Thomas
Jefferson wrote, “I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our
monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial
by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”
Sadly,
we have not followed Jefferson’s advice. The consequence is that corporations
have increasingly come to dominate our national sense of direction, so much so
that the United States now leans strongly toward corporate oligarchy as a form
of governance. Is “we the people” becoming “we the corporation”?
In this election year we are seeing the effects of corporate
“personhood,” as it is called, particularly in the arena of campaign finance.
Much of the current presidential contest revolves around money, and not just Mitt
Romney’s personal fortune and where he keeps it. It has become, to the disgust
of many across the political spectrum, a tenet of the current conservative
contenders that votes can be bought and lies passed off as truth if enough
money is thrown into the mix. In the party of the wealthy, who has the money? Corporations, of course.
Two Supreme Court cases dominate. In Buckley v. Valeo (1976) the Court held that political spending is
protected by the right to free speech in the First Amendment. Then, crushing
Jefferson’s hope, in Citizens United v.
Federal Election Commission (2010) the Court held that corporations have a
right to free speech under the First Amendment, just as though they were
individuals. The latter decision opened the floodgates for corporate spending
to promote the interests of monied elites—wealthy corporate entities—over those
of individuals.
Democracy invests faith in the people to govern. The United
States was founded on the democratic principle that all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their
lives. This principle has yet to be fully achieved. But progress has been made
incrementally over the past two-plus centuries, granting equal civic personhood
through freedom and enfranchisement of various segments of the demos, such as
African Americans and women.
In this
progressive realization of our democratic principle, however, the granting of corporate
personhood has been a misstep. When the powers of governance come to be held by
a small number of people, an elite of any sort (the military, royalty, etc.),
which is the danger of corporate personhood, then we trade democracy for
oligarchy. For Aristotle, oligarchy
was synonymous with the rich.
Most of us—the
99% much referred to this year—are not rich and are being disenfranchised, our
individual personhood diminished, as wealthy corporations become an ascendant
aristocracy. Whether the American “experiment” can survive will depend on
whether we the people can revive the power of the demos in our democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment