User:MrMambo

I am a student at NTNU living in the city of Trondheim in Norway.

Interests[edit]

Typical views held by MrMambo[edit]

USA is gradually collapsing as a superpower, and I applaud it. I concurr with the predictions of Johan Galtung.
The wealth produced by humanity must be shared through a democratic political system of progressive taxation of people and business entities , instead of accumulating on a few hands by exploitation of labour, limited natural resources, financial speculation, inheritance etc. See social democrat. I am in favour of a democratic world government wich can redistribute and prioritize somewhat in accordance to the major interests of mankind (secured through periodic elections). But also see the need for active and vital local governance
I favour the establishment of a common language. It could be English, Chinese, Esperanto or anything that mankind might agree upon. The reason is that this will help people communicate better, reduce misunderstandings, reduce loss of meaning through translation, reduce meaningless expences related to translation costs, communications delays, communication errors etc. I do not however seek to abolish all other languages, in my view they may be freely spoken and thought.

A claim about property and democracy by MrMambo[edit]

Any form of property gives the owner of the property power.
Owning small properties like a decent sized house, a PC, furniture and such is a good basis for your own safety, freedom and independence. This is a good thing.
If the property is big, the controll of this property automatically equals having signifficant political power or position of power.
Political power in a democracy shall be held by the people. Thus if one want to have a real democracy all big properties must be controlled and owned by the people.

Excample: I favour setting by law a maximum quantity of wealth that one person can posess (own). The quantity has to be continuously re-evaluated through democratic process, and might have to be adjusted for local and regional differences. Excample: Say that you start and own a profitable business that grows signifficantly. At some time the business becomes large, and starts to become a position of power (see Comprehensive Corporate Power). Thus if the business is to grow further you will not be allowed to own more than what equals the maximum quantity of wealth. The rest of the business must be owned by the society in wich you live. The electorate in your community will thus have the power to elect the people that will controll the part of the company that exceedes the property limit.

If you are a good leader you might convince the people to let you lead the business even as it grows to be huge and important across the world. But you can never own more than your maximum limit. The rest will be owned by the people. And any time the people think someone else are better fit to lead or has a better agenda for the business they will be free to put someone else in charge. This will limit the possibily for individuals to misuse power through means of property.

The CCP Hoax[edit]

One day I was having a Wiki-surf, I found the article about Comprehensive National Power. This was a faschinating new academic field created by Chineese scolars to understand the power of Nations quantitatively (put a number on the power). I have long been interesting in the growing power of todays Corporations. Some corporations theese days have signifficantly more power and influence than smaller nations. So I thought it would be a good idea to use a CNP-approach to understand the power of the profit-empires. After writing out an outline for such a concept I was quite pleased with it and thought that such a method could well become a new field of academic research. My enthusiasm compelled me in a moment of "bad judgement" to post the idea as a totally matter of fact article on wikipedia, presenting it as an established academic field.

It didn't take long before people even improved language and removed typos of the article. And it didn't take too long before the first alert individuals thought they ought to do google searches on the term. For some reason a google search would produce no results...hmmm. The situation today is quite different, where a google search done in november 2004 produced 320 pages. This is mainly caused by the widespread mirroring of Wikpedia content around the world. Still you will find no authentic "external" sources for the consept because it doesn't really exist outside the "mirror-world".

The wiki-community have handled the hoax very delicatly, not doing rash decisions. Even awaiting a responce from me. As for instance this message posted to my own talk page by the extremely well-mannered Rossami:

"Good afternoon. I noticed that you created the original article on Comprehensive Corporate Power. There have been some questions about the use of this term. Specifically, who uses it and how widely accepted is the concept? A number of people in the Wikipedia community believe that an encyclopedia should only cover established concepts and that there are better media for the publication or discussion of original concepts. Could you take a few minutes to document the use of this concept? Perhaps on the talk page? Thanks. Rossami 22:41, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)"

If all of humanity was made up of people like Rossami I belive we would not have either war or violence. Not all to long after that I admittet the hoax in this message to the talk page:

"

It was a hoax folk's[edit]

I finally admit it. This concept is not a known academic concept or method. Its not even part of any academic paper made by anyone. It is, how some might have suspected, nothing more then a figment of my imagination. But still.. I love the concept... So I will not delete this dear hoax personally. I will respect the results of a new deletion vote now that you all have the truth, and not repost the concept, unless one day the CCP-method became a reality. ;) Thanks for awaiting my verification/falsification!

MrMambo

"

To my utter surprice the article was not deleted after the first votes for deletion process. Now( end of november 2004) I se that a new process has been started and will greatly enjoy to see what happenes this time. One side of me tells me it is best if the article is deleted. It is definately the most likely outcome this time. Another side of me though will enjoy the surreal eventueallity of it not being deleted the second time either.

Here is a copy of a stage in the Votes for Deletion process of the CCP-hoax.

" Another apparently lost/orphaned VfD nom, as the tag was added November 25, but it doesn't seem to have ever been placed on the main VfD page, and doesn't appear on "old". Procedural/delete--according to the author, "It is, how some might have suspected, nothing more then a figment of my imagination." Niteowlneils 22:05, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Neologism, the author admitted it, delete. - 67.180.61.179

This page has been on VfD previously in June and was kept due to lack of consensus if the concept is original research. The probable original author, User:MrMambo, has since admitted that the "concept is not a known academic concept or method", but his own "dear hoax". - Marcika 21:08, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC) P.S. The admission is on Talk:Comprehensive_Corporate_Power. - Marcika 21:09, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

By User:MrMambo: To my knowledge no one else has ever used the term Comprehensive Corporate Power. So I really can not imagine anyone else being the "original author". I wish you good luck in the Votes For Deletion project. It's been great fun to check in every now and then to see what would happen to my dear hoax. Of course I will not give a vote here, but my admittance of guilt is comprehensive ;) I'm more of an annoying person than an Evil person, so I will not re-post this CCP-article if you choose to have it terminated. I will however feal sentimental about the glory days of my CCP-article.

Delete admitted hoax. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:01, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Delete, original research (and I use the term loosely) or hoax. --fvw * 11:51, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)
Delete. Admitted hoax. Spank

"

The November 2004 version of the CCP article[edit]

" Comprehensive Corporate Power (CCP) is a concept or method of how to evaluate the combined political power of a corporate entity in quantitative and qualitative ways by looking at a wide range of aspects that might influence its power. The idea is derived from the concept of Comprehensive national power (CNP), developed by Chinese scholars since approximately 1978. As the Chinese scholars try to get a good picture of the power of other nations and its own to be able to make better strategic judgments on how to improve China's CNP. The advocates of the Comprehensive Corporate Power school of thought says that one can get a better picture of the power of a corporation by analyzing a comprehensive combination of aspects instead of the more narrow or one dimensional aspects that are often used. This can be useful to make predictions about changes in the marketplace, about the political impact and influence of corporations in society, or it can be used to see to what degree a corporation utilizes its power potential etc.

The aspects of CCP[edit]

The CCP-field is not static and it does not have a limited set of aspects. However the aspects that can be included must be of relevance to the power. In quantitative analysis it is also important to weigh the aspects after how important they might be. Naturally this can result in differences in results. It is therefore necessary to use good judgement, and to continuously re-evaluate the aspects. Examples of typical aspects are, market capitalization, amount and type of property, liquidity of property, amount of liquid capital, lobbying-power, number of employees, number of corporate lawyers, education level of employees, research and development budget, number of patents, market share compared with size of the market, public popularity, number of countries where active, profitability, quick change ability, how dependent others are on products and services made by the corporation, corporate culture, trade-deals vulnerability, taxation vulnerability, subsidy dependence, vulnerability to regulatory power, dependency of trade secrets and ability to protect them, etc

"