Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
15. That doesn't improve the situation.
Thu Jun 6, 2013, 11:02 AM
Jun 2013

But the main distinction is: the government operates exclusively by threat of force.

A corporation data-mining is looking to improve its chances of having you patronize their business. If you decide you don't want to regardless of their solicitations then that settles the matter.

However, a government that indiscriminately sifts the lives of its citizens may decide it wishes to act on those that it finds displeasing. This can lead to regulatory harassment, undue legal proceedings (and the government can spend more on lawyers than you can) or even outright arrest.

And if the corporations ever did sink their fangs deep enough into the government they might then use those governmental powers that corporations normally lack to compel patronage even after you have decided to decline their goods and services. Who knows how far that could go? They might even use such powers to enforce something like insurance mandates!

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

so does that make massive gov't surveillance better somehow? cali Jun 2013 #1
Corporations *are* the government KansDem Jun 2013 #9
That doesn't improve the situation. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #15
"And if the corporations ever did sink their fangs deep enough into the government " leeroysphitz Jun 2013 #17
I think a full citation is merited. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #20
I worked for a well know company that could tell when you entered the building HipChick Jun 2013 #2
To be fair, there HAS been outrage. randome Jun 2013 #3
3...2...1 for Rand Paul's rant malaise Jun 2013 #22
It's hard to get outraged at old news NightWatcher Jun 2013 #4
+100 Andy823 Jun 2013 #13
I weep for the poor bastard who has to listen to my calls NightWatcher Jun 2013 #14
Cardinal Richelieu accepts your challenge! With only three lines no less! Pholus Jun 2013 #16
I use a dumbphone and anything I really don't want them to know I keep inside my skull. hobbit709 Jun 2013 #5
So did this guy! randome Jun 2013 #8
Hold on to those thoughts until they get a bit more advanced, citizen... Pholus Jun 2013 #10
If we ever get the Thought Police my thoughts would incinerate them. hobbit709 Jun 2013 #11
Kind of like Python's "The Killer Joke?" Pholus Jun 2013 #12
Cause I CHOOSE to do business with a company but MUST live in this country. Pholus Jun 2013 #6
Big Brother? Social networks are far worse, says Estonian president FarCenter Jun 2013 #7
What's the point of these outrage comparisons whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #18
it helps them to sleep at night frylock Jun 2013 #24
convenience culture olddots Jun 2013 #19
This. -nt CrispyQ Jun 2013 #30
I hold them in contempt equally nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #21
i didn't vote for corporations.. frylock Jun 2013 #23
Seriously? Savannahmann Jun 2013 #25
Its Bushs fault. Its the Reagan appointed judges fault. The Link Jun 2013 #26
This thread is a discussion I could only see at DU. Buzz Clik Jun 2013 #27
Sometimes I just laugh malaise Jun 2013 #31
wow. "they did it too mommy!!" you must be real young. boilerbabe Jun 2013 #28
But I can't live without my iWhatever. CrispyQ Jun 2013 #29
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The corporations track ou...»Reply #15