Why should companies not be able to give the same kind of support, and to promote candidates who reflect their own outlook on the world?"
Perhaps because democracies are supposed to have government of the people, by the people, for the people, and not by and for corporations? "It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."
The issue is transparency. In everything. You can't be me, I'm taken
The job of a corporate body is to pursue it's corporate interests - quite often transnational now - whereas the job of a state is to protect the interests of its people - which may sometimes coincide but are never coterminous with the interests of the people.
Political debate should be between the people and not determined by corporate interests - which means there should also be considerable restrictions on corporate ownership of media etc. - which are an essential part of a functioning democracy. "It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."
protect the interests of its people - which may sometimes coincide but are never coterminous with the interests of the people
I should of course have written "coterminous with the interests of corporations". What's good for Henry Ford isn't always what's good for America - even if it sometimes can be. "It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."
