Joel Bakan–The Kids Are Not All Right

…the issues confronting parents today can’t be dismissed as mere generational prejudices. There is reason to believe that childhood itself is now in crisis….

the 20th century also witnessed another momentous shift, one that would ultimately threaten the welfare of children: the rise of the for-profit corporation. Lawyers, policy makers and business lobbied successfully for various rights and entitlements traditionally connected, legally, with personhood. New laws recognized corporations as legal ”” albeit artificial ”” “persons,” granting them many of the same legal rights and privileges as human beings. In an eerie parallel with the child-protective efforts, “the best interests of the corporation” was soon introduced as a legal precept.

A clash between these two newly created legal entities ”” children and corporations ”” was, perhaps, inevitable. Century-of-the-child reformers sought to resolve conflicts in favor of children. But over the last 30 years there has been a dramatic reversal: corporate interests now prevail. Deregulation, privatization, weak enforcement of existing regulations and legal and political resistance to new regulations have eroded our ability, as a society, to protect children.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Economics, Politics, * International News & Commentary, America/U.S.A., Children, Corporations/Corporate Life, Economy, History, Law & Legal Issues, Politics in General

4 comments on “Joel Bakan–The Kids Are Not All Right

  1. m+ says:

    last time I checked, the State/ Government did not give birth to our children or bear primary responsibility for raising them. If a child is eating too much junk food, then where did he/ she get the money to buy it? If he’s spending too much time on the phone or online, who bought him the gadgets and paid for the data package? The corporations and government certainly should check toxins in food and the environment and work to provide a reasonably safe place for children. But the primary responsibility for most of this author’s points rests with the parents, not the State/ government. And the attempt to connect corporate “personhood” with the topic of raising children comes off as an awkward non-sequitur.

  2. Albany+ says:

    #1

    “Personal resposibility” meets culture. It can’t always win.

  3. David Keller says:

    I appreciate the history lesson from Mr. Bakan. I foolishly thought the rise of the for profit corporation occurred in the 19th century. I could assume liberals play fast and loose with the facts whenever it suits them. But since that can’t possibly be true, I am currenly re-aligning my brain cells to wipe out all refences to the Interstate Commerce Act and the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.

  4. Paula Loughlin says:

    What new laws? I’m pretty sure the recent ruling regading free speech rights (re political speech) declaring Corporations persons did not break new ground on that point as Corporations have been regarded as persons in many other situations. It only broke new ground in that it decided they would also be regarded as persons for this specific application.

    I never needed society to protect my children beyond the protection of laws against criminal behavior by others. I was able to parent quite fine without their help.

    The reason childhood is in danger is because of the policies so loved, advanced and embraced by the Left. Don’t tell me how abortion is a right then gabble on about the dangers of McDonalds to children.