the OTHER paper
Box 11376
Eugene, OR 97440
April, 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corporate colonization of our minds
by Wanda Ballentine
"American society is disproportionately shaped by the
outlooks, interests and aims of the business community,
especially that of 'big business.' The sheer power of
corporate capital is extraordinary. This power makes it
difficult even to imagine what a free and democratic
society would look like if there were public
accountability mechanisms that alleviated the vast
disparities in resources, wealth and income, owing in
part to the vast influence of big business on the U.S.
government and its legal institutions."
-- Cornell West, "The Role of Law in Progressive
Politics," in
The Politics of Law 468, 468-469 (David Kairys ed.
1990).
This corporate power has emasculated American liberalism, claims
Ward Morehouse, co-founder of the Program on Corporations, Law and
Democracy (POCLAD). It has transformed America into a profoundly
conservative culture which worships at the altar of "economic
growth." Anyone questioning this sacred cow, which is -- by any
definition -- unsustainable, is marginalized.
Partner Richard Grossman asserts that our language, and thus our
way of thinking, has been "corporatized" by corporate hirelings
trained to use language as "a manipulative, diversionary,
coercive, and distortive mechanism." We act like the colonized
people described by anthropologists, he said: "It's the best we
can get; don't rock the boat; this is the way it's always been."
This has created what Morehouse calls the "TINA" phenomenon -- the
belief that "There Is No Alternative." It is this idea, the
internal co-option by the corporate vision, that is the greatest
obstacle to confronting corporate power, not the power itself. The
challenge is to examine our relationship with corporations, to
determine how we have been affected, and to free ourselves. What
would it be like to be a free, self-governing people? What do we
really want in a society?
Grossman suggests we start by expunging the following phrases from
our vocabularies:
* "Corporate responsibility" -- an irrelevant term, says
Grossman. A corporation should either do what it is chartered
to do or be dissolved. It is not chartered to "bastardize the
democratic process, shape public debate, manipulate our
language and values, or pit communities against one another."
* "Corporate accountability" -- Elected officials are,
theoretically, accountable to the people who elect them --
but to whom are corporations accountable? Corporations are
chartered by states, which represent the sovereign people;
technically they are accountable to "we, the people." "We
should not have to fight a revolution to dissolve a
corporation that has exceeded its authority and caused
massive harm," said Grossman. We fought that revolution in
1776. But we have forgotten who we are, and it may take
another revolution to restore our rights.
* "Corporate citizen" -- A corporation is a legal fiction with
neither the responsibilities nor the rights of a citizen.
* "Corporate America" -- America represents a lot of things,
and while there has always been a gap between ideals and
reality, the ideals hold. We are a sovereign people governed
by the constitution. America is the people, not corporations.
Self-governance/Corporate anthropologist, Jane Ann Morris, also
with POCLAD, provided an overview of what self-governance entails
and how this area has been colonized by corporations.
* Access to unprejudiced information.
Corporations control research centers, universities and think
tanks, influencing what research will be done and how. They
provide "free" information to schools. The new term
"infomercial" recognizes that advertising is now being
promoted as "information." Corporations control information
about their operations. At one time, states, stockholders,
and sometimes even the public had access to corporate books.
It rarely occurs to anyone to ask these days. (A shareholder
in a dairy cooperative tried a few years ago, going all the
way to the Supreme Court -- she lost. And that was a
cooperative.)
* Ability to collect opinions about information.
Corporations create and manipulate opinion though advertising
and the influence that gives them on programming. They take
control of public debates by defining not only their own
position, but that of their opponents, marginalizing the
latter by defining it as ridiculous.
* A forum wherein people deliberate issues and make decisions
without undue influence.
Corporations take control of this arena as well via the
tremendous influence they exert on the legislative process
via PACs. They not only lean on legislators, they help write
the laws. When things don't go their way, they withdraw
support and can use a PR blitz against the offending
legislator. (Former Sen. Udall, when blitzed by the mining
industry for trying to reform the 1872 Mining Act, remarked,
"I didn't see the light, but I sure did feel the heat.")
* Implementation.
This last stage is the one arena left to the people -- in
regulatory battles and the courts. Corporate power has
sometimes been halted or restricted through these means -- at
great cost of time, money and energy, of which they have a
great deal more than their opponents. But even that
effectiveness is being eroded by corporate influence on the
regulatory agencies and the push to deregulation. They want
it all. Morris discovered this in a battle over a nuclear
plant in Texas, which she documents in her book, Not in
Anybody's Backyard.
"The real learning," she said, "occurred after the book was
written." She had chronicled what she thought was a unique event
-- they had organized, followed the rules, done the research,
testified (in three-minute testimonies on small points). Right
clearly appeared to be on their side - and they lost. Instead, she
found her story duplicated many times in many places across the
country. The purpose of regulatory agencies is to determine how to
grant a permit to build or mine or cut, not how to prevent it. The
battles of Warner Creek, the Umpqua and Hyundai stand in
testimony.
Corporate spokespeople speak out of both sides of their mouths
regarding regulatory protections -- on the one hand, they assure
us the laws are "more than sufficient" to protect workers,
consumers and the environment; on the other, they rail at the
restrictions and work constantly to undermine them. Morehouse
reported that when a huge Formosa Plastics Corporation PVC
facility was dumping highly toxic wastes into the Gulf of Mexico,
and he contacted the EPA to demand action, officials admitted they
knew what was happening, but informed him that "enforcement is
discretionary."
From the OTHER paper, April, 1996, pg. 7, POB 11376, Eugene, OR 97440.
Subscriptions $15/yr. Reprint permission granted; please cite source.