For the world's wealthiest nation, this ruling cements the transition of the American form of government from representative democracy to outright corporatocracy. While the "American way of life", as touted by reactionary forces, has always included a definitively capitalist economic structure, the Supreme Court has gone one step further by declaring that in the electoral process, as far as "free speech" is concerned, money talks and everyone else walks. Never have the class forces that govern American politics been more clearly visible. Now, the greater financial resources of corporations and wealthy individuals may be directly funneled into the political candidates that represent their interests. Of course, as Greenwald points out, that's pretty much the way it is now. All the same, the floodgates are now open. The ongoing decline and fall of American democracy has now vastly accelerated itself, helped along by unelected, politically-motivated judges.
Conservatives constantly rail against "judicial activism", except when it serves their interests. This was the case with Bush v. Gore and now with Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The original focus of the case - whether a right-wing group had the right to promote its film Hillary: The Movie in the immediate run-up to the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries - was swept aside by the right-wing judges, who seized the opportunity to re-interpret federal campaign finance laws in the broadest terms possible. The new ruling overturns almost a century of legislative precedent on the issue, stretching back to the days of trust-busting Republican president Theodore Roosevelt, and further cements the dubious status of corporations as "persons" under the law. Of course, corporations are like no other "persons" - they are effectively immortal, possess deeper pockets than most individuals, and while enjoying many of the same rights as citizens, evade almost all of the attendant responsibilities, such as paying taxes. And as many have pointed out, it says a lot that this right-wing court has declared corporations to be persons, while - say - Muslim detainees in the "War on Terror" are not.
Finally, in yet another example of conservative hypocrisy (an increasingly redundant term), it's worth nothing that the same political faction which incessantly proclaims itself the most ultra-patriotic in the country has further empowered stateless multi-national corporations to vastly increase their influence on the American political system. As Greg Palast notes:
The ongoing crises of the American empire are the result of a corporate-dominated political system increasingly incapable of changing course even as it leads to neo-feudalism domestically and ecological catastrophe internationally, in addition to its lucrative policy of perpetual war. The Supreme Court's ruling in the Citizens United case will only further weaken the dysfunctional American system, and underlines the need for a truly democratic, egalitarian movement that places the value of people above those of Big Business. What else is new?
The danger of foreign loot loading into U.S. campaigns, not much noted in the media chat about the Citizens case, was the first concern raised by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who asked about opening the door to "mega-corporations" owned by foreign governments. Olson offered Ginsburg a fudge, that Congress might be able to prohibit foreign corporations from making donations, though Olson made clear he thought any such restriction a bad idea.Tara Malloy, attorney with the Campaign Legal Center of Washington D.C. says corporations will now have more rights than people. Only United States citizens may donate or influence campaigns, but a foreign government can, veiled behind a corporate treasury, dump money into ballot battles.
[...]In July, the Chinese government, in preparation for President Obama's visit, held diplomatic discussions in which they skirted issues of human rights and Tibet. Notably, the Chinese, who hold a $2 trillion mortgage on our Treasury, raised concerns about the cost of Obama's health care reform bill. Would our nervous Chinese landlords have an interest in buying the White House for an opponent of government spending such as Gov. Palin? Ya betcha!