework of progressive political analysis:


You might enjoy Lee Camp’s weekly show, Redacted Tonight:

He also does a weekly podcast, Common Censored (with Eleanor Goldfield):

1 Like

Stopping these corporations will be very difficult and it may not be necessary or productive.
Their greed could be turned into altruism.

Preserve corporate competition and their economies of scale by routing their flow of money from the oligarchy’s pockets to society’s. No taxation needed.

A simple periodic referendum to cap wealth could turn oligarchy profits into social and environmental welfare. Altruism as a form of greed is more satisfying than greed for its own sake.

A referendum would set a cap on personal net worth. Cap excesses would be shared equally, electronically, by all citizens. A cap of one billion one year for example, 100 million the next referendum.

A simple way to democratize the economy, eliminate poverty and prevent oligarchy.

1 Like

Remember Howie Hawkins is the original Green New Dealer, and the only candidate with a plan to meet the 2030 deadline.



1 Like

Problems with socialism:

If you change private control to state control, you’re not fixing the problem.

1 Like

Ownership now that’s the problem.

End ownership of the world’s resources, they belong to all the world’s people to use sustainably and for the highest good of all.

Just shut these companies down …


We solve inequality and overpopulation in one fell swoop.

Business as usual

Theirs, and ours

Is certain suicide.

Good video, I like Richard Wolff. It’s not incompatible with Howie Hawkins’ Ecosocialist Green New Deal, though it’s good to learn more about exactly what we want, in case we ever get a say. Howie wrote: “We need social and cooperative ownership” and calls for a “democratized economy where some sectors are nationalized, others are controlled by state and municipal government and more are re-made into cooperatives that are worker-owned.”

He talks about it more here:

Humanity doesn’t have enough sense to stay out of its own way.

Laugh - by a coincidence I’ve been listening and re-listening to Wolff on universal income over these last two days.

I liked him.

Had an undergrad macroeconomic class w/him in the late 70’s at U Mass, Amherst, in western Massachusetts: really, have only a single image of his comparing classic industrial period capitalists to sharks attacking each other - and, playing to his amphiteatre-type lecture hall audience, making biting head motions and noises.

(Wolff may have been one of a number of left wing teachers at Harvard who were not given tenor and, as a result, migrated over a short time to U Mass, Amherst in the 70s, creating the distinguished progressive Economics department it continues to have.)

Was struck in the universal income piece by his hyper-lucid articulation of points - which seems to combine Marxist clarity with a sort of exasperation…directed at historical masses that did not make the turn into socialism, or at the inveterate iniquity of capitalism, I don’t know…