The "free press" : $b portrait of a monopoly — John Shaqi
The "free press" : $b portrait of a monopolyMarion, George
History
The "free press" : $b portrait of a monopoly
Marion, George
Press -- United States
It is true that the press lords are forever wailing about an alleged
government menace to press freedom. The conflict of press and
government does not contradict, however, the charge that the press
is an instrument of the State. The common notion that State and
government are two names for one thing, makes a few words on theory
advisable at this point. A hundred or a hundred and fifty years
ago, there would have been less likelihood of similar confusion. In
the great political strife that attended and immediately followed
the adoption of the United States Constitution, political theory
was treated with more respect than it is today. Federalists and
Jeffersonians agreed that the State was an instrument of class rule.
Jeffersonian John Taylor saw revolution and “order” as “two modes of
invading private property; the first, by which the poor plunder the
rich ... sudden and violent; the second, by which the rich plunder the
poor, slow and legal.” Summarizing Taylor’s views, historian Arthur
Schlesinger, Jr. says: “The succession of privileged orders through
history--the priesthood, the nobility, now the banking system--showed
how every age had known its own form of institutionalized robbery
by a minority operating through the State.” Lenin later put it
scientifically: “The State is an organ of class domination, an organ of
oppression of one class by another; its aim is the creation of ‘order’
which legalizes and perpetuates this oppression.”
The American State
Classes do not march in a straight line to their goals. Sometimes
the executive arm of government is completely responsive to the
views of the most reactionary section of capitalism, as when Hoover,
Harding, Coolidge were President. Sometimes the President is not fully
“manageable,” as in the case of President Roosevelt. But he then finds
himself pretty well invested by “trustworthy” men; he must accept a
John Garner for Vice-President; he must put men like Jesse Jones in his
Cabinet. In the same way, Congress may be an easy tool of reactionary
interests one term, curbed by public pressure the next. Note the speed
with which the last few Congresses have enacted drastic anti-labor
legislation and tax bills pouring billions into the coffers of Big
Business. If an active public conscience restricts the freedom of
executive departments and legislative departments otherwise favorable
to Big Business, there are always the courts. When the democrats,
Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, held the presidency, Martin Van Buren noted
that the party of rich-man’s-rule fled to “the judicial department of
the government, as to an ark of future safety which the Constitution
placed beyond the reach of public opinion.” So today the courts readily
grant anti-picketing injunctions to employers despite laws expressly
designed to halt such use of the injunction. Below the Federal level,
government is even more easily dominated by big capital. The local
police are always at hand for strike duty.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account