Re: Kuttner, Enron and the Chicago Ideology

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: Kuttner, Enron and the Chicago Ideology


> Hogwash is defined in the dictionary as worthless or
nonsensical language.
>
> Taking the paragaph as quoted, and taking the legal
definition of
> corporation, I am affraid the burden of proof that the
paragraph is
> "hogwash" is on the accuser.
>
> A corporation is a legal entity, chartered by a state or
national
> government, and separate and distinct from persons who
own it, giving rise
> to a Supreme Court characterization of it as having
"neither a soul to
> damn nor a body to kick."  A corporation is nevertheless
regarded by the
> courts as an artificial person; it may legally own
property, incur debts,
> sue or be sued.  The three distinguishing features are:
> 1. limited liability
> 2. free to transfer ownership through the sale of stocks,
> 3. continuity of existence.
>
> The rationale of a corporation is its ability to obtain
capital through
> expanded ownership and provide a vehicle to allow
shareholders to profit
> from the growth of the business.
>
> Neither democracy nor freedom is a constituted purpose.
In fact both of
> these charateristics are considered detrimental to
efficient and effective
> growth.  Corporation exists to benefit the sahreholders,
not the community
> at large.
>
> Now, one may argue that the modern corporation operates
beyond the narrow
> legal definition and limits of its charter, but it does
so for reasons
> beyond its legal requirement.
>
> Therefore, it is difficult to challenge the verity of the
quoted paragraph
> unless one departs from strict constructionist
interpretation.
> This is particularly true if one considers the revival of
the holding
> company in the last decade which allows regulated
institutions such as
> banks and insurance compnay to skirt limits imposed by
the New Deal,
> bypassing antitrust limits and violating conflict of
interest issues.
> Citigroup is a callsic example. It is now a commerical
bank, an investment
> banks, a merchant banks, an insurance congomerate, a
trading company and
> an own for profit operation.  Anyone looking for
democracy or freedom
> within Citigroup would last to the end of the day.
>
> The literature on the mismatch of corporatism with
democracy, particularly
> economic democarcy is widely available.  The current
> anti-globalizationmovement is based in large measure on
anti-corporatism.
>
> Thus a serious debate among those who have diderent views
on the issue
> should be encouraged, and not silent by wholesale
condemnation.
>
> Henry C.K. Liu
=======================

I don't think there's any such thing as an
'anti-globalization' movement, but if you asked the average
worker in the US, Africa, Europe, Asia, or Latin America
whether corporations such as IBM, FedEx, Asia Pulp & Paper,
Toyota, BHP Steel, Disney & Union Carbide which of the
following terms--oligarchic, meritocratic,
authoritarian/hierarchical, or democratic--defined the
internal flows of knowledge/decision-making,
representation, accountability, participation/communication
etc.of those firms; odds are that oligarchy and
authoritarianism would score higher than the other choices.

To the extent that corporations are creatures of States,
what does that say about the human ideals of freedom,
equality, representation, accountability,  the right to be
secure in one's person and effects etc etc.? How many
people on this list have their computer use monitored or
have to piss in a cup to maintain their employment status?
How many are 'at will' employees prepared to find work when
your firm decides they need to do something about the share
price? How many have had co-workers murdered on the job
because they were trying to form a union or the company
brings in DEA agents to try to arrest drug dealers?

Anyone who thinks the evolution of the corporation has
advanced the ideals listed above should simply take a look
at Morton Horwitz' "The Transformation of American Law:
1870-1960" or Scott Bowman's "The Modern  Corporation and
American Political Thought: Law, Power and Ideology." The
history of labor movements around the world should also
prove enlightening to those who think the corporate form of
social organization is the greatest thing since sliced
bread.

Ian