Corporatism and Democracy

A good economy is often associated with the wellbeing of the population, that is, an increase of social and economic rights and benefits felt across society. However, particularly in times of economic crisis, the need for a healthy economy often leads to increasing corporate power, as opposed to the power of common citizens. Indeed, in order to restore economic balance, austere governmental policies shift the focus away from social interest and redirect it towards corporate interests, while hoping that the latter will contribute to the wellbeing of the former. In doing so, governments provide corporations with much power; but is this power been wisely used to promote a good economy for the enjoyment of citizens? The increasing polarization of social and economic disparities seems to suggest otherwise. In fact, many recent social, political and economic developments denote that corporate interests are satisfied at the expense of citizens’ wellbeing.

Indeed, in Canada and elsewhere, the population’s struggle to improve its economic and social rights as well as environmental rights is been undermined by corporations’ foremost interest: increase their profit. For example, recent protests from fast food workers highlight that large multinational corporations (MNCs), such as McDonald, provide their CEO with a salary of 20.71 million USD a year, while their servers are paid at the minimum wage ("CEO Compensation, 2011"). In fact, instead of fairly compensating they workers for their work, McDonald and other MNCs such as Wal-Mart, are suspected to be encouraging their employees to rely on welfare programs. This compensatory gap not only affects the employees of such corporations, but it also cost the U.S. government 1.7 million per year of tax money (Buchheit). Indeed, MNCs do not have a responsibility towards their government, and this betrayal can be observed in the popular practise amongst MNCs to shift their profit from one country to another to avoid paying owed taxes, which could be used to improve socioeconomic benefits for citizens.  In return, however, the government always protects the interests of corporations. For example, the decision of the Harper government to pull out of the Kyoto protocol reflects the priority of the Canadian government to protect the interests of corporations over assuming Canada’s environmental responsibility.

Furthermore, corporations are also diminishing the political power of citizens by influencing governmental decisions. Indeed, not only corporations embody the central key for a healthy economy and, therefore, benefit from favourable governmental policies (especially in times of crisis), but they are also able to influence governmental decision through even more direct means. For example, the largest corporate lobby group in Canada was able to influence the government into adopting free trade agreements which ultimately increased their profit while reducing the role of the state. These free trade agreements, however, have had tremendous negative impacts on the wider population. For example, according to the Canadian Center for Policy Alternative, NAFTA has “destroyed more jobs than it has created, depressed wages, worsened poverty and inequality, eroded social programs, undermined democracy, enfeebled governments, [while greatly increasing] the rights and power of corporations, investors, and property holders” (“Lessons From NAFTA”). Furthermore, their political power is also observed in their financing of political campaigns. For example, in Canada, the current policy regarding campaign funding still allows large financial disparities between campaigns which inevitable impacts the outcome of an election.

However, the government is not the only player empowering corporations: by consuming, working for corporations and embracing their cultural influence, citizens also provide corporations with much social and cultural power. Indeed, some corporations are able to influence the population into internalizing certain values and beliefs from their symbolic and overt propaganda. In addition, the concentration of media ownership, in Canada and elsewhere, is also providing corporations with much social power as it makes it hard to offer alternative views, norms and values. At last, this social and cultural power is replacing the previous democratic possesses of creating culture and beliefs from genuine and traditional sources.

The belief that corporate interests and citizens’ interests correlate is then fundamentally erroneous. As seen above, a focus on a healthy economy merely benefits corporations – CEOs and shareholders – not the workers, neither the environment. Indeed, by underpaying employees while overpaying CEOs and by not fairly contribution to tax money which could be redistributed, corporations add to the increasing disparities between a wealthy few and the majority of the population. Furthermore, the influence of corporation in governmental decisions and in shaping the populations’ values and beliefs induces a feeling that corporatist forces are now dominating formerly democratic political, social, economic and cultural processes. In conclusion, the solution to this current crisis faced by citizens in their confrontation with corporate interests then lies in realizing that the financial interests of corporations are met in the detriment of citizens, and in re-establishing citizens’ wellbeing as the basis on which to construct values and principles for policy making.

 

Work Cited

Buchheit, Paul. "Apple, Walmart, McDonald's: They All Stiff Their Workers as They Get Subsidized by Taxpayers." Truth-out.org. N.p., 29 July 2013. Web. 3 Nov. 2013.

"CEO Compensation, 2011." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 25 Mar. 2011. Web. 3 Nov. 2013.

"Lessons From NAFTA: The High Cost of ‘Free Trade’." Policyalternatives.ca. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Nov. 2013.