I am highly dubious about anything called “Internetocracy”

…but I do enjoy the wit of the poster:

  • Marion (Mael Muire)

    A line on the poster: “Help return the government to the people, and reign in the banks!”

    Perhaps an instance of felix culpa, but it would still be better if they had spelled rein in correctly.

  • Andy, Bad Person

    I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.

    -For once, something properly attributed to Thomas Jefferson.

  • http://ecben.wordpress.com Will

    Clearly, they want to seize “the” banks and REIGN in them, while calling themselves “the people”.

  • Chris M

    what happens if the bank people and the government people are pretty much the same people?

    • Michaelus

      Right – the problem is not the banks – it is the cooperation between the governments and the banks. The Government already runs the banks for the benefit of certain rich men. The few remaining banks love this because no one can ever start up a new bank and take away their business. In return the banks have to put up with having to put on a show for Congress once in a while like Jamie Dimon just did. For extra fun when the lefties get excited and set up Occupy protests the politicians get their support for literally reigning in the banks (i.e. ruling in and via the banking system).

    • Telemachus

      Oh, you mean the Feder… [black bag falls over poster's head; disappears]

      • ivan_the_mad

        Well, at least it wasn’t [drone strike].

      • Dan C

        Perhaps-what happened to the Sarah Palin lines about “crony capitalism.’ That line of thinking dried up very quickly. She isn’t doing the “crony capitalist” attacks anymore.

        Or like the mistakes of Gingrich and Santorum when they began commenting on Romney’s “vulture capitalism.’ Their big bucks masters stopped that line of discussion quite quickly.

    • The Deuce

      Yup, the big banks only have the power they do because the government empowered them to engage in reckless lending practices and shielded them from the consequences of doing so by covering them with taxpayer money to prevent an “emergency”. The government, meanwhile, only has the ability to recklessly run up the debt that it does because the banks loan it the money at the recklessly low rates that it empowered them to loan at in the first place, and this debt is paid back with… taxpayer money to prevent an “emergency”.

      So the government makes it possible for the banks to engage in reckless lending, because that makes it possible for the government to engage in reckless borrowing, and when either the reckless borrowing or the reckless lending threaten to blow up, the government pays for it by extracting more taxpayer money. When you step back, you realize that it’s not a matter of the banks controlling the government or the government controlling the banks. They’re really just two functions of a single entity, which work in tandem to transfer taxpayer money to themselves and their wasteful projects.

      • Ted Seeber

        You forgot about where the government forces the banks to give lots of money to big name politicians in any party that stands any chance whatsoever of winning. Oh, those poor banks.

    • Ted Seeber

      A question I asked in December 2008 after Obama started drafting his cabinet.

  • http://stevenadunn.wordpress.com Steven Dunn

    The witty lines superimposed over the picture are a paraphrase – intentionally? – of Bertolt Brecht: “It is easier to rob by setting up a bank than by holding up a bank clerk.”

    • Seamus

      Or, as he had Mack the Knife say while standing on the gallows (before receiving his pardon from Queen Victoria): “What is the crime of robbing a bank, compared to that of running a bank?”

  • ivan_the_mad

    “Visit our page (and “Like” if you are interested.” Apparently they didn’t get the memo: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/06/awareness-is-activism-for-lazy-people.html

  • LeeAnn

    Funniest conversation I’ve read all morning.

  • Mark S (not for Shea)

    Obama’s current Chief of Staff: Jacob Lew, former named chief operating officer of Citigroup’s Alternative Investments unit.

    Obama’s former Chief of Staff: William M. Daley, former Midwest Chairman of JPMorgan Chase, following its acquisition of Bank One Corporation.

    That right there should be all you need to know as to why the Obama administration has completely failed to rein in the banks: Because they don’t want to.

    But if you think a Romney administration is going to be any better, I think you may be smokin crack.

    Hey, Progressives! The problem isn’t Big Business. Hey, Conservatives! The problem isn’t Big Government. The problem is that they are the same damned thing now.

    • Dan C

      Its always been like this. And big banks are just one of the big businesses that own the government. That is the dynamic: the government is owned. Its not “collusive” in that career government employees are on doing the bidding of big business. Its temporary appointees who will float out of their position of power into some future lucrative position in big business. Its not the EPA regulator or the SEC auditor. These are the targets of bullies like Rush Limbaugh, but these men in positions as described are just contract workers from the big business world doing the work of big business “on the inside” until they then pursue some employment once again in the for profit sector. The government is owned.

      The right gets its proxies all lathered up to fight that “gubmint” when such seems to impede someone’s profit. Like a pipeline. Like attacking environmental regulations to assure that forests can be hewed down more rapidly.

      • Hezekiah Garret

        The left gets its proxies all lathered up to fight “bidness” when such seems to impede someone’s power. Like a lifeline. Like attacking environmental conditions to assure that entities and individuals beyond their control can be hewed down more rapidly.

        If you’re not going to intertwine the libertine aspect, you’re going to miss a lot of attention you could other well get.

  • http://www.hancaquam.blogspot.com PNP, OP

    “Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. . .” Give all the customers in the bank a gun and. . .well, the robber won’t make it very far.
    As a former Leftie of the Academic subspecies, let me caution all rational folks. . .when small groups of politically motivated people start talking about The People, watch your wallet and your civil liberties, especially your religious liberties.
    Fr. Philip Neri, OP

    • Matt Talbot

      Fr. Neri – I’m more worried by the threat to my wallet & liberty posed by the One Percenters and their minions and courtiers, than I am by small groups of people (of whatever political stripe) who understandably point and object to the One Percenter’s behavior.

      • http://www.hancaquam.blogspot.com PNP, OP

        But the one’s objecting to the One Percenter’s are themselves second-tier One Percenter’s who are pissed b/c their first tier colleagues aren’t making good on their promises to share the cultural wealth. The whole Occupy sham is an intra-cliche struggle btw Limo Liberals and their Bratty Trustfund Babies. Don’t buy their P.R. “The People” don’t borrow $150,000 for a Columbia PhD in postmodern feminist aesthetics with a minor in peace studies and then pitch violent fits in public b/c they can’t find their perfect meaningful job and don’t want to pay back their loans.
        Fr. Philip Neri, OP

        • http://austrolibertariancatholic.wordpress.com Martial Artist

          An excellent point Fr. Philip.

          Pax et bonum,
          Keith Töpfer

    • Dan C

      The One Percenters are, in a time of record profits, not hiring. The One Percenters are not avoiding risk in their business anymore than before.

      The Gordon Geckos are ensconced in greed and selfishness. They sin, as much as a contracepter, with wealth-hoarding. They sin in their businesses and their offices for many more hours a day than they will sin in their bedroom.

      It does the, no justice by not calling them out.

  • http://spikeisbest.blogspot.com Paul Stilwell

    The banks own the government because as proverbs says the borrower is at the mercy of the lender.

    The problem is that the government is not doing the very thing the government is there to do: issue its own currency in the public interest. Lincoln was assassinated for issuing the greenbacks as one example. Booth testified in his trial that he was hired by the national bankers in Europe.

    The Federal Reserve is actually a private company, like Federal Express. It only has to have two “government approved” people on its board. The rest are chosen by the banks. The Federal Reserve is a smokescreen for the banks.

    The Secret of Oz: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swkq2E8mswI

    The Money Masters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXt1cayx0hs

    Money as Debt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC720Cl3N-0

  • toggler

    …..seems like a lot of you missed the point…..our current form of government is raping everything on the planet…..if you want to have better governing of our societies…the current form of governing has to be changed. Not just altered in appearance…..but completely renovated. The problems that have been created by greed for wealth and power cannot be solved by the system that created them. If you don’t realize that you will always experience one form of corrupt incompetence or another. A lot of you have been throwing around quotes to make a point…so….’if you always do what you’ve always done…you will always get what you have always got. Go to the internetocracy page and read their mainfesto…..you want better government…..here’s your chance.