4 ms·

The merits of this decision are a legitimete topic for debate. I'm still not 100% sure how I feel about it. The point that I feel like those who are against i

The merits of this decision are a legitimete topic for debate. I'm still not 100% sure how I feel about it. The point that I feel like those who are against it completely miss (and that anti-business people generally miss) is that corporations are just groups of people. It's people/turtles all the way down. A quote that I found interesting, even though I do not agree 100%: "Until today, we had the right to free speech, and the right to assembly, but not the right to free speech when we were assembled. The Supreme Court has thankfully corrected that absurdity." http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2010/01/good-news-for-free-speech.html http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2010/01/good-news-for-...

joubert 17y ago
There is a huge power asymmetry between a corporation and a natural person. If the former is able to voice their political opinion without constraint (e.g. Enron spends, say $1 billion dollars in an election), they can effectively manipulate our democracy, drowning out citizens' political will. This is what just happened when the (conservative) Supreme Court overturned the limits on corporate spending in political campaigns. Moreover, it now enables foreign corporations to manipulate election outcomes.
- yummyfajitas 17y ago
  Lets be clear what we mean by "manipulate" and "drowning out citizens' political will": the corporation may use speech to persuade voters to vote a certain way. So it isn't so much "drowning out" citizen's political will as persuading them to exercise it in a certain way.
  - joubert 17y ago
    If an organization is able to purchase all the advertising space in a jurisdiction, they can effectively decide how people will vote. Consider the Prop 8 smear campaign in California by the Mormon Church.
    - yummyfajitas 17y ago
      The Mormon Church bought all the advertising space in CA? That's quite a feat.
jamesbritt 17y ago
"The point that I feel like those who are against it completely miss (and that anti-business people generally miss) is that corporations are just groups of people. It's people/turtles all the way down." Many of these people see exactly that point, and use it to assert that since corporations are just groups of people, and people have the right of free speech, no additional laws or protections are needed for corporations.

joubert 17y ago

There is a huge power asymmetry between a corporation and a natural person. If the former is able to voice their political opinion without constraint (e.g. Enron spends, say $1 billion dollars in an election), they can effectively manipulate our democracy, drowning out citizens' political will. This is what just happened when the (conservative) Supreme Court overturned the limits on corporate spending in political campaigns. Moreover, it now enables foreign corporations to manipulate election outcomes.

yummyfajitas 17y ago
Lets be clear what we mean by "manipulate" and "drowning out citizens' political will": the corporation may use speech to persuade voters to vote a certain way. So it isn't so much "drowning out" citizen's political will as persuading them to exercise it in a certain way.
- joubert 17y ago
  If an organization is able to purchase all the advertising space in a jurisdiction, they can effectively decide how people will vote. Consider the Prop 8 smear campaign in California by the Mormon Church.
  - yummyfajitas 17y ago
    The Mormon Church bought all the advertising space in CA? That's quite a feat.

jamesbritt 17y ago

"The point that I feel like those who are against it completely miss (and that anti-business people generally miss) is that corporations are just groups of people. It's people/turtles all the way down." Many of these people see exactly that point, and use it to assert that since corporations are just groups of people, and people have the right of free speech, no additional laws or protections are needed for corporations.