The Neglect of
Democracy
John Ikerd
The 2008 presidential candidates raised and spent more than one billion dollars, about $8.50 per voter in the presidential election. Obviously, each person who voted didn’t contribute $8.50 to support their candidate’s attempts to win the election. Some contributed millions while others contributed nothing. Other than each casting one vote, Americans did not participate equally in determining the outcome of the election or even in deciding which candidates appeared on their ballots.
The most fundamental principle of democracy is that all
people are of equal inherent worth
and thus have equal inherent rights, including the right to participate in
making the rules by which all are governed. The democratic government of the
Throughout American history, the wealthy have had more
political influence than the poor. The U.S. Supreme Court confirmed this
inequity in 1976 when it affirmed that spending money to influence elections
represents “constitutionally protected free speech.” With this decision, the
person who can afford $1,000 dollars was granted one-hundred times as much
influence over political processes as the person who can only afford to spend
$10. Two years later, the Supreme Court affirmed that corporations have a constitutional right to make political
contributions, allowing the corporate concentration of economic power to be
wielded as political power. In addition, the political power of corporations is
not limited to campaign contributions: they lobby our lawmakers, advise our
regulators, influence public opinion of political matters, and essentially
dictate the economic policies of the
When wealthy individuals support various political causes, they may or may not be motivated by the public good. Corporations, on the other hand, are legally committed to serving the interest of their stockholders, not the good of the public in general. They are not real people and thus have no innate sense of social or ethical responsibility. Corporations are legal entities, created for specific purposes: in the case of for-profit corporations, to maximize economic returns for their investors. Anything they do that serves the public good must be justified to investors as a means of enhancing their wealth. Individuals are capable of pure altruism and patriotism; corporations are not.
Regardless of
whether wealth is individual or corporate, the people of the
Corpocracy seems an
appropriate word for a government that is dominated by corporate power. The
word democracy has its roots in the Greek words "demos," meaning
common people, and "cracy," meaning rule or strength. Plutocracy
comes from "plutos" – rich people – and aristocracy comes from “aristos”
– high-class people. "Corp" is a common abbreviation for corporation.
Following the pattern of the other Greek words, "corpos" would
mean "corporate people" and corpocracy “corporate rule.” Since the
U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that corporations are “legal people,”
with the same political rights as “real people,” the
The gradual
transformation from democracy to corpocracy is not so much a matter of intent
or design as public neglect. Democracies require constant attention from the
people, particularly when coupled with capitalist economies. The capitalist is
always motivated by economic value – profit and growth. Economic value accrues to individuals, not to
society as a whole. Thus, anything done solely for the benefit of others – or
for society in general – is of no economic value. For-profit corporations are
pure capitalists. Certainly corporate investments and employment create
benefits for society as well as individuals, but societal good is not their
motivation.
Anytime the
government collects taxes for purely public purposes, the economic
opportunities of corporations are diminished. Corporate taxes reduce dollars
for dividends or investments and investors could have spent their dividends or
capital gains to stimulate the economy. Government restrains on corporate
exploitation of natural resources or workers are seen as wasteful government
interference. Anything that ensures the economic
rights for all people to adequate food, shelter, and healthcare are opposed
as being socialistic.
The primary
responsibility of government is to do those things that are necessary for the
benefit of society in general, but for which there is no economic incentive –
meaning things that have no economic value. As a result, the most important
things governments do for the common good of real people are invariably opposed
by “corporate people.” In a pure corpocracy, the only legitimate function of
government would be to ensure the individual’s right to private property – meaning
the right to acquire and accumulate individual wealth.
The Constitution is
our only defense against the rising power of corpocracy in