Corporations Will Run Amuck


Corporations help create domestic and global economic prosperity. However, when they grow extremely rich they can become powerful which may threaten sovereign actors’ authority, both on a national and international level. Additionally, through hefty donations their lobbying capability allows them to manipulate politicians and the political process undermining democratic processes and devaluing the voice of the people.  In order to prevent corporations from interfering with the democratic processes there needs to be an overarching system that monitors what corporations do and how they do it.

To a certain extent room and flexibility may help corporations better compete against one another. Capitalist societies like the United States believe that less regulations on corporations means more incentive to be innovative. And while that may be true to some extent, there are also many abuses these companies commit in order to maximize their profits. Without strict guidelines corporations can abuse the environment, people and animals. For example, without oversight a company may dump toxic waste into a body of water instead of disposing of it properly in order to save money. Not only are these acts unethical and irresponsible but also signal to corporations that such behavior is acceptable. Governments that place weak regulations on corporations risk being overshadowed and overrun by said corporations. Governments should therefore implement policies that punish corporation for unethical behavior and make it illegal for corporations to influence politics.

The WTO exists to ensure fair play by member nations trade wise, but some of their policies do not go far enough to ensure environmental, worker, and animal safety. Perhaps the best way to address this concern is simply by having the WTO enforce stricter rules on its members. The WTO is already established and legitimate so members would be less skeptical and unreasonable in following the new guidelines. If they don’t agree or break the rules they will be sanctioned, fined or they can simply choose to leave. However, there might be more drawbacks to leaving the WTO than remaining even with stricter guidelines in place.

Corporations have the ability to influence domestic and national politics. This is dangerous because it undermines democracy and drowns out the voices of the people. In order to prevent being overrun by corporations governments and institutions like the WTO need to place stricter rules on corporations especially dealing with political contributions, the environment, workers rights and animal welfare. If corporations are allowed to run amuck they will surely interfere with the democratic processes of governments, domestic and global, shifting our democracy to corporate advantage.

Comments

  1. UnknownAugust 5, 2018 at 5:58 PM

    I agree that corporations should be limited on their ability to influence politics. I think the biggest issue we have here in the United States with that is corporate funding of political campaigns. Many companies will donate to a campaign to curry favor with that politician. This reeks of a certain level of corruption or at the very least shady dealings. I know there have been some restrictions placed in the past by the Supreme Court on the amount that can be donated, but I don't think this is nearly enough. We do have to come up with a better way to corral the influence money has on politics.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousAugust 15, 2018 at 11:07 AM

    To add to Celesse's comment, while there have been restrictions on corporate donations but there are groups of politicians and corporations that are actively trying to roll these back/prevent them from happening. Not ideal.

    Thankfully governments aren't the only ones working to combat corporations or hold them accountable. There are nonprofits and other IO's policing corporations and helping the government keep them in check. Your water example brought to mind a relevant news event here in Chicago where a local watchdog organization brought to light that Trump Tower is illegally taking water from the Chicago River and then putting the same amount of water back into the river without cleaning it and at 30 degrees warmer. They didn't have the authority or authorization to do this and now the city government has taken up the case.

    Corporations do have a lot of power and are a threat - but I think the current system does have checks that prevent them from completely upending the system.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anarchy in the USA

           While discussing realist motives and intentions, it seems that the United States is headed down a curious path worth looking at. Clearly a powerful nation, the United States should be in a unique position to latch onto globalization in order to secure a stable future. Calm, cool, collected domination is a much better look than ramping up rhetoric and perceived might, because your neighbor's interest to attack is seemingly when they are most threatened by show of force.             The United States has long taken advantage of its allies, while using economic bargaining to secure peaceful existence. The European Union is a clear ally in the spread of Democracy and Capitalism, two tenants central to the existence of the United States. It is this point that makes recent events troubling with regards to a peaceful future.             In an effort to bolster nationalism, our country has tur...
Read more

Waltz's Neorealism

The reading by Waltz points out some key points that Neorealists believe in. Neorealists view power as a possibly useful means. Neorealism contends that international politics can be understood only if the effects of structure are added to the unit-level explanations of traditional realism. It rejects the assumption that man’s innate lust for power constitutes a sufficient cause of war in the absence of of any other. Specifically, we need to look at the causal link interacting units and international outcomes. We’ve established before with Hobbes that the system we live in is anarchy. States are rational actors that at their basest level want to survive. Neorealism states that within an anarchy, states need to provide their own security to protect themselves from threats. This security dilemma is a problem, war occurs. This depends on situations and characteristics of states, not because states want to have war. The more important question then becomes what started th...
Read more