Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: If Corporations Are Persons Let's Execute One.

Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 18, 2011, 10:32 p.m. EST by rosewood (543)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Will OWS consider launching economic boycotts at specific corporations; targeting their bottom line, or is this a tactic that we won't utilize ?

105 Comments

105 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by SoldOut (150) 12 years ago

Can we put one in jail and tell its employees to go home and then take all of it possessions like we would a drug dealer

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (5843) 12 years ago

Lets do it.

[-] 2 points by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ 12 years ago

An excellent tactic! If only enough people will participate. However, I believe this kind of effort must arise from the people themselves. The problem is how to get such a movement started. Also, many people will not give up personal likes and dislikes without powerful motivation. However, banks are a pain in the a** which all of us understand. Perhaps the focus should be there.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I'm certain we can multi-task, and focus on banks as well as corporations. When OWS first began it was just a small number of people, now look at it.There are activists who know how to launch an economic boycott; OWS has to the word out for help. First this proposal has to be discussed within OWS and I had hoped that people would carry this directly to OWS for consideration.I'll have to do it when I'm off . We need multi-focal points not just one. It stimulates the populace; keeps the 1% minions busy, and develops us. It's also essential if you truly want to garner the power for systemic change.

[-] 2 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

The minions of the 1% will try to assure us of the futility of economic boycotts because it is this tactic which will cause them real concerns and impact their bottom line. Beware those who seek to divert you into ineffective strategies and actions like letter writing campaigns. 1% minions will be on this seeking to divert and neutralize the conversation and interest in deploying global economic boycotts.

[-] 2 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Okay people I am employed, and have to work some 12 hour shifts; so I'm asking those who agree that OWS needs to move into the next phase that should encompass GLOBAL OCCUPY in a global economic boycott, to pick this proposal up, and encourage OWS to seriously consider it for global direct action. I won't be around for a day or so since I have these shifts. Please help us to turn OWS in this direction, as we continue our protests using all the non-violent means at our disposal. Peace

[-] 3 points by Rico (3027) 12 years ago

Thanks ! I've already got it out to several thousand folks via my own networks, and I'm getting nothing but supporting comments back so far. Assuming no duplicates (and there will be some), we only need this to happen 150,000 times and we'll have covered the entire population of the US !

SEED THE CLOUD FOLKS !

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

totally awesome...thank you

[-] 2 points by OccupyMonsterdotcom (6) 12 years ago

you realize incorporating a business protects even small business owners? AKA, a person slips and falls outside your bookstore.. now they want to not only take the store's assets, but your home as well. Its a smart business move to protect your personal assets.

How is bringing down Coke or Pepsi going to do anything? Does their money magically go into your pockets if you destroy them? You realize they are a global company right? They could EASILY survive if their US customers went away.

You all need to realize that the US is becoming less and less important in the World. Plenty of business elsewhere. Also, what happens to all the people that Coke and Pepsi employ? I'm not talking about the top Execs.. who will just make their money from foreign markets instead.

I'm talking about the people who work in accounting, marketing, IT, maintenance, factory workers, truck drivers, janitors, etc. They probably make average wages for their jobs, they aren't living it up.

They all lose their jobs, thanks to you.

[-] 1 points by hortstu (5) 12 years ago

The number one problem is that we are giving the majority of our money to multinational corporations that have no allegiance to America. The extent of their allegiance is throwing money at every politician that has the slightest chance of getting elected. So then we put these people in power, at least 99% of which are part of the 1%, and then they do the bidding of their multinational corporate masters. They don't do what's right for the progressives, the conservatives, the liberals or anyone other than the 1%. This will never change until the 99% cuts off the flow of money to the 1%.

[-] 1 points by Doc4the99 (591) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

Small business doesnt pour millions into campaign and congressional lobbying. Also when a small business goes bank rupt, generlly speaking thousands dont loose their 401k s while ceo s walk away with.millions. Those are rhe rights of corporations we nees to repeal. Not small business

[-] 1 points by Doc4the99 (591) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

I am personally not anti capitalism or business , but there has to limitations. What happened is that big firms poured money into lobbying for things like unregulated deratitives trading since early 2000s, this stuff is complicated, and thats partly why people dont question it. While the conversation has started for sure.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

As far as I'm concerned, we're in the beginning of a war; and it's real; in war, albeit non-violent; there is collateral damage. I'd rather lose several hundred jobs; than lose 2 million jobs, lives, and futures because the psychopathic power elites were left unchecked and uncontained in their blood lust , greed and insanity.

Yes PepsiCo is a global company; and OWS is a global movement; and this is a opportune time to use the global movement to contain a global 1% corporation. This would be a great adventure and action to see if the 99% globally can consciously coordinate the economic takedown of a transnational to gain power and control over the excesses, brutality and injustice of the corporate world. If we could do this, then we can begin to truly make demands, and have the economic firepower to be taken seriously.

[-] 2 points by Bone75 (13) from Lumberton, MS 12 years ago

I agree that someone like Pepsi would be an easier target, but how would destroying a soda company help our economy?

[-] 2 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

It's a transnational corp, a real minion of the 1%, with a history of worker and enviromental abuses in developing nations. We now have fascism, a merger of government and corporations systematically deconstructing the republic and economy, and effecting a financial coup d'etat. We won't have a constitution, republic or economy if we leave it to the 1% who ONLY respond to power, control and greed.

We can demand all forms of reform and change, but unless you come to the gunfight with some major firepower, euphemistically speaking, the power structure isn't going to move. As a peaceful global movement we need an arsenal of peaceful weapons; that the oligarchy or 1% will respond to.

Economic boycotts and divestments helped bring down South African Apartheid, it was effective and it worked; and global OWS can learn to move as a single intention; economically bringing down a targeted corporation, which would show the 1% that the 99% means business and are serious; so they need to implement OWS demands. To preserve a corporation and lose your constitution, economy, republic, rights and freedoms is to assign ourselves to serfdom. If just one corporation's bottom line is impacted, the corporate world may cease disregarding the 99% with contempt. Then again when they stop disrespecting you; it get's into life and death serious tyranny and police state actions.

[-] 1 points by VERUM (108) 12 years ago

All I have to say is this... if Corporations are people... I want to pay the same in federal taxes as GE!

Ohhh... I'll take the subsidies as well... along with my own Lobbyist !

[-] 1 points by Doc4the99 (591) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

Lets make them cry

[-] 1 points by guynorth (33) 12 years ago

Boycotts have never worked post-industrialization/post-permanent-corporation legal change. The reason is rather simple, unfortunately, no corporation truly stands so isolated that any boycott that is feasible by a common public would affect any action by the corporation of interest.

As such an example, to accomplish boycotting a corporation such as PepsiCo, one would need to boycott everything on the following list for at least one to two fiscal years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_PepsiCo

And even if the boycott were successful, the resulting affect would be something akin to what provoked K-Mart's purchase of Sears Roebuck & Co. in which because K-Mart was going into the, "black", they purchased Sears after selling a large extent of K-Mart locations and assets; this prevented them from falling into the, "black", and changed their revenue stream from being strictly K-Mart and now became anything Sears had grown over its corporate existence - such as Craftsman and Kenmore, as well as the Sears Card (credit card accounts and collections earnings.)

So essentially, boycotting a large brand such as PepsiCo would cause another corporate buyout which would, at worst, shuffle the revenue stream of the following brand into PepsiCo. And it may not be restricted to the same line of business. For example, PepsiCo. could buyout T-Mobile while selling its losing assets to assist in the venture, and then in turn possibly have enough buying power following such sales to offer upon Motorla or even possibly Google licenses.

It would not be impossible to see a falling PepsiCo. result in a bought-out Google.

Boycotting, as a result of these systems, simply does not work anymore. The world is just not that simple.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

That's exactly what I'd say if I didn't want the public to boycott; I'd explain the futility of the act; as futile as having a movement based on occupation, which would never get off the ground.

[-] 1 points by guynorth (33) 12 years ago

The issue is more with the legal standing of a corporation than it is with their product or income. The futility only exists by wrote of law which wasn't always the standard of the corporation. Initially, the corporation was a temporary status of business and not a standard license of indefinite identity responsible to no single citizen or citizenship, yet responsible to its own preservation.

This was not always the case, and this is where the principle contradiction of circumstance arises in regards to the corporate responsibility to the common.

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 12 years ago

Just so people have the full background ...

On June 25, 1948, US Code Title 1, Section 1 was revised by Congress to read "In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise - the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;"

Given this definition of a corporation as a person, the Supreme Court had little choice but to grant them their free speech rights in the Citizens United case. The majority opinion also noted media corporations (Fox, MSNBC, etc) routinely advocate candidates, and there is path under law to allow one corporation to advocate while denying another the same right according to equal protection.

The court's hands were tied. Congress needs to fix Title 1, Section 1.

[-] 1 points by htorres1107 (24) 12 years ago

You've got my vote!

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

That's great...hopefully we can all start urging OWS to go in this direction, and I'm sure Max Keiser, will be a consultant if asked, since it was his idea, years ago; and he mentioned it recently.

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

How about BP?

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Lots of consumers some instituional, won't boycott BP.

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I laid out the reason for PepsiCO; highly vulnerable to a consumer base; easier to take down; already being boycotted for using aborted fetal cells to develope a sweetner: everyone could participate, kids to adults, they produce many well known consumer products. Max Keiser studied this corp and recomended a long time ago to target this corp.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 12 years ago

MK and his buddy have an Occupy Coke campaign, didn't hear anything about pepsi

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

"aborted fetal cells to develope a sweetner"

OMG I had no idea about this. How gruesome.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I put this out there in another post, and a guy did some immediate research on this corporation, and they're up there with the 1% it seems working for global financial tyranny.

[-] 1 points by stuartchase (861) 12 years ago

Here's our first victim!

Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. Digital Products Division 9740 Irvine Boulevard Irvine, CA 92618-1697 1-949-583-3000

They had a heavy hand in Japan's nuclear accident. It's only a matter of time before Japan's nuclear waste affects Americans.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-03-13/tepco-toshiba-jr-east-may-be-among-most-hurt-by-earthquake.html

They sold U.S. military secrets to the Russians.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/04/15/opinion/l-punishing-toshiba-is-a-secondary-boycott-809388.html

And Toshiba is giving the folks the shaft!

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2213279355#!/group.php?gid=2213279355&v=wall

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/computers/toshiba.html

http://www.boycottowl.com/Toshiba/79

[-] 1 points by yarichin (269) 12 years ago

No, lets charge anyone who owns a corporation (person), with violating slavery laws. Selling or owning a person is a crime. Owning stock in a person is a crime. A corporation is a person = owning a corporation is a crime.

[-] 2 points by classicliberal (312) 12 years ago

So you support corporate personhood?

[-] 1 points by yarichin (269) 12 years ago

I support using the person-hood they bribed our politicians to get, to put their asses in jail. This is a case of be careful what you wish for. Fuck them with their own court case.

[-] 1 points by classicliberal (312) 12 years ago

And you want the politicians in jail too I hope?

[-] 1 points by coolnyc (216) from Stone Ridge, NY 12 years ago

. . . thus taking that which has been taken to a ridiculous extreme to its logical conclusion. Love it, but in a situation where 1% owns the courts . . .

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 12 years ago

brilliant! Absolutely brilliant.

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I'm serious about this, and seeking the most doable strategy, vs setting a precedent that will be a judicial long shot.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 12 years ago

Change.org has some boycotting information for Black Friday. It's not about the money. It's about families. Check out the petition against Target.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I'm talking about economically taking down a transnational corporation to launch the economic resistance arm of OWS in a manner that will send a shot to all the corporate boardrooms around the world; and establish GLOBAL OWS as a corporate economic containment instrument, staffed by global humanity. I'm not talking about Black Friday, but about deconstructing a transnational by global humanity as a warning to all the others.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 12 years ago

How do you propose that be done other than the people as customers refusing to do business with the transnational corporation? I think if a corporation is exhibiting unscrupulous behavior and it could be taken down, that would send a clear message from the bottom to the top. Once profits are at stake, real attention will be paid.

[-] 0 points by Gmartine (106) 12 years ago

Yes. The free market gives the consumer the choice of who to support. But of course RP supporters are not for the execution of a life.

[-] 0 points by winwinforall (-13) 12 years ago

Do it - - someone please show us the list - - you must identify those corporations first and do it - - no violence please. These bastards don't like exposures and don't like "all" to wake up. They use corporations to run the USA, there are no real "Constitutional Republic" governments. Here they are w/ their filings in the state of Delaware:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.
Non-profit Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 4/19/89 File No. 2193946

(USA Corporation...disguised as Federal Gov't - - using a fraudulent constitution.) INTERNAL REVENUE TAX AND AUDIT SERVICE (IRS) For Profit General Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 7/12/33 File No. 0325720 FEDERAL RESERVE ASSOCIATION (Federal Reserve) Non-profit Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 9/13/14 File No. 0042817

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AUTHORITY INC. (CIA) For Profit General Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 3/9/83 File No. 2004409

SOCIAL SECURITY CORP, DEPT. OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE For-Profit General Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date: 11/13/89 File No. 2213135 etc… The following video will show you facts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0BUGSrkvTM&feature=related

That's why they are being sued: The lawsuit that could end the gangster rule of Western civilization - November 24th, 201

http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/benjaminfulford/2011/11/the-lawsuit-that-could-end-the-gangster-rule-of-western-civilization.html

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Great info thanks so much. How would you respond to people who say boycotting corporations would destroy jobs, and hurt the 99%. I have my answer but i'd love to hear others.

[-] 0 points by LiberalsAreExHighSchoolGeeks (-5) 12 years ago

You liberals are probably wondering where the idea that businesses are people come from. This is what I was taught in business school and it made sense. It makes sense just on the idea that if every person leaves the building then what do you have? You have a building.

From Wikipedia: As a matter of interpretation of the word "person" in the Fourteenth Amendment, U.S. courts have extended certain constitutional protections to corporations. Opponents of corporate personhood seek to amend the U.S. Constitution to limit these rights to those provided by state law and state constitutions.[3]

Others argue that corporations should have the protection of the U.S. Constitution, pointing out that they are organizations of people, and that these people should not be deprived of their human rights when they act collectively.[4] In this view, treating corporations as "persons" is a convenient legal fiction that allows corporations to sue and to be sued, that provides a single entity for easier taxation and regulation, that simplifies complex transactions that would otherwise involve, in the case of large corporations, thousands of people, and that protects the rights of the shareholders as well as the right of association.

[-] 1 points by coolnyc (216) from Stone Ridge, NY 12 years ago

All of that is well and good, but when they can buy MY elected officials there's a problem. Corporations may be collections of individuals, but the big mothers are amorale profit machines capable of wielding a great amount of influence. That influence needs to be better checked or we lose the basic concept that elected officials serve people not legal entities. A line has to be drawn somewhere. They can't vote. Why should they be able to engage in political graft?

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Yes I scanned that peice which is why I posted if corporations are people ; let's execute one..and I mean that..economically speaking.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheePatriot (-2) 12 years ago

Losers with no money can't boycott?

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

OWS is a global movement that could respond with global economic boycotts; and every child to adult can boycott the products of PepsiCO. Also there are many sucessful employed middle class people like me supporting and part of OWS.

[-] 0 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

Why not remove their power base by removing their ability to fund elections or legislation?

http://www.nycga.net/groups/political-and-electoral-reform/docs/amendment-28-to-the-constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america

ARTICLE—

“SECTION 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.

“SECTION 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state, and any such corporate entities that are subject to regulation”.

“SECTION 3. All entities except people, person, or citizen as used in Section 2 of this amendment are excluded from participation in the political process”.

“SECTION 4. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable”.

[-] 1 points by Bone75 (13) from Lumberton, MS 12 years ago

I totally agree, and to me this is the core issue of what OWS is all about. The only way to get rid of corporate influence on our government is to prevent them from buying politicians.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

The proposed amendment does just that, but I just found out that a Congressman wrote a perfect amendment.

http://deutch.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=269672

Now every body has to engage in a letter writing campaign to their legislators to pass this, as is, without any alterations and do it now.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

So you want to divert people from a targeted global economic boycott; a powerful weapon, to a letter writing campaign. Almost sounds like psyops=psychological operations, and an attempt to divert, nullify, neutralize and disperse operation. As if we haven't been writing letters for decades. Letter writing is safe and ineffective so yes the minions of the 1% would try to corral us into letter writing campaigns.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

No, my letter will read if they don't pass an amendment that removes corporations and so on from politics by July 4, 2012 I will strike and boycott until they do.

I want a finished draft to send to them with the instructions to pass this as is, without any alterations and without any rider or other bills.

If a 5-10 million people did this, well that would hardly be something the legislators could ignore. Come July 5, 2012 everybody boycott everything except that which is needed like food and your bills.

Boycott restaurants, boycott theaters, boycott gas stations [take public transit if at all possible or walk if you can], boycott everything.

The union is behind this so they can go on strike as well. Picket city hall, picket the legislators, picket everything.

It is the only way these idiots are going to pass anything that is of value to the American people.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

We are now in a police state; and historically police states DO NOT respond to the demands of even a mobilized populace. While OWS is already impacting the culture; I doubt it will be able to create systemic and financial reform until it arms itself with the formidable economic firepower of global economic boycotts.The quest for electoral and politcal reform has been sought for decades unsucessfully because the 99% had no backup and brought nothing to the gun fight but protests. The bottom line is where they live..economic boycotts should be added to our arsenal of direct action. Implement the reforms we demand or we will boycott and economicaly bring down this corporation.

[-] 2 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

You make a choice, 650,000 to 1,000,000 people did when the removed their money from banks and moved a credit union.

If twice those numbers [1.3 - 2million] boycott Black Friday, it will have a significant impact and if that number doubles or triples [3.9 - 6million] for Christmas that will be a massive movement.

Be a part of the number if you choose to.

[-] 2 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I'm sure boycotting one Black Friday won't eliminate the development of the OWS global movement to engage corporations with direct action long term...so go for it.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

You have to respond to what I wrote if you want me to respond to what you wrote. This is called a discussion.

The perfect bill. http://deutch.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=269672

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

I did respond; I said go for it. Perfect bills go through committe and are watered down, and laced with loopholes, but thanks for the info. We need to follow that bill.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

Boycotting Christmas and threatening to boycott if the amendment isn't passed will drive home this is something important to you. I will boycott everything except what I can until this passes.

It has to get to the floor of the house first.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

We can track it using govtrack.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

post the URL and I will pass it around.

Pass the legislation URL around as well.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

No i'm not interested in supporting psyops on here and diverting the people into a ineffective tactic. I'm pushing for global economic boycotts and the effort will be to divert and corral us away from this strategy because it will alter the public consciousness and corporate landscape.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 12 years ago

I don't think we could do a global economic boycott or I would push for that as well. I try to get the one thing we need, money out of politics. Since I know that right now we can do publicly funded elections I am just settling for the least of what is needed for us to actually be able to fix this.

Removing all money except from corporations and those entities.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 12 years ago

Forum Post: Boycot Wal-Mart on Black Friday

Posted 59 minutes ago on Nov. 18, 2011, 12:08 p.m. EST by hirez3 This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Please everyone lets contact all our friends and family, and ask them to PLEASE stay away from Wal-Mart at least on Black friday, lets send the kind of message to the Walton's that they can understand . . . . . . MONEY. I would also beg all of you to consider, like my wife and myself to take Wal-Mart completely off you list of shopping locations, lets not help them kill another small town!

http://occupywallst.org/forum/boycot-wal-mart-on-black-friday/

[-] 1 points by mandodod (144) 12 years ago

They have really good deals on vacuums. and....everything else. They are helping poor America. Food there is cheap! You can't hurt Wal Mart.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 12 years ago

I'm not impressed by their grocery prices

[-] 1 points by mandodod (144) 12 years ago

If you take your time and shop for all the regular stuff you buy, you will find it is far cheaper.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 12 years ago

sorry

not groceries

[-] 1 points by mandodod (144) 12 years ago

Sorry, wrong. Take vianna sausages for example. Libby's brand is at least $1.17 per can at Safeway stores. At WalMart they are .56 cents. Just a tiny example. The nice breads at the main stores atr $3.50 to $4.00 I can buy a nice same brand loaf all day long for $2.50. Really, I go there all the tome when I can and other times I go to the regular Union market and it is much more. Do your own test. Price stuff at your union store and then price Wal Mart. Maybe WEal Martr is cheaper where I am.

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Yes, we need to be supporting the mom and pop stores, although I'm focused on economically impacting the bottom line of a offending transnational to launch OWS as a formidable global economic containment instrument of coporate America. We need to takedown a major transnational and evolve into a global economic containment instrument.

[-] 0 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Wal-Mart is a major global company. There are Wal-Marts in Canada, Mexico, Europe...

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Please skim comments as I responded as to why PepsiCO might be better for an initial effort.

[-] 0 points by Bone75 (13) from Lumberton, MS 12 years ago

Exxon/Mobile should be #1 on any boycott list. The cost of gas and oil is outrageous, yet this company stands proudly at #2 on the list of most profitable companies in the country.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

The oil companies have been threatened with boycotts for decades and Americans have never been interested enough to effectively boycott them. Further, the priority for me, is getting global humanity to consciously recognize, that with a global movement, we can now have effective global economic boycotts; and hit the 1% where they actually live..profits and the bottom line.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

If you skin the comments you see that the oil companies may not be the best choice, for one, they are supported by other institutions. In a practice run, to launch OWS's corporate containment arm; you choose a corp that is vulnerable to it's consumer base, a DOABLE by a young movement. I wouldn't pick several giants as we learn to do this as the 99%.

[-] 0 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 12 years ago

Interesting analogy, but persons may only be executed in this country after--at a minimum--a jury finds them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of aggravated murder or treason. After that, there are typically many years of appeals. What you are proposing, instead, is to summarily execute a corporate person just because you don't like it.

Thankfully, OWS numbers are far to paltry to create more than a blip in a large corporation's stock price. Regrettably, occupiers have already killed or injured small businesses near their fetid campgrounds.

[-] 2 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Corporations have and are, killing millions of people, and OWS has millions of potential supporters who won't get in the streets, but who absolutely would participate in global economic boycotts. We have a untapped pool of supporters just waiting to engage a good cause.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 12 years ago

It's to prove a point that corporations are not people. It's not to be taken literally.

But when you say that corporations don't kill people.... well obviously not all of them do and most of them don't. What about all the corps that have been responsible for deaths from tainted and poisoned products? Especially those who knew the products were tainted but figured the lawsuits would be cheaper than throwing away the products.

[-] 0 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 12 years ago

Well, of course it's not to be taken literally; it's an analogy (and I didn't contend a corporation can't kill a person). My point is that you aren't so much as trying to execute a corporation as to lynch one. Of course, OWS is way, way too small to significantly affect any large corporation. So far, it has only hurt food vendors and other mom-and-pop businesses.

[-] 0 points by lonewolf1069 (-1) 12 years ago

I hope that whoever started this thread real;izes that its name is a class 3 felony in most states under the terroristic threats via a federaly regulated communications device...real smart for people who claim to have an actual agenda other than pot smoking....harassing kids going to school...stoping hard working people from going to work and craping in the park

[-] 2 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Yes I am aware, that it could be considered economic terrorism, but having witnessed the system of South African Apartheid come down with the effective use of a global boycott; I am compelled to try to ressurect it as a effective weapon which needs to be utilized along with mass non-compliance, and strategies we are presently using.

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 12 years ago

From Wikipedia:

Boycotts are unquestionably legal under common law. The right to engage in commerce, social intercourse, and friendship includes the implied right not to engage in commerce, social intercourse, and friendship. Since a boycott is voluntary and nonviolent, the law cannot stop it. Opponents of boycotts historically have the choice of suffering under it, yielding to its demands, or attempting to suppress it through extralegal means, such as force and coercion.

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Thanks but with the Patriot Act, and post 911 Terrorism laws, what I'm expousing might come under economic terrorism; but I'm so fed up...I'll take the risk. If OWS were to adopt this, anticipate major blowback from the 1%...the battle would be on for real; because that is their achilles heel.

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Osama Bin Laden is dead. So should the Patriot Act:

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/repeal-patriot-act/JF1pdPKg

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Agreed but they want police state measures so they can plunder, terrorize assume full control over the populace. Another reason why we need economic boycotts, in addition to other strategies.

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I think that would be a legal stretch, but I'm not a lawyer. Would 12 men and women agree? (Depends how they are chose I guess.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 12 years ago

Which ones and what is the criteria?

[-] 1 points by stuartchase (861) 12 years ago

Toshiba! This link clearly illustrates their crimes:

http://www.occupywallst.org/forum/toshiba-is-raping-the-poor/

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 12 years ago

Methinks stuartchase is a disgruntled former employee of Toshiba.

[-] 1 points by stuartchase (861) 12 years ago

No, I caught Toshiba doing bad things to people who couldn't defend themselves, and I want everyone to know about it. Also, Toshiba has used UPS' name to vindicate their warranty fraud scam and UPS looks the other way because Toshiba is a big client of UPS.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

PepsiCO is easier for a economic takedown, completely vulnerable to the consumer base, and a badassed 1% corporation. We need a sure thing for the first run.

[-] 1 points by stuartchase (861) 12 years ago

Toshiba has the worst record. They use UPS as cover for their warranty fraud scam. If you don't have any evidence or personal experience that PepsiCO is up to no good, let us focus on the really bad companies. :)

[-] 0 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 12 years ago

Taking down Pepsico is a sure thing? The .001%'s delusions of grandeur are something to behold.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Yes, there is no sure thing....but I can hope lol Actually if OWS adopts economic boycotts, I expect the gates of hell to be flung open as the 1% go berserk. I might find myself in a Fema camp .

[-] 1 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 12 years ago

If you end up in a FEMA camp, I'll slip you a Pepsi through the fence.

[-] 1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

hahahahaha geez thanks OMG that was great lol

[-] 0 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Max Keiser tried to initiate this some time ago; researching and finding PepsiCO to be the most vulnerable to economic takedown by the consumer. It has a record of enviromental and worker abuses in the developing nations. Additionally PepsiCO is seeking to develope a sweetner using the cells of aborted fetal cells, so pro-life groups are already boycotting it.

This could be a good global exercise for OWS to economically takedown PepsiCO. It's vulnerable to consumer boycott, a transnational that is a major 1% minion; it could create more support for OWS with religious groups, creating more supporters, and there are other cryptic reasons which Keiser mentioned which I don't remember. PepsiCo should be our trial run, our training exercise before we go after something hardcore like Monsanto.

[-] -1 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 12 years ago

But what is the criteria?

[-] -2 points by Lizzy0Windsor (36) 12 years ago

Depends how keen you are on creating mass unemployment and global economic depression.

[-] 0 points by yarichin (269) 12 years ago

Yes, you are right the corporations love sharing money, by giving jobs to people. Is your last name Reagan?

[-] -1 points by rosewood (543) 12 years ago

Mass unemployment, global depression, depopulation and starvation is what they have planned for the 99%; and their tools for engagement are the corporations...yet we'd be reluctant to economically hit their weapons of economic conquest...the corporations/banks ?

So basically we won't go to their achilles heel, or where they live; and use one of our best weapons, global economic boycotts ? Also it's not viable to bring down an offending corporation, and then reconstruct another business here on American shores; that will be responsive to the public ? So we'll take a life and death chance by not engaging one of our most potent weapons with an adversary which intends to enslave and kill us, because we need jobs ?