The
Corporate States of America
By Jonathan McIntosh — Cropped version
of File:J20_corporate_flag_dc.jpgCropped and uploaded by Trickymaster at
de.wikipedia (07:25, 12. Apr. 2009), CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=8458827
Introduction
Large corporations have
commandeered the world economy to such extent that, of the one-hundred largest
economies in the world, sixty-nine are corporations (globaljustice.org). Those
numbers don’t appear alarming on the surface but placed in the framework of the
2008 collapse of the world economy, the problems of what to do about “too big
to fail” takes on an alarming importance. Only about a handful of America’s
largest corporations have brought down the housing market, reallocated pension,
and retirement funds of millions of workers into exorbitant salaries and
bonuses for corporate executives, produced massive job layoffs around the
world, and caused a spike in personal and small-business bankruptcies.
Corporate representatives in
government, such as Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, have created a “shadow
government” that essentially controls American economic policy
(opensecrets.org). The 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United Decision that granted
human rights to non-human corporate entities has turned electoral politics into
a scramble for massive campaign funds from organizations with no stake in the
public interest. The American political system is now governed by those
sixty-nine corporate economies, which have perpetual life, unlimited resources,
and the ability to make their own law to assure that their rights and their
power take precedent over the will of the people and the public good
(systemicjustice.org).
We’ve had amble warning about the
excesses of corporate power. Thomas Jefferson wrote in an 1816 letter:
(founders.archives.gov)
“I hope we shall take warning from
the example of England and crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied
corporations which are already to challenge our government to a trial of
strength and bid defiance to the laws our country.”
And on another occasion:
“Headed toward a single and
splendid government of an aristocracy founded on banking institutions and
moneyed incorporations and if this tendency continues it will be the end of
freedom and democracy, the few will be ruling and riding over the plundered plowman
and the beggar.”
And again, in a letter to Secretary
of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin: (google.com/books)
“I sincerely believe [. . .] that banking establishments are
more dangerous than standing armies.”
The history of the United States
has no shortage of great leaders who have alerted us to the dangers of the
corporate monster; Along with Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Dwight D.
Eisenhower issued public warnings of the encroachment of corporate money and
corporate power into government.
A
History of Corporate Personhood: Causes and Consequences
Section 1 of the Fourteenth
Amendment, passed into law in 1869, reads:
“All persons born or naturalized in
the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or
enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of
the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The Amendment was written primarily to overturn the Dred
Scott decision of 1865 that denied citizenship to slaves and clearly refers
to person and citizen. But Supreme Court decisions before and
after the Fourteenth Amendment have resulted in the creeping — and creepy —
definition of “person” to include corporations, including multi-national
corporations.
“A corporation is an artificial
being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law.” (famguardian.org)
A corporation is not a person. American jurisprudence takes corporate strengths
and human weakness into consideration in making and enforcing its laws. Prisons
are built for people but cannot contain a corporation. Corporations have
perpetual life in which to realize their goals, while humans have about fifty
productive and voting years. Corporations have, for all practical purposes, unlimited
resources, while the average worker lives on a weekly wage. Corporations have
the legal power to make laws as they wish; the citizen can cast a single vote
for a representative he can trust to look out for his interest in the
legislative and executive branches of government.
Corporate personhood extends back
to Roman law, but its American History began with the end of the American
Revolution. Citizens of the newly found republic held contractual agreements
with agencies in the mother country. Did the Revolution nullify those
obligations? Could the United States legislate new laws to supersede English
law that created the contracts?
Those questions came before the new Supreme Court under
Chief Justice John Marshall in 1816 (famguardian.org). The state of New
Hampshire had passed laws changing the charter of Dartmouth College from a
private institution, chartered by the British Crown in 1769, to a state
university. The college trustees filed suit. The court ruled that the charter
was a contract between the king and the college trustees, and that a state
cannot pass laws to alter a contract. That ruling honored corporations and
people as equals in contract law.
In the case of Santa Clara
County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, filed before the Supreme Court in May
1886, “Chief Justice [Morrison] Waite said, ”The court does not wish to hear
argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to
the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations.
We are all of opinion that it does.” (supreme.justia.com) That statement was
made before arguments were heard in the case, and do not appear in the
court record. Subsequent cases before the court have drawn on that case as
legal precedent regardless of the error.
Since 1886, the court has heard
several cases involving corporate personhood, and the benefit or loss to actual
humans has swung in unpredictable directions. Then, in 1978, the issue of
corporate personhood exploded.
The Secretary of Labor, Ray
Marshall brought Marshall v. Barlow’s before the Supreme Court
(supreme.justia.com). An inspector for the Occupational Health and Safety Act
(OSHA) entered Barlow’s Company, a plumbing and electrical installations
contractor. The president and general manager of the company denied access to
the agent on the grounds that he did not have a search warrant. OSHA had the
responsibility and the authority to conduct warrantless searches of businesses
to guarantee worker safety, but Barlow’s argued that the corporation enjoyed
the same Fourth Amendment guarantee of protection against illegal search and
seizure as an individual. The court sided with Barlow’s, and henceforth OSHA
inspections of businesses must be enforced with a search warrant, or OSHA must
make an appointment with the company to conduct an inspection. (supreme.justia.com).
On January 21, 2010, an appeal from
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia reached the
Supreme Court. Led by the court’s conservative members, Citizens United v.
Federal Elections Commission (supreme.justia.com), citing free speech
rights, struck down the McCain-Feingold Bill and allowed corporate entities to
sponsor funds to political elections without revealing their source.
Multi-national corporations now control (opensecrets.org) the financing of
elections in the United States, and corporate financial contributions to the
political process reached the one billion dollar mark in 2018. The
Democratic Party under President Obama appealed to the corporate interests for
a détente. Democrats softened their support of workplace safety, a livable
minimum wage, and government regulation of business.
With Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Shell
(supreme.justia.com). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
issued a stunning decision that a corporation cannot be sued for human rights
abuses. A panel of the court ruled 2–1 on September 17, 2010, that the Alien
Tort Statute gives U.S. courts jurisdiction over alleged violations of
international law by individuals only, not by corporations.
Seeing the direction those court
decisions will take the country, former President Obama’s plea for détente with
the corporate community (nbcnews.com) makes good political sense but has the
potential to forever end the democratic system. His party has traditionally
championed worker safety, equal employment opportunity, and a livable wage;
issues at odds with corporations. If the Democratic party is to survive — that
is, to receive unlimited campaign funds from the deep pockets only corporations
can provide — it must relax its support of the proletariat. Ergo, détente.
I find reams of eloquent prose
about the failure of the American democratic experiment in the phrase, “Follow
the money.”
Abuses
Committed by National and Multi-National Corporations
Who can forget the televised images
of Enron company employees who found it hilarious that “grandmas” were in
danger of dying in the heat due to the artificial electrical shortages created
by Enron to hike their fees for services?
“A Defense Department auditor
testified [on August 10, 2010] that DynCorp International billed the government
$50 million more than the amount specified in a contract to provide dining
facilities and living quarters for military personnel in Kuwait.”
Headlines like that represent a common feature of Americans’
daily lives. We have become inured to corruption. The 2010 mid-term elections
resulted in a turnover of the political majority in Congress because of the
anti-corruption mood among the electorate. Yet, many of the very people ushered
into power have praised the Citizens United decision. The
revolution in Washington suggests lyrics from a rock anthem by the British rock
group, The Who: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
Human rights violations by
corporate entities don’t often garner headlines, though. The only way to get a
handle on corporations’ involvement is through research. Here are just a few of
those violations. For a full list of name brand-name companies engaging in
behavior that might have made Genghis Khan blush, the Global Issues website at http://www.globalexchange.org/.
https://archive.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/221-transnational-corporations/46979.html
offers a full alphabetical list of offending corporations and links to
reputable organizations that back up its claims.
Caterpillar, Inc. supplies
equipment to the Israeli army for the purpose of destroying Palestinian homes
to facilitate annexation of East Jerusalem.
The crimes charged against Chevron
are too numerous to list in a paper of this scope, but they include rape,
murder, political corruption, and — the plague of America’s dependency on oil —
environmental destruction.
Outside of the United States, the
Coca-Cola Company behaves like a mafia family. Murders, kidnappings, and
torture highlight its activities in Third World countries, and in some of the
industrialized world, reads like intrigue and adventure fiction.
Employees of DynCorp have been
found to have engaged in sex trafficking with women and underage girls.
A different kind of corporate abuse
arose with the Supreme Court's Burell v. Hobby Lobby decision. That case
gave closely held corporations a super-power in that it permits Hobby Lobby and
others to govern the religious preferences of their employees by denying them
health insurance based on the employer's religious beliefs, not on those of the
employee. That decision went far beyond the question of non-human personhood,
it allows corporations to seek to control workers beliefs. That is only one
step removed from attempting to control employees' political affiliation.
It goes without expression that the
American version of Christianity is little more than a medieval superstition,
yet legal attitudes from 1200 CE govern the Supreme Court's decision in Burrell
as well as cases like Sebilius v. Hobby Lobby. In that decision the
Court ruled that the personal beliefs of a small number of corporate executives
can overrule the personal beliefs of some 50,000 employees.
The
Future of Corporate Personhood: Consequences
The year 2010 marked the crowning
of transnational corporations as the new owners of the American government.
Where it will lead us is, at this time, anybody’s guess. The General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
have prepared the way for the new leadership with international laws that
supersede federal and state statutes regarding relaxed food safety governance,
reduced product quality standards, a virtual end to workplace safety
regulations, and the erosion of individual rights and national sovereignty. We
have already seen the cost of those agreements in the recent flood of product
recalls, tainted food in the marketplace, and the undermining of workplace
safety laws.
Social attitudes, too, have favored
the growing power of corporate entities. Contemporary views of entrepreneurship
no longer include the bootstrap legacy. An entrepreneur is now one with massive
financial backing from banks and capital investment firms. Corporate culture is
rapidly becoming the only socially acceptable course of economic pursuit.
Employment in a large company, preferably a multinational corporation, is
regarded as a most noble profession, one pursued by most college students. The
arts and crafts, manual trades, outdoor work, jobs in philanthropic
organizations, and vocations in religious organizations are rarely considered
by those who came of age in the corporate world, and — judging by a barrage of
human-interest stories in the media — shunned by even the chronically
unemployed.
Conclusion
Of all the conceivable results of
the corporatizing of America and the world, the bulk of them are unpleasant but
that need not be the reality. The companies that now own the country’s
political and judicial system rely on consumerism to feed their gluttony, and
they have the power to destroy the consumer culture through the elimination of
a middle class with disposable income. They must take care that, in bringing
down American wages, they do not undermine their own profits. Worldwide, people
have shown a surprising tendency throughout history to sacrifice their
individual pursuits and band together to resolve injustices. If our new masters
do not tread carefully — with much more care than they have in the recent past
— they could find themselves pitted against the very source of their power: the
consumer.
Note: This work is an updated
version of an earlier piece that appeared on this website.)
Works
Cited:
“69 of the richest 100 entities on the planet are
corporations, not governments, figures show”
“Corporate representatives in government, such as
Senator James Inhofe”
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/james-m-inhofe/summary?cid=N00005582&cycle=CAREER
“the will of the people and the public good”
Corporate Influence: Exploring the Relationship Between
Lobbying and Corporate Power
https://systemicjustice.org/article/corporate-influence/
“Thomas Jefferson wrote in an 1816 letter” 12
November 1816 Founders Online https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-10-02-0390
“And on another occasion”
“And again, in a letter”
“Thomas Jefferson quote about banking-Truth!” Posted on
March 17,
2015 by Rich Buhler & Staff
https://www.truthorfiction.com/jefferson-banking/
“Those questions came before the new Supreme Court”
Definition of a corporation by Chief Justice Marshall in Dartmouth
College v. Woodward (1819) https://famguardian.org/Publications/PropertyRights/corpor.html
“A corporation is not a person”:
“Surprise! Citizens United Legal Reasoning Doesn’t Rely
on Corporate Personhood” By Nick Bentley November 11, 2012 https://reclaimdemocracy.org/citizens-united-corporate-personhood/
“In the case of Santa Clara County””
“Supreme Court: Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific
Railroad Co., 118 U.S. 394 (1886)” https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/118/394/#:~:text=CHIEF%20JUSTICE%20WAITE%20said%3A,laws%20applies%20to%20these%20corporations.
“The Secretary of Labor, Ray Marshall brought Marshall
v. Barlow’s before the Supreme Court”
“Supreme Court: Marshall v. Barlow’s, Inc., 436 U.S. 307
(1978)” https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/436/307/
“Citizens United V. Federal Elections Committee)
Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/558/310/
“multinational corporations now control…”
‘Dark money’ topped $1 billion in 2020, largely boosting
Democrats
By Anna Massoglia and Karl Evers-Hillstrom, March 17,
2021
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/03/one-billion-dark-money-2020-electioncycle/
“With Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Shell…”
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 569 U.S. 108 (2013)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/569/108/
“former President Obama’s plea for détente”: U.S.
President Barack Obama said Monday he wanted to lower the corporate tax rate
and eliminate tax loopholes to pay for that, requesting support from the
business community to achieve that goal.” 11 Feb. 2011 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna41456730
“jurisdiction over alleged violations of international
law by individuals only, not by corporations.”
Geoffrey Pariza, Spring 2011, Loyola University Chicago,
School of Law “Genocide, Inc.: Corporate Immunity to Violations of
International Law after Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum” https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1022&context=lucilr
“jurisdiction over alleged violations of international
law by individuals only, not by corporations.”
“Companies Immune From Alien Tort Suits, Court Rules” Bob
Van Voris & Patricia Hurtado, Bloomberg, 17 Sep 2010 https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/companies-immune-from-alien-tort-suits-court-rules/
“US: DynCorp Billed U.S. $50 Million Beyond Costs in
Defense Contract”
Published by Washington Post, By V. Dion Haynes,
Wednesday, August 12, 2009 https://www.corpwatch.org/article/us-dyncorp-billed-us-50-million-beyond-costs-defense-contract
“behavior that might have made Genghis Khan blush”
December 2005 https://archive.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/221-transnational-corporations/46979.html
“sex
trafficking with women and underage girls.”
Sex Trafficking Scandal in Post-Conflict Bosnia
DynCorp employees and international peacekeepers accused
of forced prostitution and child rape in Bosnia.
https://icoca.ch/case-studies/sex-trafficking-scandal-in-post-conflict-bosnia/
“and the undermining of workplace safety laws”
Lori Wallach, essay, “Hidden Dangers of GATT and NAFTA:
The Case Against Free Trade” (San Francisco: Earth Island Press, 1993), 23-64.
“…one step removed from attempting to control
employees' political affiliation.”
https://healthlaw.org/resource/summary-of-the-supreme-courts-decision-in-hobby-lobby/
Suggested
Reading
Grace Blakeley, Vulture Capitalism: Corporate Crimes,
Backdoor Bailouts, and the Death of Freedom, (New York: Atria Books, 2024)
The U.N. and the Sex Slave Trade in Bosnia
Isolated Case or Larger Problem in the U.N. System?
April 24, 2002
https://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa78948.000/hfa78948_0.htm
Matthew Desmond, Poverty, by America (New York: Crown
2023)
“Corporations data 2017”
Timothy Gorringe, Fair Shares: Ethics and the Global
Economy, (New York, Thames & Hudson, 1999)
#
The History of Corporate Personhood
How did we get to the point where a for-profit
corporation can lay claim to religious rights? Ciara Torres-Spelliscy on the
slithering history of corporate personhood.
Ciara Torres Spelliscy, April 8, 2014
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/history-corporate-personhood
SCOTUS Blog
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/sebelius-v-hobby-lobby-stores-inc/
SCOTUS Blog
New fallout from Hobby Lobby
By Lyle Denniston, on Jul 9, 2014
https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/07/new-fallout-from-hobby-lobby/
Bloomberg Law
Court Opinions
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682, 134 S.
Ct. 2751, 189 L. Ed. 2d 675, 123 FEP Cases 621, 82 U.S.L.W. 4636 (2014), Court
Opinion
https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/Burwell_v_Hobby_Lobby_Stores_Inc_No_13354_and_13356_US_June_30_20
SEC. 6. EXEMPTION FOR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS.
https://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ENDA-religious-exemption.pdf
Hobby Lobby symposium: A decision based on conclusory
assertions and results-oriented reasoning
By Marcia Greenberger, on Jul 2, 2014
Marcia Greenberger, Hobby Lobby symposium: A decision based on conclusory assertions and results-oriented reasoning, SCOTUSblog (Jul. 2, 2014, 12:00 AM),
https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/07/hobby-lobby-symposium-a-decision-based-on-conclusory-assertions-and-results-oriented-reasoning/
SEX TRAFFICKING SCANDAL IN POST-CONFLICT BOSNIA
DynCorp employees and international peacekeepers accused
of forced prostitution and child rape in Bosnia.
https://icoca.ch/case-studies/sex-trafficking-scandal-in-post-conflict-bosnia/
THE U.N. AND THE SEX SLAVE TRADE IN BOSNIA:
ISOLATED CASE OR LARGER PROBLEM IN THE U.N. SYSTEM?
April 24, 2002
https://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa78948.000/hfa78948_0.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.