[discuss-dan] FWD: Corporate Democracy; Civic Disrespect

[Doc Rosen <drdrdoc@dr.com>]

Corporate Democracy; Civic Disrespect
by John K. Galbraith

With the events of late in the year 2000, the United
States
left   behind  constitutional republicanism, and turned
to a different
form of  government.  It is not, however, a new form.
It is, rather, a
transplant, highly familiar from a different arena of
advanced
capitalism.

This is corporate democracy. It is a system whereby a
Board of
Directors-- read Supreme Court -- selects the Chief
Executive Officer.
The CEO in turn  appoints new members of the Board. The
shareholders,
owners in title only, are invited to cast their votes
in periodic
referenda. But their franchise is only symbolic, for
management holds a
majority of the proxies. On no important issue do the
CEO and the Board
ever permit
themselves to lose.

The Supreme Court clarified this in a way that the
Florida courts
could not have. The media have accepted it, for it is
the form of
government to which they are already professionally
accustomed.  And the
shameless attitude of the George W. Bush high command
merely
illustrates, in unusually visible fashion, the
prevelant ethical system
of
Corporate life.

Al Gore's concession speech was justly praised for
grace and
humor.  It paid  due deference to the triumph of
corporate political
ethics, but did not embrace them. It thus preserved
Gore for another
political day – the obvious intention. But Gore also
sent an
unmistakable message to American democrats: Do not
forget.

It was an important warning, for almost immediately
forgetting
became the media order of the day. Overnight, it became
almost
un-American not to accept the diktat of the Court. Or
to be precise,
Gore's own distinction became holy writ: One might
disagree with the
Court, but not with the legitimacy of its decision.
Press references
from that moment forward were to President-elect Bush,
an unofficial
title and something that the Governor from Texas
(President-select?
President-designate?) manifestly is not.

The key to dealing with the Bush people, however, is
precisely
not to accept them. Like most Americans, I have nothing
personal against
Bush, Dick Cheney, nor against Colin Powell and the
others now surfacing
as members of the new administration. But I will not
reconcile myself to
them.  They lost the election. Then they arranged to
obstruct the count
of the  vote. They don't deserve to be there, and that
changes
everything.

They have earned our civic disrespect, and that is what
we, the
people, should accord them. In social terms, civic
disrespect means that
the  illegitimacy of this administration must not be
allowed to fade
from view. The conventions of politics remain: Bush
will be president;
Congress must  work with him. But those of us outside
that process are
not bound by those conventions, and to the extent that
we have a voice,
we should use it.

In political practice, civic disrespect means drawing
lines
around the freedom of maneuver of the incoming
administration. In many
areas, including foreign policy, there will be few
major changes; in
others such as annual budgets and appropriations, 
compromises will have
to be reached.

But Bush should be opposed on actions whose reach will
extend
beyond his  actual term.

First, the new president should be allowed lifetime
appointments only
by  consensus. The public should oppose -- and 50
Senate Democrats
should freely block -- judicial nominations whenever
they carry even the
slightest ideological taint. That may mean most of
them, but no matter.
And as for the Supreme Court especially, vacancies need
not be filled.

Second, the Democrats should advise Bush not to
introduce any
legislation to cut or privatize any part of Social
Security or Medicare.


Third, Democrats should furiously oppose elimination of
the
estate tax a social incentive for recycling wealth to
the non-profit
sector, to foundations and universities, that has had a
uniquely
powerful effect on the form of American society. Once
gone, this
ingenious device will never be reenacted.

Fourth, the people must unite to oppose the global
dangers of
National Missile Defense -- a strategic nightmare on
which Bush
campaigned – that threatens for all time the security
of us all.

Fifth, Congress should enact a New Voting Rights Act,
targeted
precisely at   the Florida abuses. This should
stipulate: mandatory
adoption of  best-practice technology in all federal
elections; a
24-hour voting day; a ban on private contractors to aid
in purging voter
rolls;  and mandatory immediate hand count of all
under-votes in federal
elections.

With those steps taken, Democrats must also recognize
and adapt
to the new  political landscape that emerged from this
election. Outside
of Florida,  Democrats are finished in the South. But
they have
excellent prospects of  consolidating a narrow majority
of the Electoral
College -- so long as, in  the next election, there is
no Ralph Nader
defection.

What can prevent such a thing? Only a move away from
the main
Clinton  compromises that so infuriated the progressive
left. Nader's
voters were motivated passionately by issues like the
drug war, the
death penalty, consumer protection and national missile
defense --
issues where New Democrats took Republican positions in
their effort to
woo the South.

Clinton the Southerner succeeded at this -- but against
Republicans who were only weakly "Southern" at best.
Gore, on the other
hand, was principally a Northern candidate, strongly
backed by the core
Democrats, who ran against, and defeated so far as
ballots were
concerned, a wholly Southern Republican.

Future Republicans almost surely also will be
"Southern," for
that is where the base of the party now lies. And
future Democrats, if
they are Northern  candidates too, can beat them -- all
the more so if
they bring  the Greens back into the Democratic fold.

In short, Al Gore's campaign proved that there is an
electoral
majority in the United States for a government that is
truly a
progressive coalition, and not merely an  assemblage of
sympathetic
lawyers,  professors and investment bankers. Rather,
Americans will
elect a government that firmly includes and effectively
represents
labor, women, minorities --  and Greens. This is the
government we must
seek to elect-- if we get another chance.

And for that, the first task is to assure that the
information
ministries of our new corporate republic do not
successfully cast a fog
of forgetting over the crime that we have all just
witnessed, with our
own eyes.

Somos la misma familia,
Doc

FREE PELTIER EMAIL THE WHITE HOUSE NOW
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

This is a non-secured list and it should be always assumed that all posts can be monitored and read by others. Exercise appropriate discretion.
All posts represent the opinion, and are the copyright, of the originator and not that of DAN or the list administrators. No material may be reprinted without prior permission of the copyright holder.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
discuss-dan-unsubscribe@egroups.com