"Corporations are illegitimate institutions"

[rman]

The hidden history of the rise of corporate power

(Modern) "corporations are illegitimate institutions, they have no right to exist.
And their control is very fragile, they know it.
It’s in principal easy to dismantle them, they understand that.
A large part of the corporate effort to appear benevolent is to make sure that - you can read it in court decisions - "an aroused population will not take away their rights"".
-- Noam Chomsky


Why corporations (as they are now) are illegitimate institutions:

How it used to be

"In Europe, charters protected directors and stockholders from liability for debts and harms caused by their corporations. American legislators rejected this corporate shield. The penalty for abuse or misuse of the charter was not a plea bargain and a fine, but dissolution of the corporation."

"In 1776 we declared independence not only from British rule, but also from the corporations of England that controlled trade and extracted wealth from the US (and other) colonies. Thus, in the early days of our country, we only allowed corporations to be chartered (licensed to operate) to serve explicitly as a tool to gather investment and disperse financial liability in order to provide public goods, such as construction of roads, bridges or canals.
After fighting a revolution for freedom from colonialism, our country's founders retained a healthy fear of the similar threats posed by corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. These state laws, many of which remain on the books today, imposed conditions such as these:

- A charter was granted for a limited time.
- Corporations were explicitly chartered for the purpose of serving the public interest - profit for shareholders was the means to that end.
- Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
- Corporations could be terminated if they exceeded their authority or if they caused public harm.
- Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts they committed on the job.
- Corporations could not make any political contributions, nor spend money to influence legislation.
- A corporation could not purchase or own stock in other corporations, nor own any property other than that necessary to fulfill its chartered purpose."


Then things changed

- Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad <1886>
"One of the most severe blows to citizen authority was seeded in the 1886 Supreme Court case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
Though the court did not make a ruling on the question of "corporate personhood", thanks to misleading notes of a clerk, the decision subsequently was used as precedent to hold that a private corporation was a natural person.
This meant that the 14th Amendment, enacted to protect rights of freed slaves, (could be) used to grant corporations Constitutional rights. Justices have since struck down hundreds of local, state and federal laws enacted to protect people from corporate harm based on this illegitimate premise."

- Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Beckwith <1889>
"Supreme Court rules a corporation is a "person" for both due process and equal protection."

"Of the 14th Amendment cases brought before the Supreme Court between 1890 and 1910, 19 dealt with African Americans, 288 dealt with corporations."

"Today, many U.S. corporations are transnational, but the corrupted charter remains the legal basis for their existence. A new generation of American patriots is learning this hidden history and recognizing that it contains many keys to successful action today."

source: Reclaim Democracy
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/
Corporate History Primer
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/pdf/primers/hidden_corporate_history.pdf
Timeline of Personhood Rights and Powers
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/personhood_timeline.pdf


"..These state laws, many of which remain on the books today.."

Also see the documentary "The Corporation" (www.thecorporation.com) for more on the history and the impacts of corporations, and a few examples of successful use of "these state laws" in civil action to limit the power of corporations.

[leftyandproud]

1. If you want to nationalize them, nationalize them..

I really don't like this backdoor route to it.
Just be honest...most people will agree anyway!

[rman]

4. nationalize?

I'm not sure that's the solution. The problem isn't so much that corporations are not nationalized, the problem is in the bastardization of corporate charters.

Also i'm not sure i understand what you mean by "backdoor route", nor what you mean by "it", nor how it is that i am being dishonest (nor if you are refering to me, in fact), nor what it is that people will agree with.
Could you please explain?

[aquart]

2. Don't like 'em much myself.

Didn't know that bit about the chartering. Thanks.

[jpgray]

3. I think a breakup of these megacorps is long overdue

It's clear that when corporations are given breaks and subsidies by the government, they will simply use that to enrich their leadership and/or stamp out their more independent competition. If corporations gave back to the community once costs were lowered, we wouldn't see a jump in average CEO to worker pay from 42 in 1980 to 541 in 2000. They don't invest that money in America, they invest it in dominating the marketplace and lining their own wallets. And that's fine, but we should stop pretending that they have some benevolent 'okay we have enough, let's give back now' point. For a corporation that has to ruthlessly stamp out competition to survive, it makes little sense to give back when one doesn't have to. Let's force them to--we're one of the largest and wealthiest markets, and yet we bend over backwards to please THEM? Come on, let's get serious and deal fairly here.