[Peace-discuss] Fw: GP RELEASE Greens: 'Citizens United' ruling will...

[C. G. Estabrook]

[The following is an amalgamated ("corporate") response from comments on Doug 
Henwood's excellent LBO email list.  The burden is that denying personhood to 
corporations is an exercise in missing the point - which is to control 
corporations.  --CGE]

In response to the Citizens United v. FEC decision, there seems to be a movement 
afoot by some folks on the left to amend the Constitution to end corporate 
personhood. See here: <http://www.movetoamend.org/>. Maybe I'm missing something 
important, but this seems insane. Legally speaking, labor unions are 
corporations ("non-stock corporations") - so are all cooperatives, and Amnesty 
International, and the Economic Policy Institute, etc. They're all corporations, 
as is pretty much any non-governmental organization. "Corporation" is a legal 
term, but basically it's just a synonym for "collectivity." Is the left in this 
country so hyper-individualistic that it wants to stymie all economic and social 
life not based on the rugged individual?

[What's necessary instead is serious regulation of business corporations - 
democratic control of investment decisions, nationalization of banks, 
redistribution of wealth - as Joseph Stiglitz recommends in his new book.]

...It's a legalistic, petit bourgeois illusion that doesn't seem very thought 
through. Not a word about increasing social control over investment or worker 
control over the workplace. Instead, there's an instinctive focus on the 
corporate form itself, as if that were the focus of evil in the modern world, to 
borrow a phrase from Ronald Reagan.


unionyes wrote:
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* David Sladky <mailto:tanstl at aol.com>
> *To:* undisclosed-recipients: <mailto:undisclosed-recipients:>
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 24, 2010 5:55 PM
> *Subject:* GP RELEASE Greens: 'Citizens United' ruling will...
> 
> Sent: Sun, Jan 24, 2010 8:38 am
> Subject: Re: [usgp-media] Re: Draft - GP RELEASE Greens: 'Citizens 
> United' ruling will...
>  
> In a message dated 1/24/2010 1:34:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> cobbweb at greens.org <mailto:cobbweb at greens.org> writes:
> 
>      > Many Greens are supporting Move To Amend
>     (http://www.movetoamend.org), which, like the Green Party, asserts
>     that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to
>     constitutional rights; that money is not speech; and that the right
>     to vote and have one's vote counted must be guaranteed. Move To
>     Amend demands a constitutional amendment enacting these principles.
> 
>  
> I certainly support the general positions the Greens are taking on this, 
> and certainly oppose the concept that corporations are persons under our 
> constitution (and are aware of the controversy over the deceptions that 
> went into the court allegedly recognizing corporations as people).
>  
> One caution that I have is that, as a lawyer, having briefly read the 
> summary of the case, most of the majority decision, and some of the 
> dissenting opinion, there does not appear to be a simple remedy. My 
> concern is given a court decision that once again seems more driven by 
> personal ideological biases rather than sound legal reasoning, merely 
> overturning the concept of corporate personhood does not necessarily 
> overturn the court's recent decision. (Restoring a Supreme Court that 
> upholds the law is the clearer solution).
>  
>  The idea of a constitutional amendment related to corporate personhood 
> seems to be getting a fair amount of attention. Something the Greens 
> support for reasons far beyond this court decision.
>  
>  The website cited above - movetoamend - goes far beyond this particular 
> approach in a way greens would support, but I wonder how difficult and 
> complex it would be to draft (and more importantly, then pass) a 
> constitutional amendment that would actually accomplish the goals it 
> lays out
> 
> -- 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.