cause, effect:
What do you get when you give corporations the same rights as citizens? You could argue you get companies with unreasonable political clout, legal protections and wealth distribution. All solid arguments but not what I’ll address today.
For this post’s purposes, it means celebrity companies make news with political endorsements just like Hayden Panettiere or any of these people.
I don’t mention this to discuss the implications of having man-woman-only marriage. Something like that is incredibly personal, based on long-standing beliefs or environmental influences that I, nor anyone else, could address with brevity. Still, in my humble opinion, it’s obtuse interference and should be viewed as government expansion, something most oppose.
I bring it up to ask you, dear SD&IF readers, should we look to corporations to tell us what to believe? These two examples are progressive and diverse modern companies. Whether anyone cares what they think matters little compared to how this opens the door for more established or conservative companies to push their two cents $6.88 when comparing CEO pay to that of average workers.
How do we define the bounds of the national discourse when so few with so much can manifest such influence? Google and Apple may be progressive and insightful but they are likely, considering the money and ideology involved, among the minority. We already rely on corporate culture to feed, clothe and finance us, do we need them to speak for us?
Cross posted at SD&IF.