Author Archives: sdiamond

Corporate speech and democracy

My colleague David Yosifon has an excellent Op-ed piece in the SF Chronicle today making the point that in the wake of the Citizens United US Supreme Court decision that corporations enjoy free speech rights these corporations have increased responsibility to insure that their speech reflects democratic input from all of their constituencies, including employees and shareholders.

I like his analysis because it gets beyond the idea of many on the left that somehow it is just plain wrong to allow corporations, which include unions many of which are organized as non profit corporations, free speech rights. Of course corporate personality has long been well established in American law all the way back to a case from Santa Clara County, in fact, dealing with the umbrella of equal protection spreading to corporations as “legal persons.”

The bottom line is that we live in society not just as individuals but through institutions, including unions, corporations, political parties. The goal should be to democratize fully those institutions rather than curtailing their ability to speak for us in the name of a utopian “individualism.”

As the Court itself held: “Because speech is an essential mechanism of democracy—it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people—political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it by design or inadvertence.”

“Progressive” Economist Excuses Mass Murder, Again

A few years ago Cal State Chico “Marxist” economist Michael Perelman argued with me on his “Progressive Economists Network” that the Cambodian genocide, if it really happened at all, was really a side effect of the otherwise justifiable attempt by the Khmer Rouge to feed starving Cambodians.

He is at again – this time arguing the Rwandan genocide was really just a side effect of a civil war.  The real story can be found in the reports of Human Rights Watch as developed by the heroic Alison des Forges, who is nearly slandered by the specious article provided by Perelman.

What seems to stymie Perelman, like others of his political cohort like Mike Klonsky and Bill Ayers, is the naive notion that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Thus, any regime, whether that of Chavez in Venezuela, Ahmadenijad in Iran, Ortega in Nicaragua, or Hu Jintao in China, however brutal and authoritarian, is to be excused or defended as long as they indicate they are in opposition to US foreign policy.

The tougher job of establishing an independent and democratic foreign policy for the United States is ignored. Whether they know it or not, Perelman, Ayers, Klonsky, et al, are the flip side of the “new realism” that is in such fashion among certain human rights activists. These people argue that the US government can make genuine support for human rights an integral part of US foreign policy. Tell that to the Dalai Lama. My critique of that position can be found here.

In an era when Chavez admirer and stalinoid education professor Bill Ayers can be a guest at numerous college campuses perhaps it is not a surprise that Perelman is being “honored” by his campus, Cal State Chico, next month.

PEN-L: Rwanda: The Case for Humanitarian Intervention.

20 Years After the Wall Fell

009_berlin_wall_openThe Berlin Wall fell 20 years ago so today is as good a day as any to announce the publication of my new book, From “Che” to China: Labor and Authoritarianism in the New Global Economy.

Here is the back cover blurb:

From ‘Che’ to China: Labor and Authoritarianism in the New Global Economy argues that globalization is not a progressive force that is giving rise to a new democratic capitalism. In fact, authoritarianism, in part influenced by neo-stalinist regimes and their intellectual architects such as ‘Che’ Guevara, remains an important political force and the new global capitalism itself is contributing to its persistence. In particular, the labor organization is now seen by authoritarian regimes as a source of power and control over the general population. To realize the democratic potential in the globalization process, a new autonomous labor movement responsible to its rank and file members must emerge. This requires an intellectual break with the consensus view that capitalism can safely accommodate healthy trade unions in a stable world order.

As I argue in the book, formal stalinism has disappeared but it is being replaced by what I call “neo-Stalinism” as well as authoritarian forms of capitalism.

Did Al Gore Really Say That?

Al Gore has millions invested in his climate change myth according to the New York Times. He defends himself by calling his critics “deniers” – what, as if they were denying the Holocaust?

The myth, of course, is not whether or not global warming is taking place – although some of the same people who told us 20 years ago to expect an Ice Age are now telling us the opposite.  No, the climate definitely changes and the direction is a subject of legitimate debate.

The myth, of course, is whether human carbon contribution has anything to do with it. Ice core samples over 400,000 years demonstrate that in fact warming PRECEDES carbon change by some 800 years.

Gore’s Dual Role in Spotlight: Advocate and Investor – DealBook Blog – NYTimes.com.