"Simple" is perhaps not the right word a step by step approach begining with obvious and modest changes at criticial points would be a better description. Add for this the need that such a preliminary program must be near universal (applicable to third and first world states) and the critical point becomes how public companies are allowed to conduct their business.
*Companies are legal fictious indivduals not citzens - they should be disbarred from political processes which by definition can only be corrupting (political processes are for people not legal fictions).
*Companies do not own our natural wealth, they make use of it - they cannot be allowed to dispoil it. Fines may be sufficient to punish the company but other sanctions must be used against directors who allow it to happen in the first place.
*The laws of fraud and criminal negligence are applicable to companies in the form of their directors having criminal liabilty - we should not allow them to employ their "get-out-of-jail" card which in effect by the non-prosecution they enjoy.
*In short, the responsiblity of directors should be expanded well past the interests of their shareholders - their legal existence is a by common license - it needs to be better defined.
The role the state should assume in all of this is criticial, I am not being dismissive of attempts to work within (these have the virtues of pointing in a direction we do need to follow) but in the end it is state power that will make a real difference. Real struggle however is not confined to the main roads I expect if some of these reforms were brougt up we would see a response in share-holders and have more than a few ready to side with a just cause.
The democratised (proletarianised) state is in this sense the main objective, but achieved by an accumulation of struggle for modest reforms (ie that directors be responisible for their company's behaviour, that corporate practices be subject to social control beyond protecting investors). In this, no form of increased consciousness is to be spurned for our aim remains moving the whole of society along a peg or two towards a truly human existence.
As isolated examples the above mean very little, nothing that could not be circumvented even if it was implemented. On the other hand, the struggles you refer to below are already in embryo allies for a grander platform for the Democratisation of the State and the Economy.
Greg Schofield Perth Australia
--- Message Received --- From: Chris Burford <cburford at gn.apc.org> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:46:22 +0000 Subject: Business bribery [Democracy and the nation state]
Quite a bit of experience has been built up of activists attending companies annual general meetings and raising arkward questions about the environment, racism, etc. This started I think with the global campaigns against apartheid.
To channel that activity towards the reform you suggest is so simple, we would need these activists to link their activity to national campaigns calling for legislation against company donations to business. A sort of capitalist Charter 88 (the UK consitutional reform movement)
It might be linked to a requirement that at all company AGM's there should be a section for social and environmental audit.
Any prospects or is this just one of those simple ideas if only people would see it our way?
Regards
Chris