As we examine the difference between the economic
power and political power, not only do we have to realize the correlation between
the two, but also remember that power is a dynamic concept. There may be a
clear distinction between the two, but a powerful private economic actor is
fully capable of challenging these definitions.
Philosopher Harry Binswanger describes this difference
in his essay The Dollar and the Gun[1]:
“Political power” refers to the power of government.
The special nature of that power is what differentiates government from all
other social institutions, and its essential attribute is its monopoly on the
use of physical force. Only a government can make laws, which in essence are rules
of social conduct backed up by physical force. A government that has no power
to use force is not a government. A non-governmental organization can make
rules, pass resolutions, etc., but these are not laws because they cannot be
enforced on those who choose not to deal with that organization. The penalty
for breaking the rules of an organization or a club, e.g. (G8 turning into G7) Summit,
is expulsion from the association. The penalty for breaking the law will result
in fines or imprisonment.
Economic power is the ability to produce material
values and offer them for sale. E.g., the power of big oil companies is the
power to discover, drill, and bring to market a large amount of oil. Economic
power lies in the cash and other assets possessed by businesses. A business can
only make you an offer and present you with possibilities. The alternative a
business presents you with in a free market is: “increase your well-being by
trading with us or go your own way.” The alternative a government, or any
force-user, presents you with is: “do as we order, or forfeit your liberty,
property, or life.”
Journalist Steve Coll’s book “Private Empire:
ExxonMobil and American Power”[2] challenges this notion
that political power rules supreme. This book is about a private economic actor
that has become so powerful, that it can sometimes go against U.S. foreign
policy, often arrogantly declaring itself a global corporation not tied to the
U.S. government in terms of policies, and then just as quickly lobbying for
government support when such support is necessary to boost its corporate goals.
Coll describes Exxon
Mobil as one of the largest, and most omnipresent, corporations in the world,
covering the years from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska through the explosion
of BP's floating oil rig out in the Gulf of Mexico. It documents ExxonMobil's
dealings in African countries like Chad and Equatorial Guinea as they negotiate
with repressive dictators while managing security against insurgents in their
own compounds and ignoring the horrific social conditions they see around them.
For years, Exxon Mobil refused to acknowledge the problem of climate change,
and created purposefully disingenuous studies to create confusion on the topic and
delay government or social action.
No comments:
Post a Comment