Lindblom - The Market System - Afghan Journalists' Committee

238 What To Make of Itfunds to draw on, as does the plaintiff. These suits oftenconstitute frightening intimidations that obstruct freespeech and participation in public affairs. More familiar examplesof corporate activity inconsistent with politicalequality are corporate spending on election campaigns or tocultivate close relations with government officials.Enterprises enjoy advantages beyond size itself. Theycan draw on “public” funds while members of other groupsmust spend out of their own incomes. These public fundsthey throw into political activity are public in the sensethat they are drawn from the receipts of the enterprise, thusfrom customers and stockholders rather than from the personalincome of enterprise executives. The individual citizenis on his own. Laws sometimes limit executive use of“public” funds, but it takes little ingenuity to escape them.Enterprises, corporate and other, enjoy the additionaladvantage that they are already organized, ready and able tomove, while ordinary persons are still struggling to raisefunds and organize. In a moment, a corporation can assignexecutives to political tasks, while citizen groups mustsearch for qualified staff. And corporations persist, for theyare not mortal. They may persist in their political activitiesfor one generation after another, while their mortal adversarieslose their energies or die off.Although the law varies from one country to another, itgenerally grants corporations as legally fictitious personsmany of the rights, including rights of political participation,that one might think appropriate in a democracy onlyfor living, breathing persons. Corporations are legally entitledto engage heavily in political activity, even if theycannot vote or run for office. Theirs, too, are legal rights offree speech and of communication with political elites.Corporation as person is a fundamental fact about