Who owns the world: companies or governments?

With the growth of capitalism in 17th century Europe, large corporations gradually emerged as a powerful economic unit. Perhaps the history of the first powerful trading companies dates back to the early 17th century in the Netherlands. Due to the Dutch supremacy of the maritime industry, the East India Company began trading with India and Southeast Asia. Gradually, other economic companies emerged in continental Europe, especially in the United Kingdom. From the mid-19th century onwards, these companies gradually emerged in the United States, especially in the oil and railroad industries. Gradually, as the power of these large corporations increased, their interests led to their entry into politics. Eventually, some of these companies became larger than governments in terms of political and financial power, so that they took control of the government, and gradually the interests of these companies took precedence over the interests of the people. In 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled that companies could be given unlimited funding for election campaigns. Of course, corporate financial aid to the candidate existed before this vote. In 2008, for example, financial, insurance and real estate companies spent just $ 132 million on the US presidential election. In this way, large corporations, with the financial support of candidates’ campaigns in the United States, generally capture them in their own interests. Since the 1970s, the power of large corporations in the US government has gradually increased. By injecting large sums of money into lobbying, these companies have succeeded in driving many politicians to their advantage. Politicians who need the money of these companies to maintain their power and campaign, are selected in the campaign by making demagogic promises with the help of the money of these companies and later use their position to protect the interests of these companies. The American economist Jeffrey Sachs called this system “corporatocracy” or “corporatocracy”. These companies spend an average of about $ 3 billion a year on US House lobbying and are divided into four major lobbies: the military-industrial lobby, the lobby of Wall Street and Goldman Sachs, the oil lobby, and the lobby. بهداشــت -درمان. Usually one or more of these large lobbies will support certain candidates in the presidential or parliamentary elections to secure their interests in their future decisions. Many companies even cross geographical borders and operate internationally, influencing countries’ policies globally. Using tremendous advances in technology and the phenomenon of globalization, these companies have succeeded in controlling markets and financial institutions to secure their interests worldwide and to influence governments in their decisions. So it can be said that the nation-state model is now strongly influenced by the influence of these companies. These are the big companies, and they are the ones who, in essence, employ politicians ostensibly by popular vote. In his book, When Companies Run the World, David Catherine details the history of these companies and their role in politics, economics, and even globalization. The profit-seeking behavior of these companies has increased the wealth of a small minority (one percent) in the United States. So that after the Second World War, despite the economic growth, the share of this group has gradually increased and increased. For example, the group’s total wealth is greater than the total wealth of 90% of the American people. The irresponsible and utilitarian behavior of these companies, especially financial institutions, led to the 2008 economic crisis. In the United States alone, 800,000 people lost their homes and millions lost all their retirement money and savings. In response to the crisis, the US government and politicians have spent billions of dollars on taxpayers to save these companies and prevent their destruction. But it was not possible to save many of these companies. In his book, The Courage of Action, Ben Bernanke, then in charge of the US Federal Reserve or the US Federal Reserve, describes how the US government and politicians acted to save some of these companies. Eventually, however, due to the influence of these companies, only some companies, such as Goldman-Sachs and AIG, were preserved, and some, such as Anran, were destroyed. They justified public opinion by propagating that “these companies are too big to be destroyed” and that their destruction would lead to the destruction of the entire economy. While there was not enough money to save the millions of people who created the crisis and destroyed these companies! Interestingly, millions of dollars of money that the US government paid to save these companies went as a reward to the pockets of high-ranking companies that were responsible for the crisis. With the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, many members of these companies entered the US government directly. Many in Trump’s cabinet, including himself, have not been politicians and are at the forefront of these corporations; People like Tillerson (Secretary of State) who worked for the Exxon oil company for many years or Steve Manuchein who worked for Goldman Sachs for many years. Surveys show that only members of the Trump administration have as much wealth as 40% of Americans.

The fact is that Trump has introduced a new paradigm in American and world politics, and that is the direct involvement of corporate leaders in politics, and the government is taking steps to protect the interests of these companies instead of financing traditional politicians. One of the most important measures taken by the Trump administration to protect the interests of large companies has been to reduce the taxes of these companies and their trustees. Tax cuts for the wealthy are a trend followed by all US statesmen after World War II, with their taxes reduced from about 90 percent to less than 35 percent in recent years. But what exactly is the way to deal with the giants of big companies? If they have economic and decision-making institutions, can their influence be reduced? The fact is that these companies still need the votes of the people to send their people to the decision-making bodies. People should support independent candidates who do not move in the interests of these companies. Bernie Sanders succeeded in creating such a movement in the 2016 US presidential election. Millions of people, with little financial support, were able to fund his campaign against two big-backed rivals. A phenomenon he called the “political revolution,” that is, the participation of millions of people in political processes. The movement ultimately failed, but promised that the participation of millions of people in society, rather than being marginalized, would be able to contain the corporate giants.

Dr. Reza Saidi Firoozabadi – Transplant Surgeon