You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: THE ABSOLUTELY HILARIOUS WAKING NIGHTMARE OF LEROY CROW

in Deep Dives3 years ago

In political science, the term banana republic describes a politically unstable country with an economy dependent upon the exportation of a limited-resource product, such as bananas or minerals. In 1904, the American author O. Henry coined the term to describe Honduras and neighbouring countries under economic exploitation by U.S. corporations, such as the United Fruit Company (now Chiquita Brands International).[1] Typically, a banana republic has a society of extremely stratified social classes, usually a large impoverished working class and a ruling class plutocracy, composed of the business, political, and military elites of that society.[2] The ruling class controls the primary sector of the economy by way of the exploitation of labor;[3] thus, the term banana republic is a pejorative descriptor for a servile oligarchy that abets and supports, for kickbacks, the exploitation of large-scale plantation agriculture, especially banana cultivation.[3]

A banana republic is a country with an economy of state capitalism, whereby the country is operated as a private commercial enterprise for the exclusive profit of the ruling class. Such exploitation is enabled by collusion between the state and favored economic monopolies, in which the profit, derived from the private exploitation of public lands, is private property, while the debts incurred thereby are the financial responsibility of the public treasury. Such an imbalanced economy remains limited by the uneven economic development of town and country and usually reduces the national currency into devalued banknotes (paper money), rendering the country ineligible for international development credit.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic

Sort:  

See, there is a difference between the country and everything else. The less healthy the people and corporations, the more the government has to feed off them to maintain its survival, and the government itself is nothing but a corporation.

the government itself is nothing but a corporation

and corporations are NOT MERITOCRACIES

(a.) the government itself is nothing but a corporation = true
(b.) and corporations are NOT MERITOCRACIES = true

There is a caveat to (b.), although corporations are not meritocracies, that doesn't mean a corporation cannot exist meritorious-like. Generally speaking, the meritorious individual or entity will rise to the top. However, if doing so allows them to receive government welfare, that's when things start to get fucky and questionable, and that's because the same merit that took them where they are can get discarded in favor of "being too big to fail." No, the failure needs to happen, and the people need to feel the pain, just like we need to feel the pain of our failing government for allowing it to get away with what we allowed. Government can only get away with what the people collectively allow.

i'm actually impressed that you think that "the best people" will "rise to the top" of an unmoderated, ungoverned system.

i guess that's why Al Capone is considered a capitalist mastermind

Al Capone made money selling liquor in
a moderated and governed system. It's
why so many of those in his employ &
law enforcement died. If it were not
moderated or governed, everyone
could sell liquor and it would be
a less interesting business for
the criminally minded.