Vexen Crabtree 2015

vexen

Vexen Crabtree's Live Journal

Sociology, Theology, Anti-Religion and Exploration: Forcing Humanity Forwards


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Vexen Crabtree 2015
vexen

Multinational Corporations Versus Democracy

New page as subject, the conclusion reads:

"Massive corporations can outmanoeuvre governments and therefore evade the law. Multinationals organisations like the UN and EU can fight back. The heads of large companies have massive power over staff, employment, industry, national economies, the environment and yet are not elected nor publicly accountable for their actions. Supra-national organisations, staffed by those on the pay roll of elected governments, empowers democracy with renewed control. National democratic consolidation of power is required in order to reign in multinational corporations that are presently beyond the law because they can avoid the laws of any one particular government."

It's a page I've been meaning to write for a year! I have quite a lot of further material but need to polish up what I'm trying to say, before I try to say it!

  • 1

Interesting article


The heads of large companies have massive power over staff, employment, industry, national economies, the environment and yet are not elected nor publicly accountable for their actions.

It should be pointed out that the commissioners for the EU, and UN representatives, are appointed. They're only democratic in the most highly spun scenario - it's like saying the House of Lords is democratic, because they're appointed by elected officials. It doesn't wash.

Also, the EU hasn't had a public audit on over eleven years - so as far as being publically accountable, again, that doesn't wash.

Supra-national organisations, staffed by those on the pay roll of elected governments, empowers democracy with renewed control.

When has the civil service ever been democratic?

National democratic consolidation of power is required in order to reign in multinational corporations that are presently beyond the law because they can avoid the laws of any one particular government."

I see the point you're making, but for such a situation to occur you'd need a World Government.

I think it would be far easier to control multinationals via a free press - that is, one that isn't dependent on advertising revenues.


Re: Interesting article

The theory behind me saying that such commissioners are still democratic is that when a party is voted in they will tend to change the commissioner, hence, they are a still representative of the elected government.

I do agree with where you are coming from, but, I still think that multinational trade laws are "more democratic" than having free-running industries erode the power that democratic institutions have.

I think a solution is for the public to vote for supra-national representatives such as EU staff, who then serve a 2-year term up above, and can be appointed regardless of their party. So, a Labour government could be in power but the public could vote for a politician to move to the EU on his individual style (partially indepedent of his party).

Free press helps with exposés of multinational corporations' misdeeds, but, such companies pay staff & scientists to abuse that free press with sponsored studies & commentary, there needs to still be organisations that can pass laws based on information that comes to light via free press and private public investigation, public concern and special interest groups' lobbies.


For the general record, I've just added two quotes from The Economist, referenced now at the end of the article.

No sympathy for the majority

I do agree with where you are coming from, but, I still think that multinational trade laws are "more democratic" than having free-running industries erode the power that democratic institutions have.

I've always thought anarcho-capitalism as the most democratic of all systems of government. That is, I'm in favour of doing away with government entirely and allowing private industry to take over. If the populous approves of a company, then it'll continue to trade, if not, then bankruptcy beckons.

It stikes me, and it would be in keeping with your ideas on the Übermensch, that you aren't a supporter of democracy. You don't trust the populous to make informed decisions about whether to buy shoes from sweat-shops, or whether they'll be make the best ethical decision when buying food. Rather you're in favour of forcing people to do what's best for them.

While I totally see your point, I don't think it takes into account human nature. While there are laws, people will find ways around them. Control via hegmonic methods, and embedding them in ritual and tradition, has always been a far better method.

That said, thanks for a facinating article. :)

Random thought but have you ever considered self-publishing any of your work, in say a collection of essays, via www.lulu.com ?

I don't know exactly why you'd want to, other than it's rather gratifying to be in print :)

Anyway, just a thought...

Subserviant national government?

(Anonymous)
For the record, anyone reading Helds book will find a wealth of info that actually pertains to a non global outlook. There is considerable argument against the need for supranational government in dealing with MNC activity. Globalisation and economic globalisation is a vast subject- one shouldnt advocate supranational government creation as the only regulatory method of MNC's. This is a far more complicated agenda than is given above.

  • 1
?

Log in