← The Hacking of the American Mind The Science Behind the Corporate Takeover of Our Bodies and Brains
The Hacking of the American Mind Chapter 13. Extreme Makeover—Washington Edition
Author: Robert H. Lustig Publisher: New York, NY: Penguin Random House. Publish Date: 2017 Review Date: Status:⌛️
Annotations
Highlight(pink) - Location 2429
Corporations are people. So said the U.S. Supreme Court in the now-infamous decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010). Well, corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to their stockholders. People have a fiduciary responsibility to themselves and their family. That’s not quite the same thing. Also, corporations don’t have serotonin, or dopamine, or a Jiminy Cricket. All they have is a balance sheet.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2432
This case has been pilloried in the popular press and in public opinion as selling America to the highest bidder.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2433
But this case wasn’t a fluke. The triumph of corporations over individuals represented by Citizens United is the culmination of a forty-five-year-long war fought in the halls of Congress and the aisles of Walmart. Yet, unlike the survivors of a war with weapons, our citizens don’t even know that a war was fought, or that it even matters. Corporations now have a legal right to interfere with your pursuit of happiness.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2436
The history of the law is just as important as the science in explaining how we got to where we are, and how to move forward—which is why I went to law school.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2438
The United States is home to both individual rights and corporate rights. The balance of power between individuals and corporations has always been precarious, one that has exhibited a sinusoidal wave up and down for the first two hundred years of our existence, based on the parity built into the Constitution (thank you, James Madison) and the Bill of Rights (thank you, George Mason!).
Highlight(pink) - Location 2440
Since the inception of our nation, corporations have often attempted to tip the scale to usurp control over individual rights, but in each successive era the scale has been rebalanced by the political process.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2442
For instance, in the 1870s the robber barons of the steel, oil, and railroad industries and the national banks wielded virtually unlimited power and money. To beat back the threat of monopolization, Congress passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in 1890, and in the early 1900s, Teddy Roosevelt was able to effectively constrain the growth in corporations and banks.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2444
After the squalor and danger of slaughterhouses and the meat industry were laid bare by Upton Sinclair in The Jungle (1906), Congress was pressured to charter the FDA to protect the nation’s food supply. After the infamous Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911 in lower Manhattan, Congress established the Federal Trade Commission in 1914 to protect consumers and prevent child enslavement.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2447
In the 1920s, the next wave of private speculation by companies (such as what happened in the Teapot Dome bribery case) led to “irrational exuberance” and ushered in the Great Depression in 1929. The economic havoc was countered in the 1930s by Franklin Roosevelt’s enactment of the New Deal and the Works Progress Administration to get people working again. FDR also established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Commission in 1934 to protect individuals from corporate abuse.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2450
World War II in the 1940s and the Korean War in the 1950s, along with Joseph McCarthy’s communist witch hunts, rolled back individual rights yet again. Then, in the 1960s, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962) exposed corporate contamination of the environment, and Ralph Nader’s Unsafe at Any Speed (1965) birthed the consumer rights movement. Both books pushed the scale toward the rights of the people, culminating in the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in 1970.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2455
But the ebb and flow of individual versus corporate power has now ceased. Since 1971 there has been a slow, ever-steady creep of usurpation of power by corporations, with a concomitant loss of power from individuals.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2456
Look, I am not espousing socialism or communism or any other “-ism.” But the balance of power has so shifted in favor of the rights of corporations that individuals are losing, and in ways that are opaque to them. They have more consumer choice, so they think they have more rights, but in fact they have far fewer.
Note - Location 2457
Anarchism >:)
Highlight(pink) - Location 2458
This shift in the balance of power can in part be traced, as documented by City College sociologist Nicholas Freudenberg,1 to the tenure of one particular American—U.S. Supreme Court associate justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2461
Why would a Supreme Court justice be the thumb on the scale that tipped America to favor corporate over individual interests, on which so much of our current unhappiness is grounded? (See Chapter 14.) How does one man out of nine wield that much power, and in the judicial branch, no less? Does the Bill of Rights count for nothing?
Highlight(pink) - Location 2463
Powell’s biography gives us several clues as to his philosophy and his methods. In World War II, Powell worked in U.S. counterintelligence, where he learned the need for absolute secrecy. Following the war, for twenty-five years he was a partner at Hunton, Williams, Gay, Powell and Gibson, a Virginia firm specializing in litigation and business law. During this time, he also served as chairman of the Richmond School Board and advocated “constant surveillance” of school textbook and television content. He was at the helm of that school board when the Commonwealth of Virginia defied the Supreme Court’s mandate for integration in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). He also served as the liaison between Virginia Commonwealth University and the tobacco industry.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2468
The first salvo sounded in 1950 with the now infamous Doll paper2 equating smoking with lung cancer. At that point Lewis Powell’s firm began to provide legal defense for Big Tobacco. From 1964 through 1971, he served on the board of directors of tobacco giant Philip Morris. In fact, he represented the Tobacco Institute and various tobacco companies in numerous law cases, defending them against individual and class action lawsuits for lung cancer. In 1971, because of his corporate ties and pro-business leanings, he was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Richard Nixon. Note that Justice Powell was never a state or federal judge nor was he a constitutional lawyer.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2474
In 1971, prior to his nomination for the high court, Powell wrote a secret memorandum to his friend Eugene Sydnor, who was the chair of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In this now-notorious document, entitled “Attack on the American Free Enterprise System,”3 he bemoaned the loss of American standing in the world in the 1960s due to the civil rights and counterculture revolutions, as well as decrying the loss of corporate power due to the ongoing assault of both “extremists of the left” and “perfectly respectable elements of society.” In the secret Powell Memorandum, he admonished Sydnor to help take back America from the hands of the mob. Corporate America, he stated, must become more aggressive in influencing and molding politics and law. He argued that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, at that time a passive pro-business lobby group, must itself become politically active. He stated that business must not waver and take on prominent bastions of public opinion and political power—the universities and the courts.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2481
Not only did this resonate with Sydnor, but this “confidential” Powell Memorandum quickly spread throughout the business community—not quite viral, but more parasitic. This missive can be traced to the origins of several right-wing think tanks and lobbying organizations, such as the Heritage Foundation (the origin of Reagan’s Star Wars missile defense system) and the American Legislative Exchange Council (a front group for the food and pharma industries).
Highlight(pink) - Location 2485
By the time this document revealing Powell’s biases and motives was leaked to muckraking Washington Post reporter Jack Anderson, who reported it in 1974, Powell was firmly ensconced on the Supreme Court.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2486
Like a worm that slowly eats away one apple at a time in the barrel until the entire barrel is contaminated, Powell’s action on the Supreme Court ate away at individual rights, with the result that we now have diminished individual contentment and increased societal anxiety.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2488
Let’s look at some of the seminal cases where Powell voted with the majority.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2489
1976: Va. State Pharmacy Board v. Va. Citizens Consumer Council. This case allowed unfettered corporate advertising to unsuspecting patients, paving the way for all the drug ads you now see on TV. This case has helped the pharmaceutical industry harness fear to create demand for their products (see Chapter 14).
Highlight(pink) - Location 2491
1976: Buckley v. Valeo. This case was the precursor to Citizens United. The decision did away with limitations on campaign spending and individual donations in elections (thirty-four years later, Citizens United allowed corporations to turn their treasuries into campaign war chests to bankroll any candidate to do their bidding). Now public elections are a free-for-all, where politicians, high-rolling donors, and corporations can buy elections, and the most money wins. Higher betting means higher pay-outs. And, to quote Will Rogers, “A fool and his money are soon elected.”
Highlight(pink) - Location 2496
1978: First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti. This was a 5–4 decision, and also set the groundwork that paved the way to Citizens United. Powell was the deciding vote and wrote the majority opinion. This case basically said that corporations could say whatever they wanted and vote with their dollars. Of course they do say whatever they want, and they vote for themselves in the form of campaign contributions. When there are more dollars than votes, it becomes a societal problem.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2499
1980: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission. This was another 5–4 decision, with the majority opinion authored by Powell. Up until this case, public utilities were just that: public. They could not have an opinion and they could not advertise, because they were a public trust. Powell saw it differently. By the time Powell got through, he had protected “commercial speech from unwanted governmental regulation.” He instituted a four-part test for government to regulate commercial speech: (1) Does it violate the First Amendment? Well, only speech that breaks the law (incitement to riot, yelling “Fire!” in a crowded building) isn’t covered. Otherwise it’s fair game, even if it is false. (2) Is the government interest substantial? That means that short of trying to overthrow the government, anything goes. (3) Does the regulation advance the government interest? Corporations could sell poison to the public, but as long as people aren’t dying in the streets (i.e., obvious deception), government stays quiet. Tobacco was a good example. And finally: (4) Is the regulation as narrowly tailored as it can be? In other words, there must be a “reasonable fit” between the government’s ends and the means for achieving those ends. Oh, by the way, it’s not any of the four; it’s got to be all four that are violated at once. So virtually any speech can be corporate speech.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2509
In the span of four short years, 1976 to 1980, Lewis Powell helped to lay waste to any hope of keeping corporate power and influence in check.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2517
This is how the U.S. Supreme Court has paved the way for the relentless marketing of products, irrespective of their utility or cost, either personal or societal (e.g., Big Pharma, Big Food). And there’s virtually nothing left in the public legal arsenal to curb their influence.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2519
On top of that, we have now elected the first “populist” president, who is on the side of corporations versus the government instead of on the side of the people.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2520
The marketing salvos come swift and hard, they’re aimed at our nucleus accumbens (food), our amygdala (drugs), and our prefrontal cortex (our Jiminy Cricket), and we can’t possibly defend against all of them.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2522
Corporations are now blessed with the ability to produce and subject us to virtually any unfettered form of corporate advertising, campaign spending, and commercial speech.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2523
Not only that, but because of Justice Powell’s legacy, corporations have even more rights than people do. They have both the rights of corporations and the rights of individuals. Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz chronicled the fact that corporations can now sue the federal government for restitution of profit lost from the enactment of any government policy.4 You can’t sue the government, but they can? Are you kidding me?
Highlight(pink) - Location 2526
And there are no prosecutions of individual lawbreakers, as they derive protection from civil actions by their position as an instrument of the corporation, and you can’t lock up a corporation.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2527
Witness the Economic Recession of 2008, perpetrated by Big Banking against the public using the vehicle of subprime mortgages. Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual, Countrywide—all gone, and their investors’ money with it. Merrill Lynch was forced to merge with Bank of America, and Bear Stearns with JPMorgan Chase. AIG and Citigroup survived only because of the government bailout. Lots of stress and cortisol and very little serotonin. But who was prosecuted? A total of one person—a Credit Suisse banker, Kareem Serageldin, born in Egypt. The judge who sentenced him called him “a small piece of an overall evil climate within the bank and with many other banks.”
Highlight(pink) - Location 2532
Why didn’t they prosecute the rest of these corporate hoodlums? Simple. They work for corporations. If corporations are “people,” then do you employ the rules regarding corporations, or do you employ the rules regarding people? Do you call it a lack of caution, in which case it is a corporate civil action with no jail time? Or do you call it personal “criminal fraud,” a felony punishable by incarceration? The Department of Justice has chosen the former, in part because the Court’s current leanings would undo any such criminal case.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2536
Given their pro-business behavior, you could argue that the success of the Corporate Consumption Complex versus the American public lies squarely at the doorstep of the Supreme Court. But that would only be half the story. Congress has also played a significant supporting role in creating our current reward-driven culture, which allows for marketing of virtually anything and everything (see Chapter 14). Nowhere is this better exemplified than in the story of how Congress changed its tune in the span of just one decade around the promotion and marketing of junk food (see Fat Chance), aimed at one target: dopamine.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2541
The junk food industry started to take off in the 1970s in part due to (1) improved harvesting and food processing technologies by companies like Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill, and (2) the enormous federal subsidies for corn, wheat, soy, and sugar supplied to processed food companies as part of the Farm Bill, which made them cheap. The original Farm Bill, which dates to 1933, had as part of its legislation the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 (revised in 1938), which paid farmers not to grow certain crops and to kill off certain livestock—this effectively reduced supply and artificially increased prices—and farmers got to double-dip.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2546
This policy diametrically changed course in 1971, when President Richard Nixon decided that fluctuating food prices caused political unrest (and he had a lot of unrest to deal with). He remanded his agriculture secretary, Earl Butz, to make food cheap. Butz immediately canceled the government handout, and said three things to the American farmer: “Row to row,” “Furrow to furrow,” and “Get big or get out.” Government now would reimburse on quantity, not quality, and the farmer would make it up in volume.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2549
Let’s use corn as an example. If you make corn more plentiful, supply and demand says you sell it for less. But if some of that corn is turned into high-fructose corn syrup, and that’s put in every processed food, then you can sell it for more. And if you turn some of that corn into ethanol, you can sell it for even more.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2552
Also in the late 1960s and early 1970s, just as this massive agricultural overhaul was beginning, the sugar industry came under intense scrutiny due to nutritional research performed by John Yudkin in the UK and Sheldon Reiser in the U.S., which correlated sugar consumption with heart disease. In response, the Sugar Association established a public relations arm called Sugar Information, Inc., and hired a PR firm to blanket the country with pro-sugar propaganda. Saying that sugar was the “quick energy” to provide “the willpower you need to undereat” and “to curb your appetite”—in other words, deceptive advertising designed to drive your dopamine upward.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2556
In 1972 the Federal Trade Commission took Sugar Information to court5 and shut it down. This was heralded as a major win for consumer watchdog groups and demonstrated the power of government to protect the public.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2558
Unfortunately, this episode was also the immediate impetus for the chartering of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in 1973. ALEC’s website states that “Americans deserve an efficient, effective, and accountable government that puts the people in control” (www .alec.org). But it doesn’t define which people. What ALEC does is draft “model legislation” that favors its funders, and then feeds these model bills to state or federal legislators to get them passed. A new way to perform congressional lobbying. A corporate bill mill and front group. When you hear a politician railing against corporate special interests, they’re talking about ALEC. And who are the funders? Well, there are a lot of them, but the food and pharma industries were founding members, and agriculture, pharma, and guns are numbers one, three, and four on their bill-writing agenda. ALEC doesn’t just write the bills, they provide campaign contributions to the legislators who introduce them into law, which currently totals 338 out of 535 congresspeople.6
Highlight(pink) - Location 2566
Special interests grew exponentially in the 1970s, especially after the Supreme Court verdict in Buckley v. Valeo. In 1970 there were 175 lobbyists in Washington, D.C.; by 1980 there were 2,500. In 1970 there were 300 established political action committees; by 1980 there were 1,200.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2568
This leaves us with a conundrum: Who’s in charge? We pride ourselves on being a democracy. We choose who to vote for, and what we want to spend our hard-earned money on. Or do we? When corporations can act with impunity, unbridled, without oversight, and both dictate and cater to our deepest wants and desires, where is the accountability?
Highlight(pink) - Location 2570
This is the model theorized by Princeton philosopher Sheldon Wolin, who warned us of the evolution of a political hybrid in which corporate America and Washington were one and the same.7 Political scientist Martin Gilens goes even further8 by showing that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy. For instance, if a congressional bill is supported by 20 percent of the rich, it passes 20 percent of the time; whereas if a similar bill is supported by 80 percent of the rich, it passes half the time.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2575
As long as America views the concept of happiness as consistent with both consumption and GDP, it will not be able to break free of corporations’ stranglehold on our brains.
Highlight(pink) - Location 2577
And they know what they’re doing, because they’ve done the research and know what works. Read on, and you will too.