From love affair to marriage
Colin J. Gardner writes from Washington DC
There may be a silver lining in the most recent political events to hit Washington. Scott Brown recently won the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, creating a domino affect across Washington politics. On the surface, this changes the political landscape in Washington because the Democrats no longer have a filibuster proof majority. Is this really a big deal? Have the Democrats done anything significant with their super majority in the Senate? No. They have squandered their political power and have used very little of it to enact any major change that the Left would like to see.
A part of this inaction is due to the diversity within the Democratic Party. On the health care bill for example, there are serious disagreements between the left and the more conservative sections within the party. Republican or Democrat, our government remains relatively unchanged with diversionary battles that keep the public’s eye away from its true illegitimacy. Our government does nothing significant to help its people in comparison to its love affair with capitalism.
The possible silver lining is that American’s are beginning to realize that political parties in this country matter very little. What’s important is the establishment to which our elected officials all pay homage; an establishment that demands serious change. Hopefully, people’s anger will be directed away from party politics to the overarching system.
Unfortunately, our government’s relationship with corporations has now become more than a love affair, perhaps more of a marriage. Recently the Supreme Court ruled to grant corporations the same political and civil rights as people. Portions of these rights have already been in existence; in many circumstances corporations have the same civil rights as people without risk of imprisonment (yea, this sentence doesn’t make sense for a reason).
Corporate rights are a lengthy discussion in itself, but this new ruling affords new and unconscionable rights to corporations. They no longer have limits on how much money they can spend on political campaigns. Although they cannot contribute directly to politicians, they are no longer restricted on how they spend money outside of giving it directly to a campaign. They now have unlimited spending on ads that can support a candidate or party. Prior to this Supreme Court ruling they could not name a specific person or party. Candidates may think twice about attacking any specific corporation for fear of a well-funded backlash.
Of course there are supporters who are cheering the decision (Republicans), stating that corporations finally have their first amendment rights as legal individuals. Two things immediately pop into the rational mind; first, corporations shouldn’t have personal rights to begin with, and second, real living breathing humans cannot compete with the financial power of corporations.
Capitalism has penetrated another layer of free speech. Whose voice is going to win? Of course there are certain mechanisms working on our side. We have the power of the consumer. If we don’t like the ads or political leanings of a corporation, we can stop buying their products. But we all know that only goes so far. Corporations also face the risk supporting a candidate who eventually loses, or becomes involved in a scandal.
In any case, it doesn’t seem likely that corporations are going to take full advantage of this ruling in an overt manner because of its inherent risk. However, it represents another legal step towards the suffocation of the voice of real people. Hopefully Americans will pay more attention to the major systemic changes in this country and will pay less attention to petty political wins that mask the larger issues. Let’s keep our eyes focused on that silver lining; let’s help Americans realise their frustration truly lies with a government that favours Corporations over their own interests, Republican or Democrat.
27 January 2010
