4 ms·

I opened up the article mildly curious about which internet personality was about to make the outlandish claim to the biggest victim crown for internet clicks.

I opened up the article mildly curious about which internet personality was about to make the outlandish claim to the biggest victim crown for internet clicks. I'm heartbroken it was Steven Danziger, they guy that took on big oil, gave them a black eye, and went to (house) jail for it. Even though his case is one I've followed for years, it even escaped my own memory. Also, someone mentioned Snowden and Arrange. for comparison. Although they can be thought as same, remember these two, unlike Danziger, took on the govt, the intelligence apparatus, and its guns. They should have known full well that when you play high stakes poker you are risking a ton. Danziger OTOH, was taking on a private corporation. His case is big, but no too different in scope than say Erin Brokovich's case against PG&E & Hinkley(2), or Jan Schlittchmanns case vs WR Grace and Beatrice Foods(1). The plaintiff counsels won in both cases, without consequences to their life or careers. Arrange and Snowden were morally righteous however they probably knew the size of the sacrifice they were about to make and made the decision to proceed anyway. I doubt Danziger had any idea that what he was getting into would cost him his career. (1) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_v._Cryovac,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_v._Cryovac,_Inc. (2) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_groundwater_contamination https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_groundwater_contamin...

simiones 4y ago
It should be noted that a significant difference between Steven Danziger and Erin Brokovich is that he took on a US energy corporation which was acting against non-US citizens. The US state apparatus clearly considers that US corporate economic interests far outweigh any rights non-US citizens have, especially outside the USA, and doubly especially in South America, and are thus more than willing to provide any kind of assistance that helps those economic interests - up to and including military aid in the past (for example, the infamous banana republics). Taking on a US corporation harming people outside the USA (especially if you have the gall of winning!) is seen as a slight on the USA itself, and is punished as much as possible. It's important to the US state department that people are taught not to take such a task on lightly. I'm surprised there weren't bigger repercussions for the foreign judges who tried the case as well.
tintedfireglass 4y ago
you mean Julian Assange? looks like your Autocorrect messed it up lmao
akudha 4y ago
Erin Brokovich's case against PG&E & Hinkley(2), or Jan Schlittchmanns case vs WR Grace and Beatrice Foods Are these exceptions? I wonder how many individuals (without money) have taken on mega corporations only to have their lives destroyed by the mega corps (legally)? I am just speculating here, but my guess is that everyone knows about cases like Brokovich vs PG&E because the little guy won and because of the size of the settlement (and the movie helps too). For every case that small guys win, there must be many many more cases that they lose, even though they are on the right?
- pawsforthought 4y ago
  I fear you are right in your speculation. Take a look at the Environmental Justice Atlas [1], which tracks 3711 cases and counting. [1]: https://ejatlas.org/ https://ejatlas.org/
doodlebugging 4y ago
Also remember another person who took on a large, well-connected corporation, Karen Silkwood [0], and ultimately lost her life under suspicious circumstances. [0] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Silkwood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Silkwood)

simiones 4y ago

It should be noted that a significant difference between Steven Danziger and Erin Brokovich is that he took on a US energy corporation which was acting against non-US citizens. The US state apparatus clearly considers that US corporate economic interests far outweigh any rights non-US citizens have, especially outside the USA, and doubly especially in South America, and are thus more than willing to provide any kind of assistance that helps those economic interests - up to and including military aid in the past (for example, the infamous banana republics). Taking on a US corporation harming people outside the USA (especially if you have the gall of winning!) is seen as a slight on the USA itself, and is punished as much as possible. It's important to the US state department that people are taught not to take such a task on lightly. I'm surprised there weren't bigger repercussions for the foreign judges who tried the case as well.

tintedfireglass 4y ago

you mean Julian Assange? looks like your Autocorrect messed it up lmao

akudha 4y ago

Erin Brokovich's case against PG&E & Hinkley(2), or Jan Schlittchmanns case vs WR Grace and Beatrice Foods Are these exceptions? I wonder how many individuals (without money) have taken on mega corporations only to have their lives destroyed by the mega corps (legally)? I am just speculating here, but my guess is that everyone knows about cases like Brokovich vs PG&E because the little guy won and because of the size of the settlement (and the movie helps too). For every case that small guys win, there must be many many more cases that they lose, even though they are on the right?

pawsforthought 4y ago
I fear you are right in your speculation. Take a look at the Environmental Justice Atlas [1], which tracks 3711 cases and counting. [1]: https://ejatlas.org/ https://ejatlas.org/

doodlebugging 4y ago

Also remember another person who took on a large, well-connected corporation, Karen Silkwood [0], and ultimately lost her life under suspicious circumstances. [0] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Silkwood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Silkwood)