This is not a new story, it happened sometime last year I think.
It is a court case: Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, whose decision was to declare money "free speech."
Here is the link to a
Wiki Page for background information
Putting all the political drawbacks that come from this, namely infinite monetary resources for those with enough support and means, creating unfair advantages for some, let us look at what this decision says about Human values in regards to Marx theory.
Think about Freedom of Speech, the first amendment in our Bill of Rights meant to protect citizens (though this is not specified in the constitution, thus the ruling) and how this amendment is applied to "money."
Again, looking forward to your comments.
I think Marx would argue that, in a Communist system, those "human values" issues wouldn't arise. Those problems are a symptom of a capitalist state. Absent that state, those problems disappear.
ReplyDeleteAs for Citizens United: when considering the implications, I think it's important to clarify the holding. While it is true that corporate speech is protected political speech (and money spent on broadcasts communicating that speech also constitutes speech), the amount that corporations can donate to campaigns or candidates remains unchanged.
Limits on campaign donations remain the same as pre-Citizens United. Those federal regulations remain wholly intact.
So the major change from Citizens United is that for-profit businesses, non-profit businesses and labor unions can now broadcast "electioneering communications" within 30-60 days of an election.
A major change in campaign finance? Definitely
A major change for First Amendment rights? Maybe not.