While this does not seem ethically questionable on the surface, it is certainly questionable when one considers that the only way for a capitalist to keep being a capitalist is to keep acquiring capital, and the only way to acquire capital is to exploit labor for profit. This means that the bourgeoisie must oppress the proletariat in order to continue to exist, and that the proletariat must struggle to survive.
Some may say that this is not an ethical problem -- merely the brutal nature of the world. Even if this were so, it becomes an ethical problem when considered politically, and, as Marx and Engel assert, "every class struggle is a political struggle" (p. 46). In a country that binds itself morally to the concept of inalienable political rights, the decision of the highest court in the land to grant enormous political "voice" to entities whose necessary economic purpose is the subjugation of the vast majority of citizens is hypocritical at...
Marx and Engels would likely not be surprised -- they were adamant that the bourgeoisie would go to any lengths necessary to maintain themselves. We can only hope that the process does not end in the bloodshed that they predicted, but that the ethical standards of our Founding Fathers can find a new presence in our current government.
References
Marx, K., Engels, F. (1998) The Communist Manifesto. London: Verso.
Marx, K., Engels, F., Levinsky, S. (1996) Das Kapital. Washington, D.C: Regnery Gateway.
Mayer, C. (March 1990) Personalizing the impersonal: corporations and the Bill of Rights. Hastings Law Journal, Vol. 41, No. 3.
Kairys, D. (Jan. 22, 2010) Money isn't speech and corporations aren't people. Slate.com. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/
jurisprudence/2010/01/money_isnt_speech_and_corporations_arent_people.html.
