New Dimensions; The Corporate State; Part 2

<v Charles Reich>One way is to restrict the amount of goods and <v Charles Reich>to jack up the price, and the other way is to have <v Charles Reich>a great abundance and to make your profit out of your creativity, <v Charles Reich>out of your inventiveness, out of the variety of what you create. <v Charles Reich>And then you essentially are profiting from the labor that you <v Charles Reich>put in. The other way of profiting from the power you have <v Charles Reich>to make people pay anything to get this scarce <v Charles Reich>commodity. What we're seeing now is a abuse <v Charles Reich>of the profit system in which it's being used not to offer incentive <v Charles Reich>to all kinds of new kinds of economic growth. <v Charles Reich>We're seeing it used to restrict growth in every possible way- <v Charles Reich>to narrow the field of enterprise, to- to create a <v Charles Reich>permanent category of unemployed. <v Charles Reich>And one of the things about profits today is that they are a lie. <v Charles Reich>They're a lie because they don't count the costs.

<v Charles Reich>You see, if your profit doesn't count the river that you're polluting- <v Charles Reich>if it doesn't count, the person who is exposed to radiation <v Charles Reich>as a result of his work.- If it doesn't count the- the loss <v Charles Reich>of energy of those people who are simply left to molder <v Charles Reich>while only a few can work, then you're not really counting costs <v Charles Reich>and your profit is make believe. <v Charles Reich>It's a paper profit. So today it seems to me that we have <v Charles Reich>instead of real profits, we have phony profits. <v Charles Reich>Profits that are not based on a genuine accounting of what it costs us to <v Charles Reich>produce. Our cities and the crime and the crowding and <v Charles Reich>the congestion and the misery, those are costs of our industrial <v Charles Reich>system and they need to be added in before we start figuring out what <v Charles Reich>profits really are. <v Michael Toms>Also, what about the- the those corporations and the tremendous billion dollar <v Michael Toms>arms business that exists largely centered in this country?

<v Michael Toms>Corporations making profits off of making weapons that <v Michael Toms>can literally destroy people? <v Charles Reich>Well, there I think we have another facet of the corporate state and that is its <v Charles Reich>propensity to waste the energy <v Charles Reich>of of the country upon things that are useless, <v Charles Reich>destructive, dangerous, contaminating and and that <v Charles Reich>serve no life enhancing purpose. <v Charles Reich>In other words, it makes a lot of difference what it is <v Charles Reich>that you produce. Do you produce weapons of death or do you produce things that are going <v Charles Reich>to help people? And the corporate state over and over again <v Charles Reich>decides that what we shall produce shall be more instruments of death, <v Charles Reich>more waste, more- more exploitation of resources that are very <v Charles Reich>limited. <v Michael Toms>Our leaders tell us that we have to defend our country. <v Michael Toms>We have to defend freedom. We have to protect our individual liberties. <v Michael Toms>And the way we do that is by creating more arms.

<v Charles Reich>Well, I think that's utter nonsense. <v Charles Reich>And I think that it's just an excuse to keep going <v Charles Reich>the way we are now. I think you protect freedom best by seeing <v Charles Reich>that there is a job for everyone, that there is an opportunity <v Charles Reich>for everyone to rise to their true level of ability <v Charles Reich>and the system- that there is an opportunity for everybody to offer their <v Charles Reich>ideas and their thinking and their imagination. <v Charles Reich>That's how you make freedom grow. <v Charles Reich>And the other way to frighten people to- to create a <v Charles Reich>scare system, to have one <v Charles Reich>great power, oppose another with with weapons. <v Charles Reich>That's not enhancing freedom. <v Charles Reich>That's- that's a step on a road down toward repression. <v Michael Toms>When we talk about the corporate state, are we talking about the corporate state of <v Michael Toms>America? Are we talking about the corporate state of the planet?

<v Charles Reich>Well, you know, America's system is somewhat unique, <v Charles Reich>but all of the advanced industrial countries, whether they <v Charles Reich>call themselves democracies or socialist or communist, have something <v Charles Reich>rather similar. And so I would call it more a phenomenon <v Charles Reich>of advanced industrial society than purely an American <v Charles Reich>phenomenon. In many of the Western European <v Charles Reich>countries and also in Russia, we have something like the corporate state. <v Charles Reich>But our own problem is the American corporate state, and that's the one that we can do <v Charles Reich>something about here. <v Michael Toms>What does our relationship say? Let's take a particular problem that all of us face right <v Michael Toms>now and that is the increasing shortage of gasoline, <v Michael Toms>increasing shortage of oil fossil fuels. <v Michael Toms>And the relationship that- suddenly some power has been removed <v Michael Toms>from the American corporate state with the emergence of Arab countries that have <v Michael Toms>control of so much oil.

<v Michael Toms>What is the relationship of the American corporate state to that? <v Michael Toms>Are we seeing a potential disintegrating force of the corporate state? <v Michael Toms>Are we seeing something that will emerge and be just as dangerous as what we're talking <v Michael Toms>about? <v Charles Reich>Well, all along the- the big oil companies, the seven sisters, <v Charles Reich>have worked together with Arabs and have worked together with the OPEC <v Charles Reich>monopoly and are part of it. <v Charles Reich>And I don't really think that we ought to imagine that they are antagonists. <v Charles Reich>They are coal monopolies. They are partners. <v Charles Reich>What we want is the Isuppose is that our own independence <v Charles Reich>be secured. But what is most important is that we decide what to <v Charles Reich>do with the energy that we have. <v Charles Reich>The trouble with our system now isn't so much that OPEC's involved <v Charles Reich>as that we- we don't really get to decide for ourselves what we're going to use our <v Charles Reich>energy for. And it's there that the corporate state is anti-life. <v Michael Toms>How can that process unfold? How can we kick more, more responsibility and assume

<v Michael Toms>more power in determining what we do with our energy? <v Charles Reich>Well, I- I certainly think that the- the <v Charles Reich>great energy companies must be brought into line <v Charles Reich>with democratic philosophy. <v Charles Reich>And whether that is done through breaking them up into many <v Charles Reich>different competing units, forbidding an oil company to own gas <v Charles Reich>stations, forbidding them to own intermediate pipelines, whether <v Charles Reich>it's done through national control, whether it's done through public ownership, <v Charles Reich>whether it's done through every municipality having its own utility. <v Charles Reich>These are grass roots questions that I don't want to answer because I <v Charles Reich>would like to see the American people answer. <v Michael Toms>Let me play the devil's advocate for a moment, Charles. <v Michael Toms>When we talk about make the these companies more public or nationalize <v Michael Toms>them, when we have examples of public utilities which <v Michael Toms>are set up basically to serve a public interest, a public need like the

<v Michael Toms>the Electric Light Company or the telephone company is an example of a public <v Michael Toms>utility. And yet these public utilities have become <v Michael Toms>as much a part of the corporate state as- as any corporation set up there <v Michael Toms>is a private corporation with private interests and <v Michael Toms>personal objectives, et cetera. <v Michael Toms>So- so what is the answer? <v Michael Toms>I mean, it's not really turning everything into public utilities. <v Michael Toms>It's- <v Charles Reich>Well, it's it's how you turn them into public utilities. <v Charles Reich>I would like to suggest that we ask <v Charles Reich>who's on the board of directors of these utilities? <v Charles Reich>Who is on the board of directors of the telephone company? <v Charles Reich>Do we really have community representatives? <v Charles Reich>Do we have representatives of all the different groups, all the different interests in <v Charles Reich>society, or have the directors turned out to be nothing <v Charles Reich>but the same people that run everything else? <v Charles Reich>I think it would take only a very quick look at the list to see that the same

<v Charles Reich>people who run the private companies run the public companies in effect. <v Charles Reich>And this is due to the passivity and the <v Charles Reich>ignorance and the inaction of the American public. <v Charles Reich>We might as well lay the blame where it belongs. <v Charles Reich>They have permitted their own utilities and their own <v Charles Reich>public companies to be taken over in this fashion. <v Charles Reich>And of course, if you let it happen, it'll happen. <v Michael Toms>How can we turn it around? <v Charles Reich>Well, I think the most important thing is for people to <v Charles Reich>become aware of what we are up against, of what we are fighting. <v Charles Reich>There is just too much ignorance. <v Charles Reich>There's just too much willingness to give up, to say <v Charles Reich>we're powerless, that we can't do anything. <v Charles Reich>I don't believe that. I think that that is being defeated <v Charles Reich>before you even start. <v Charles Reich>So I guess that I believe that we must start

<v Charles Reich>with a new awareness that this is our country, that we can make <v Charles Reich>the laws that we want. We don't have to tolerate corporate giants. <v Charles Reich>You know, nothing in the Constitution and nothing in American tradition <v Charles Reich>requires us to tolerate these companies for any longer than <v Charles Reich>right now. We can pass laws and we can limit their size. <v Charles Reich>We can make them subject to local control. <v Charles Reich>You know, we can structure this country any way we want, and we can structure <v Charles Reich>it in ways that no one has yet dreamed of. <v Charles Reich>The trouble is we've driven the dreamers out of government and out of public life <v Charles Reich>and out of corporate life. And we've made it impossible <v Charles Reich>for new thinking to appear in places where power is <v Charles Reich>actually exercised. <v Speaker>[Song: It's Up To You by John Denver]

<v Michael Toms>I'm talking with Charles Reich, author of The Greening of America, The Sorcerer of

<v Michael Toms>Bolinas Reef lawyer, philosopher, <v Michael Toms>author, lecturer. <v Michael Toms>Charles, continuing on the track that we were talking about [pause] and <v Michael Toms>the power that each of us has, the responsibility in addition to the power <v Michael Toms>that each of us has, and the steps that we can take to assume <v Michael Toms>that responsibility. <v Michael Toms>What are some more steps that we can [pause] pursue? <v Charles Reich>Well, one thing that the corporate state does that we must all attempt <v Charles Reich>to undo It- It intermingled the <v Charles Reich>personal with the economic, and thereby contaminates <v Charles Reich>the personal and represses the personal, and it forces the <v Charles Reich>personal to serve the economic. <v Charles Reich>The smile that's paid for. <v Charles Reich>That's the personal serving the economic, the personal contaminated <v Charles Reich>by the economic. The- the insincerity that is purchased.

<v Charles Reich>And so one of the things that everyone can do in any job is to <v Charles Reich>begin to separate in their own mind and in their own behavior <v Charles Reich>where the economic stops and where the personal begins. <v Charles Reich>And so you say in your job, you say, well, you're paying <v Charles Reich>my salary, you're buying these services, and you're buying <v Charles Reich>these responsibilities, and you're buying this behavior. <v Charles Reich>But you're not buying me. <v Charles Reich>You're not buying personal actions. <v Charles Reich>You're not buying my feelings. <v Charles Reich>You're not buying my affection. <v Charles Reich>You're not buying my sincerity. <v Charles Reich>You're only buying a quality performance at the job that <v Charles Reich>is specified. And the more people who are able to <v Charles Reich>withdraw the personal and separate it and clean <v Charles Reich>it up and say, 'This is mine. This is what nobody tells me how to do this part. <v Charles Reich>Nobody tells me when to smile. Nobody tells me when I really like

<v Charles Reich>a person. And when I don't really like a person. <v Charles Reich>Nobody invades my zone of spontaneity.' <v Charles Reich>Then we can begin to make this kind of separation. <v Charles Reich>And it seems to me that every time that we see a celebrity <v Charles Reich>go on TV to plug a product, we're seeing this terrible contamination. <v Charles Reich>We're seeing the- the person's sincerity and reputation <v Charles Reich>sold for the purpose of a product. <v Charles Reich>And I deplore that. <v Charles Reich>It seems to me that it's one thing for somebody to get up and say, 'I've tried <v Charles Reich>this, and it works and it's fine, you know, and that's <v Charles Reich>okay.' That's just being a seller. <v Charles Reich>And we all need to sell what we have to sell. <v Charles Reich>But to- to imply that that you are <v Charles Reich>personally behind it, that your personal <v Charles Reich>integrity is- is offered as well as your

<v Charles Reich>ability to describe the product that's to enlarge this contamination <v Charles Reich>and that's to diminish the personal that we have. <v Charles Reich>You see, the more of the personal that gets mixed into the economic, the less <v Charles Reich>we have for ourselves. <v Charles Reich>And it's only from the personal that a new set of values can grow. <v Charles Reich>So I think every person in every job has to try to draw that line. <v Michael Toms>You know, to some extent that's true. I think it's really good and appropriate what you <v Michael Toms>say. And I'm just thinking of- of my own experience and my own involvement <v Michael Toms>with New Dimensions and the reality that <v Michael Toms>we're currently facing a severe critical financial crisis <v Michael Toms>right now in our own organization. <v Michael Toms>And part of it is because we have not- we have been unwilling <v Michael Toms>to- to compromise the integrity of what we do. <v Michael Toms>We've continued to broadcast on noncommercial radio. <v Michael Toms>We broadcast on commercial radio but without sponsorship.

<v Michael Toms>We've tried to do something in a nontraditional way <v Michael Toms>away from the mainstream to preserve the integrity and the essence of <v Michael Toms>the communication that we're trying to deliver. <v Michael Toms>And at the same time, the difficulty of doing that has created an incredible <v Michael Toms>financial crunch where we're looking at a situation where we might not- we might not <v Michael Toms>exist anymore. <v Michael Toms>And- I'm just relating that to what you just said. <v Charles Reich>Well, New Dimensions is one of the most valuable <v Charles Reich>services that we have. It's one of the few services where <v Charles Reich>many, many varieties of opinion are expressed over the airways. <v Charles Reich>And it contrasts with the kind of network programing <v Charles Reich>where really only one stereotype point of view is is presented. <v Charles Reich>So new dimensions. An example of something very unique and very <v Charles Reich>valuable. And now it's an endangered species. <v Charles Reich>Now it's in real financial trouble along with,

<v Charles Reich>I might say, libraries, along with other kinds of <v Charles Reich>services of this kind, along with everything that has tried to be unique <v Charles Reich>and different and special. <v Charles Reich>And all of these are likely to go into <v Charles Reich>greater danger, into greater trouble, unless the public is able to <v Charles Reich>see how vital it is that there- there be many different <v Charles Reich>voices heard in this country rather than just one controlled voice. <v Charles Reich>So New Dimensions is just our- our immediate illustration <v Charles Reich>of the jeopardy that we are in right now, because <v Charles Reich>anything that's a little bit unique or a little bit different is being squashed. <v Michael Toms>You know, we've talked among ourselves about that. If that, you know, we estimate that we <v Michael Toms>have something like 40,000 listeners in the Bay Area to our programs. <v Michael Toms>And if if each one of those listeners just took the time to send us a dollar <v Michael Toms>or to send $5 or to send $10 or whatever, just taking that little bit of responsibility

<v Michael Toms>would eliminate our problem overnight. And it's like goes back to what you were saying, <v Michael Toms>that that it's- it's- it's each of us taking hold of what we want <v Michael Toms>to have in our life. And if it happens to be New Simensions,, or if it happens to be the <v Michael Toms>library or if it happens to be a public swimming pool open in the mornings <v Michael Toms>paying an admission, whatever it is, we can literally assume <v Michael Toms>power for having that by meeting the particular <v Michael Toms>requirement that that in this case we're talking about needing financial support. <v Michael Toms>But there are lots of other support vehicles, too. <v Michael Toms>But it still comes down to the individual, doesn't it? <v Charles Reich>Well, I want to suggest another distinction that people need to make that is related <v Charles Reich>to this, and that is the importance of <v Charles Reich>dealing around the middle man, around the corporate state, dealing <v Charles Reich>direct with what you really want. <v Charles Reich>That is, each person needs to think what services <v Charles Reich>in this community, what kinds of organization, what- What

<v Charles Reich>do I want in a good society? <v Charles Reich>And then you have to deal directly. <v Charles Reich>You cannot expect the corporate state to support those things through <v Charles Reich>taxation, through its devious channels, because <v Charles Reich>that's that's how we are betrayed over and over again. <v Charles Reich>We're betrayed by a promise that says something like this. <v Charles Reich>You support the corporate state and we'll take care of broadcasting, <v Charles Reich>will take care of libraries. We'll take care of all these other services. <v Charles Reich>And it never happens. The money goes in, but it never comes out. <v Charles Reich>And we've seen this in welfare. We've seen this in every area. <v Charles Reich>We see it in public broadcasting. So the answer is, don't <v Charles Reich>trust the middle man. Try not to deal with the middle man. <v Charles Reich>See the middle man as someone who will never give you a square bargain, <v Charles Reich>who will never give you your money's worth and try always to <v Charles Reich>deal around and direct.

<v Charles Reich>And the more that we can think in that way, the more that we can think <v Charles Reich>in terms of barter, the more that we can think of one person's services <v Charles Reich>in return for another person's services, the more we avoid the middlemen and the more <v Charles Reich>we create an economic structure that doesn't have to all go through <v Charles Reich>this one channel which diverts it and sees that it <v Charles Reich>never comes out where it was intended. <v Michael Toms>There is a lot that we can do for sure. <v Michael Toms>I'm wondering about how about if if you own stock in corporations, <v Michael Toms>what would- what would a typical stockholder be able to do? <v Charles Reich>Well, as a typical stockholder can do very little because most corporations <v Charles Reich>are controlled by the board of directors and stockholder <v Charles Reich>democracy, which exists in theory, in practice <v Charles Reich>is a nulity, that in practice there is no such thing. <v Charles Reich>And the only way you could have stockholder democracy would be to have a

<v Charles Reich>extraordinary change of consciousness among people who own <v Charles Reich>stock among the great majority. <v Charles Reich>And this is something that is perfectly legal, <v Charles Reich>is perfectly possible. But pretty much what people do <v Charles Reich>is is passively sign a proxy statement and allow the management to do <v Charles Reich>what it will. And that's the end of democracy. <v Charles Reich>You can't sign a proxy and let somebody else make your decisions for you. <v Charles Reich>So corporate democracy is what you might call an unexplored area <v Charles Reich>of America. And I hope that it will be explored. <v Michael Toms>So there's there's more that we can do in that area by taking <v Michael Toms>more responsibility than just signing off on a proxy statement. <v Michael Toms>We might appear at a board of directors meeting, at the stockholders meeting. <v Charles Reich>We might not only appear, but we might appear in such vast numbers. <v Charles Reich>If you think of the millions of people who own stock in this country, <v Charles Reich>that we would begin to have a real voice and we would begin to be represented on the

<v Charles Reich>board and our wishes would be carried out. <v Michael Toms>And one of the things that I often hear- that one often hears is that the corporations <v Michael Toms>are owned by people like you and me. <v Michael Toms>I mean, this is one of the explanations or defense statements that's made by frequently- <v Michael Toms>by large corporate executives said, well, our corporation has, you know, <v Michael Toms>258,000 stockholders, and most of them live, you know, all over the country, et cetera, <v Michael Toms>et cetera. And yet. <v Michael Toms>The reality of it is, is that these stockholders have not assumed <v Michael Toms>responsibility or have not taken the power and not exercising the power, it's been <v Michael Toms>exercised still by a very few. <v Charles Reich>You know, you have to think about ownership as an activity <v Charles Reich>and not as a passive state. <v Charles Reich>You don't own anything unless you actively intervene and <v Charles Reich>show that you are the owner. <v Charles Reich>And to talk about ownership as being just a piece of paper is <v Charles Reich>to fool yourself. You know, you only own something if you exercise

<v Charles Reich>power. And when a stock holder doesn't do that, <v Charles Reich>the word ownership becomes just a hollow idea. <v Michael Toms>Well, what about that issue of ownership? <v Michael Toms>We've heard a lot about the group ownership and collective ownership and <v Michael Toms>private ownership. What are your feelings about it, about ownership related to the <v Michael Toms>corporate state? <v Charles Reich>Well, I believe in a great variety of kinds of ownership. <v Charles Reich>Everything from one person up to a collective or a large group <v Charles Reich>of people. But what I do not believe in is passivity and ownership. <v Charles Reich>I think if you own something, you have to take control. <v Charles Reich>You have to say what you have to say. <v Charles Reich>You have to make your vote count and your voice count. <v Charles Reich>Otherwise, I wouldn't call it ownership. <v Charles Reich>I would simply say it's investment that is you've just handed over your money, <v Charles Reich>like to a bank. You know, you put your money in a savings bank. <v Charles Reich>You wouldn't say you own the savings bank.

<v Charles Reich>You'd say you're giving them your money to do with as they wish. <v Michael Toms>I'm talking with Charles Reich. <v Michael Toms>You're listening to New Dimensions. <v Speaker>[Song: Deer Dancing Around a Broken Mirror by Bruce Cockburn] <v Michael Toms>Well, it's 9:00 in the city.

<v Michael Toms>You're listening to New Dimensions. This is KQED F.M. <v Michael Toms>in San Francisco.