The Observer's Blog

The Corporate Model

I have just watched "The Fog of War," which I found to be a excellent film if only for the many illustrations of actual history given by its subject Robert S. McNamara. The film has gotten me to thinking about what I can say for certain about the current political situation in the world. I've found many individuals are happy to proclaim, spread, or discuss (rarely generate) a picture of the way things are. These models are typically presented as what the proclaimer believes is fact, but my data is at least not nearly abundant enough to make as confident predictions as most people I encounter.

A common model is that of "Corporate America" which essentially states that corporations are in control of the government as a whole, specific individuals who are in a position to affect change, and sometimes even the American people. Control is a concept I've recently become very interested in. It seems to me that Person A exercises control over Person B by creating a dependency of B upon A. Applying this definition to the question of whether Corporations control America, the question is now: Are Americans dependent on corporations? Well, what happens when you need a toothbrush? A meal? Clothes? I can rarely think of a case where I could easily obtain any of this from a non-corporate source. But none of us feels dependent do we? A corporation has never made a demand of me as an individual, and so i have always been inclined to dismiss the "Corporate America" model as more than a little off base.

What about the question of whether corporations control government officials? They need toothbrushes too, but the corporations do have a more persuasive tool for politicians who must face election: money. I think there is no doubt this is a very effective tool of control that is used by corporations over elected officials, but it is also not absolute. Ultimately, elected officals' power is given by the voters, which does not always have to be coerced out of them by advertisements and other means that cost money beyond the candidate's means. Here then the corporation clearly exercises a form of conditional control: they create a dependency which is conditional to the political environment. But if the corporation controls the population in some unsensed way, the corporation my even be able to sway the political environment to their favor (e.g., in such a way that forces the dependency of the candidate).

I conclude that if it were their goal corporations could indeed "control America," but I don't think most CEO's make that their objective. They mostly are concerned with their own survival and profit, and most of the country agrees to cooperate with them because it is most convenient. I think that individuals in and out of government would find a way to break the seeming dependencies created by the corporations should those corporations ever decide to exercise the control they have through those dependencies.