February 1, 2010
“ In the case of a corporation, though, who is it that is speaking? Management? They are not the corporation; they are, as they will argue loudly whenever it is convenient or prudent, simply employees, however overpaid. The stockholders, who are supposedly the owners of the corporation, such as John Doe in Idaho, a few of whose 401(k) dollars are in a mutual fund that (quite likely unbeknownst to him) holds a few shares? The directors? I dunno. If a corporation has the same right of free speech as a human citizen, what about voting? Surely voting is a form of speech under our newly expansive understanding of the word. Should corporations have a vote, then? If they can spend millions of dollars for or against a ballot proposition or a candidate, the addition of the vote to their rights seems almost trivial. Or would it be just one vote? There is another aspect of personhood, the obverse of rights, known as responsibilities. Do corporate persons have those as well? As noted, they can’t be drafted. Why? Because suddenly, when responsibility knocks, there’s no one there. Ditto with serving on juries. A corporation is a person, says the law, but there is no one who is that person. They do pay taxes, although it is cogently argued that this makes no sense because the corporation per se has no money; there is only the money belonging to the stockholders, whether it is paid out as dividends (which are then taxed again) or retained as working capital. Once again, there seems to be no one home when you call.
Free Speech, Inc. (via azspot)
22 notes
  1. brephophagist reblogged this from azspot
  2. ddefenba reblogged this from joshuatuscan
  3. joshuatuscan reblogged this from dalasverdugo
  4. zachrose reblogged this from dalasverdugo
  5. dalasverdugo reblogged this from azspot
  6. azspot posted this