Saturday, August 11, 2012

The Fascist Origins of 'Corporate Personhood'

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Many sources support my assertion and emerging thesis: the concept of 'corporate personhood' has Germanic, fascist roots. Herr Schlegel, for example, wrote an essay entitled “Signature of the Age” (Signatur des Zeitalters, 1820). Amid his attacks on British-American "parliamentary government" may be found his Mitt Romney/SCOTUS-like descriptions of a "machine-like", ideal state.

Schlegel describes his ideal with the term "organic" --though it is not! Schlegel also used the term 'Christian' to describe his 'fascist' state. His 'Christian corporations', he said, were 'living wholes' and he described them in terms not unlike that of the corporatist (fascist) philosophy that had been espoused/advocated by Hegel.

Some hard background: in England, ‘the Crown’ has been regarded as a 'legal entity' for centuries. But that is not to say that the 'Crown' IS 'a person'! It simply does not follow that because the 'Crown' may exert power and/or authority it is a 'person'.

Likewise, it simply does not follow that because 'corporations' may enter into contracts that the said 'corporation' is a person. In the case of the 'Crown', for example, it was said that it was both a source of law and the means by which it was enforced! This, it is said, put it above 'laws' --laws which people, real people, are expected to obey. Ergo: the 'state' is, likewise, not a person.

It is said that 'all modern societies' recognize the 'legal existence, as persons, of companies or corporations'! Again --many things may be asserted! It was often asserted that the world was flat; saying so did not make it true.

Corporations do not procreate sexually; corporations do not grow, fart, belch or have babies. Corporations do NONE of the things that define 'real people' either biologically or psychologically. A 'corporation' is nothing less than a paper contract outlining how and possibly when they may interact with 'real people' and with other corporations. NONE of these 'privileges' imply or bestow upon a 'corporation' either a sexual or asexual means by which they may procreate; NONE of these 'privileges' have either the evolutionary power or the 'God-like' power of bestowing upon a mere paper contract the status of 'personhood'.

SCOTUS was wrong and wrong-headed and so are those members of the GOP who bought the scam!

Some have said that a corporation is an 'artificial' person! But a 'real person' is ...uh...a 'real' person! A corporation is not by definition! Black's Law definition is disingenuous. Neither dictionaries nor ill-informed legal decisions can make people out of what are --in fact --mere contracts. Existence precedes 'essence' and it is 'essence' which defines! People are what they are upon birth. Corporations share none of characteristics which define what it means to be a person!

Contracts which, in effect, create a 'corporate entity, differ from other contracts only because they are normally on-file with a Secretary of State somewhere. But that hardly makes of them a 'real person'. They simply outline the legal scope of responsibilities of those party to the contract. See the quote by St. Thomas More who said of them that they were, in fact, '...conspiracies of rich men to procure their commodities in the name and title of the commonwealth'!

When the Sec of State in Delaware (for example) affixes his SEAL upon the articles of incorporation he has performed in a manner PRECISELY described by St Thomas More in his classic "Utopia". Ergo --corporations are better described as being 'legalized conspiracies' than as 'real people'.
“I can perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men procuring their own commodities under the name and title of the commonwealth.”

- Sir Thomas More (1478 – 1535), Utopia, Of the Religions in Utopia
Words fail to describe the depths of lies, propaganda and sophistry indulged by the likes of A. Scalia who --laughingly --believes himself to be 'too smart for the court'!

Most advocates of 'corporate personhood' indulge false analogies because 'false' analogies may be their last redoubt. Clearly --real persons are not so easily defined or summed up having attributes of consciousness and volition that may never be duplicated in unimaginably large super-computers let alone a mere scrap of papers with a seal on it. Simply, 'personhood' cannot be duplicated artificially and most certainly is not duplicated in mere 'legal abstractions' of any kind.

I deny many right-leaning assertions that "modern societies recognise the legal existence as persons of companies or corporations"! If what is said in defense of corporate personhood were true, TRADE UNIONS would, may and should claim 'personhood'. Should they do so, GOP hypocrites would scream bloody murder, foul, no fair!

By simply refusing to tolerate such an outcome, the GOP will have demonstrated its hypocrisy, its disingenuous assertion that corporations are people. Alas --the GOP has historically sought to have it several ways but right.

In the meantime, I urge those who make cars for a living --ORGANIZE AND INCORPORATE!

I urge those who make steel for a living --ORGANIZE AND INCORPORATE!

I urge those who work in any way with respect to the production of oil and/or petroleum related/derived products --ORGANIZE AND INCORPORATE!

In that way, you are guaranteed that you will be treated like REAL PERSONS while, previously, actually BEING a real person would have guaranteed your enslavement to MOLOCH.

ORGANIZE!!!

6 comments:

YELLOWDOG GRANNY said...

every time someone starts out a conversation and within minutes is talking about being a christian, I clutch my purse to my chest(boobs) and press my butt to the wall. They are either going to want to take my money or screw me out of it.

Len Hart said...

I know the type. Grew up with them. You hit the nail on the head.

Anonymous said...

Crawl back into your cave you retarded neanderthal i almost wanted to debate you until i read your piece and saw it for the sad pice of crap it is you know what your not a person because because a person has an iq above -5 the sad crap that you wright shouldn't be dignified with an argument i should reserve those for people who make a compelling argument and not the sad nonsensical piece of crap that came out of your single brain cell i am disgusted that someone so stupid as you was allowed to live

Len Hart said...

Re: Anonymous

The anonymous "post" is a specimen of the mentality about which I have written reams. Study this drivel because it is, in fact, evidence that H.G. Wells' premise in 'The Time Machine' may have been correct. Clearly, in the U.S., homo sapiens has devolved into near seperate species --Eloi and Morlocks. But with one exception --Wells' Morlocks are much better than the present right wing of corporate kiss-ups and asswipes. Morlocks were INDUSTRIOUS and PRODUCTIVE. Those are traits the U.S. right wing clearly abandoned with R. Reagan's tax cut from which only the very rich and the very corporate brain-washed benefited.

Whenever, I tell the truth about this --the guilty bastards, liars and suck-ups to corporations get angry at me.

Usually, I just delete the spam and BS. But the one above is a good SPECIMEN that proves everything I have said about that segment of Homo Sapiens that is well on its way back into the putrid swamp from which it oozed so many million years ago.

Len Hart said...

By the way, 'flamers' and other idiots usually post anonymously. If I were just marginally smarter than pond scum, I might be inclined to post anonymously as well.

Jedi Chi said...

You make very cogent, sound points. I was speechless when SCOTUS announced Citizens United. In law school, the notion of corporate personhood was considered a legal fiction. Nothing more than a matter of practicality or convenience. Justice Stevens nailed it in his dissent: "A democracy cannot function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold."


The rant by the courageous Anonymous is typical right wing feculence. Why can't trolls use a spellchecker? Further, is it possible that not one of them was introduced to the power of punctuation? One long run-on sentence? Please!