Corporate Personhood
We’ve been subjected to a particular inequity for a long time here in America. This inequity was not legislated upon us; it was imposed upon us by the Supreme Court. This inequity has allowed our voices, the voices of we the people, to be effectively silenced. It has allowed our government to be effectively taken over by now global corporations. I’ve mentioned it before, and maybe you already know about it. This inequity is euphemistically called ‘corporate personhood’.
Our Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not crafted to provide protections to the alleged ‘rights’ of corporations. They were crafted to protect the rights of individual Americans. Over the years, the legal definitions of ‘people’ and ‘person’ have been twisted to suit the interests of those doing the twisting. As such, a corporation is now considered a ‘person’, complete with protected rights under the established precedents of the Supreme Court.
These corporate ‘people’ exercise their ‘rights’ with resources that far outstrip even the collective resources of the entire population of states and even some countries. They act with impunity and no moral conscience as their only allegiance is to their stockholders profits. They lobby our government on equal footing with flesh and blood human beings, yet with the financial resources that even the governments of most countries would enjoy.
Think about it; how’d you like to be able to hire 100 lobbyists to get your pet legislation pushed thru Congress & the Senate? How’d you like to be able to say whatever you wanted on your national TV network without fear of violating ethics laws because your 1st Amendment rights trump them? Sound good? But wait…you can’t, can you? You have a job to go to so that you can pay the mortgage and put food on the table. Sure, you have your voice, but as you’ve seen so clearly in this primary, even as a Congressman, if your voice isn’t in harmony with the voice of the media, it is simply discounted and drowned out.
So, what can we do?
Get involved. It really has become clear to me that the solution really does start right in our own hometowns. Dr. Paul is so very right, so amazingly right, it was really an epiphany for me when I realized it. Get involved in your local GOP. Get involved in your local DNC if that’s your thing. Or go Green, Libertarian, whatever. But above all, get involved. When we band together in our communities, we can and do make a difference. When our communities band together, we can change our counties. When the counties come together, we can change our states. And when your state stands together, the federal government will be in its rightful place.
Sure, this movement started for me with a Presidential candidate that speaks the truth. But it will continue and prosper only if we do what we can locally.
I’ll finish where I ended, on corporate personhood. I wanted to share with you all what happens when the people of a town get it right. Here’s the story of a township in PA that decided that the protection of the rights of people didn’t apply to corporations. While it's important to note all didn't end well as the rights of the citizens in Porter Township PA were overturned by the PA state Legislature & Senate, I hope that they give you some food for thought and help you to realize how we can make a difference and get our government back on track, one small building block at a time. We can't take back our federal government until we can take back our local & state governments people.
In U.S. First, Local Government Refuses to Recognize Corporate Claims to Civil Rights PA Township Bans Corporate Involvement in Governing
http://www.reclaimdemocra...
Pennsylvania ACRE Bill Passes
Legislature gives state officials power to override local democracy
http://reclaimdemocracy.o...
And more good information on the subject is here
Corporate Personhood
http://reclaimdemocracy.o...
Your thoughts?
output




















This is complicated
Universities and churches are also 'corporate persons', ie associations of people. Don't they have rights vis a vis the govt? If they don't have the rights of a person, what rights do they have and who grants these rights? They are supposed to have responsibilities too and be sued if they pollute etc. So what's going on? I don't see that this town can suddenly decide to ignore the idea of a corporate person and say they have no clear legal standing (they could do it then with ALL corporate persons, including private schools) because in this case, it's for a good cause. What are these 'civil and constitutional privileges' the article talks about? Aren't they really talking about 'rights'?
I once read an essay about a German writer Gierke which argued basically that corporate persons are an important counterweight to the corporate personhood of the state - as they are alternative sources of authority and independent collective action and because of their 'personhood' have to be allowed rights like a person. So the French revolutionaries abolished the idea of corporate personhood in their Republic. Doesn't sound good to me. I don't really understand what he was talking about. I am not a lawyer. I don't know about this at all, I'm just repeating what I have read. Any lawyers here?
Opinions and thoughts anyone?
I'll let this be my only self serving bump on this thread.
If IBM is a 'person' why shouldn't we charge IBM with war crimes for it's complicity in helping the Nazis herd human beings around like cattle to be slaughtered during WW2? --> http://www.ibmandtheholoc...
Oh wait, it's because they get to enjoy the benefits of being a 'person' without the liabilities...gee, thank the Supreme Court for that one I guess, right?
There should be such a thing as a corporate death penalty.
If a corporation is a person, then it should have not only the benefits, but also the liabilities that a person does. If the corporation is found culpable in a capital crime, then it should be liquidated in its entirety to pay restitution to the victim.
-jcr
people should have the right
Fortune Favors the Bold
to agree contractually to collective ownership of businesses. The established business should be subject to liability collectively. People should be able to agree via contract that property protections of jointly owned business will be handled via an agreed upon method. However, the sum total of such a business' "rights", should not exceed the rights of the individual owning members.
I have no problem with people owning a business
or with incorporating a business. I have a huge problem with the ramifications of a corporation enjoying the protection of the 1st Amendment or any other provisions of the Constitution which protect the rights of an individual.
For example, what liability should Fox News have in regard to lying to protect the interests of Montsanto as illustrated in another thread here http://www.dailypaul.com/... ? Apparently the court presumed Fox News had the same rights as a 'person' based on prior rulings, and as such the 'news' really wasn't 'news' at all. Are you OK with that? I'm not.
People have the right to
People have the right to free speech, but do we have the right to speak lies? I do not believe so as if that were the case then slander and libel laws would not exist.
well
Fortune Favors the Bold
the thing is, individual people do own foxnews. As horrible as those people are, yes, they have the right to lie. To me, the real issue there has to do with using the public airwaves and whether their use requires you to have certain standards when it comes to dsitributing political information.
I have zero problem with an individual's right to lie.
How about this scenario.
I suddenly determine the secret of alchemy and gain unlimited financial resources. In order to cover my ASSets, I incorporate as MeCO Inc. (I would have taken The Federal Reserve Bank of the USA, but it was already taken by another corporation with the same ability to make money out of nothing) I decide I want to buy a few small newspapers, a few magazines, a TV network or two, etc.
I then decide that I don't like the fact that people are starting to get bothered by my newfound wealth, power & influence. And these same people have the audacity to think they can tell me that I ought to not be so monopolistic. They actually try to make sure that the old laws of the 19th and 20th century apply to me! So, what's a wealthy guy like me to do?
I hire a few lobbying firms to help me out with my problem. I persuade a few congressmen and senators to see things my way. I use my media outlets to supress any dissenting voices by not giving them airtime on my networks or in my publications under the guise of protecting my 'free speech' rights. I point out how great my corporation is, and 'how much I do' for the community. Heck, I just outright lie. Eventually, people get discouraged and they'll just give in anyway. After all, I have all the influence & power of a far reaching corporation. And the best part? I'm not personally accountable for what I say thru my corporation!
Think that's what our founding fathers had in mind?
umm Republic...
anything that asks us to reclaim our Democracy when we are in fact a Republic, I'm put off by. What Democracy, we were never a Democracy. We were always a Republic ruled by law, the US Constitution.
Until my pledege says "and to the Democracy for which it stands..", I'm not listening!
NO WHERE IN THE US CONSTITUTION IS THE WORD "DEMOCRACY"!
Where in the Constitution does it say a corporation is a person?
Or the Bill of Rights?
I'd encourage you not to get too hung up on the fact they are looking to 'reclaim our democracy'. While I agree that clarifying exactly what our government was formed to be (a republic) and the differences between a democracy and a republic(mob rule vs. rule of law for purposes of simplification) are important points, the fact is that until we recognize and enforce that corporations aren't 'people' no matter of discourse about our form of government will matter.
Do you think your voice is as loud as GE's? Or Newscorp? Or Disney? Or AOL/Time Warner?
I don't agree
If they don't get that right, the point is moot. If we are a Democracy then the US Constitution is "just a God- damned piece of paper", as our leader is quoted as saying. Democracy isn't rule of law, Republic is. You can't ask that piece of paper to defend you if your form of government doesn't acknowledge it as the rule of law, it is central to the point!
You avoid my point completely.
Where in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights does it state that a corporation has the rights of an individual?
A fine example of exactly why it's important to understand the negative impact corporate personhood had on America, is in my response here http://www.dailypaul.com/...
Oy
It doesn't. But it does say we have protection as individuals. We can't fight this ridiculous issue of corporations claiming individual rights if we first don't have rights ourselves using this documentation.
Corporate person hood is an abuse of our own document, the Constitution. Corporations didn't even exist when this document was created so it can't be applied, but it has due to corruption.
Again without this document as our protection none of this matters. Are you not processing what I am saying? Corporate person hood is the enemy of the Constitution and we should fight their misinterpretation of the document. Remove the document and we can't even prove they manipulated it for their own greed, it doesn't exists in a Democracy.
No Constitution nothing to protect us, they did nothing wrong in calling themselves persons. Having a Constitution, they misinterpreted our document we fight to clear this up.
Besides the nit picking ..
The subject of corporate personhood is always one that comes up in philisophical discussions. Libertarian philosophy, in apure sense will always lead to monopoly, just like the actual game, and just like the actual game someone always wins.
Problem is .. in our case the game ended a long time ago.
But yet we keep on playing ... hmm ... doesnt seem like much fun but what the heck ... its your roll ... just be careful not to land on anything ..
Funny
Funny