How politicians’ insider trading destroys liberty

Read Hanne’s The Herland Report.

An important change in the U.S. political system came about through the 2010 Supreme Court decision to give private corporations, not only individuals, the right to donate and pay for politicians’ rise to power. Since then, the richest 0.01% have accounted for 40% of all contributions through corporate donations.

The funding of Congress members by private corporations creates strong self-interest ties. Who would bite the hand that feeds you? It paves the way for corrupting the democratic political system in which a politician should serve the interests of their constituency, not have his loyalty swayed by corporate funding and various forms of insider trading.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., recently commented on the practice of stock trading activities of lawmakers on Jon Stewart’s “The Weekly Show.” She called for a ban on lawmakers owning stock and pointed out the ongoing vast hypocrisy in Congress on the issue.

“There is an insane amount of hypocrisy, and the hypocrisy is what gets exploited to use the cynicism and wherever there’s a hypocritical window. For example, I think one of the biggest examples of this is insider trading in Congress,” Cortez stated.

The startling effect of the Supreme Court decision has been a slippery slope in which an elected politician in Congress may hold stocks in and lobby for the same oil company, military, pharma or tech company that also financed his run for Congress. The same person may also, once elected to Congress, push for and write laws that deregulate the particular industry that paid for his own political rise to power, causing certain stocks to soar, which naturally benefits his funders.

Reportedly, he may also, at the same time – amazingly enough – buy stocks with the foreknowledge that the value will skyrocket as a result of upcoming, not yet public, amendments he has worked on, with the potential of amassing enormous wealth for himself. This is the definition of insider trading, the illegal practice that lands Wall Street executives, CEOs and other corporate leaders in jail if caught.

By swaying politicians’ loyalty away from the interests of the people, democracy is consequently eroded by a cunning corporate billionaire class in which politicians are designated the role of serving the interests of this wealthy elite. I describe this in my book “The Billionaire World: How Marxism serves the Elite.”

Democracy itself depends on independent branches of government in order to function. The classical principles of Western, democratic governance were defined by philosophers such as Charles Montesquieu (1689–1755). The separation of powers between the legislative, the executive and the judicial branches of government is of utmost importance to combat corruption. In a state that promotes liberty, these three must act independently to be able to halt the abuse of power.

Yet, the globalist, transnational mega corporations depend precisely on a political system that continually serves the interests of its billionaire lobbies – not the nation state or its people. And it is Marxist communism, not classical Western democracy, that is defined by fear-driven, centralized state control of all branches and zero liberty for all. Arguably, it is the communist turn in America that has opened the floodgate to corporate control with non-elected powers of top politicians.

The very same corporations that fund politicians now also fund multitudes of politicized NGOs, think tanks, public uprising “community-organizing” groups and the World Health Organization (WHO), thereby paying their way into controlling public funds. For example, billionaire investor and vaccine-tyrant Bill Gates, who openly advocates for population reduction, is well-known for being the largest funder of the WHO, after the U.S. government halted its payments in 2020. In his special billionaire position, he is reportedly treated as a head of state.

The economist Milton Friedman points out that as people suffer, not getting their money’s worth for the taxes they pay, they observe how the government and politicians are spending too much on bad deals. In “Why Government Is the Problem,” he presents his critique of the influence of special corporate groups that often end up overruling the interests of the people and canceling what is best for the nation.

The end result is that the government becomes a self-generating, over-bureaucratized monstrosity, its state employees not held personal accountable, unable to criticize their own leaders in a system of politically weaponized economics. Here sociopath politicians, often without the right qualifications for the job, mismanage state funds with mostly no consequence. In short, such a uniparty system is commonly known as communism, where personal liberty is approximately zero and a small elite decides everything to their own benefit.