# "Corporation"="consummate evil"; how can a corporation be a person? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 9, 2012, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987 "2012-08-09T19:12:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/121 "2012-08-13T21:51:55Z")
> [@For You](#): > > “**[Straight Dope Message Board \> Main \> Great Debates \> “Corporation”=“consummate evil”; how can a corporation be a _person_?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=661529)**” That’s not the same argument, and the thread title is a parody. The OP is making fun of that position, not putting it forth as a serious argument. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/122 "2012-08-13T21:53:53Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > If I can only afford to “speak” in my normal talking voice, and my opponent is free to bring in a sound truck that would deafen a mountain, how “free” my speech may be loses all meaning. Equality of speech is an essential component of free speech, if you can be drowned out, you are essentially “gagged”, whether you are still free to make ineffective gestures of speech or not. But that’s a poor analogy, because spending money doesn’t drown out anyone else. Everyone is heard just as “loudly” whether someone else is being heard even more. Ads are not sound trucks, and they don’t drown each other out. If you think so, then you’d have to believe that one person talking twice as long as another, or distributing twice as many fliers on the street, or having more people show up at a demonstration, or having a bigger sign with bigger letters, is also “drowning out” someone’s speech and must also be regulated. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/123 "2012-08-13T21:55:16Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Let me make it less exciting for you to read, John > > 1. The vast majority of corporations are by design amoral greed machines whose only concern is making more money Possibly, although the use of the term “greed” is what we in the business call “appeal to emotion”. > [@](#): > > 1. Giving such organizations political free speech rights, especially coupled with unlimited SuperPAC funding means that such organizations have the ability to drown out most other voices in the mass media, which runs on money, which is what the greed machines have in spades. Unlikely. But if you have a cite that proves this, please bring it. > [@](#): > > 1. Therefore, our current definition of personhood for legal entities has led to a predictable takeover of our political system by greedy corporations and the plutocrats that control them. (Hello, President Romney!) The present status of corporations, however REASONABLE by your standards, will lead to an America that will make the Gilded Age look positively egalitarian. Anyone who cares about democracy must oppose it. A conclusion built on a faulty premise. Your argument _might_, and I emphasize might, have had some traction in the 1950s. In the internet age, it’s laughable. > [@](#): > > It’s called wit. IOW, I made a crappy argument, so let me fall back on saying it was an attempt at humor. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/124 "2012-08-13T21:55:37Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Let me make it less exciting for you to read, John > > 1. The vast majority of corporations are by design amoral greed machines whose only concern is making more money > 2. Giving such organizations political free speech rights, especially coupled with unlimited SuperPAC funding means that such organizations have the ability to drown out most other voices in the mass media, which runs on money, which is what the greed machines have in spades. > 3. Therefore, our current definition of personhood for legal entities has led to a predictable takeover of our political system by greedy corporations and the plutocrats that control them. (Hello, President Romney!) The present status of corporations, however REASONABLE by your standards, will lead to an America that will make the Gilded Age look positively egalitarian. Anyone who cares about democracy must oppose it. Sorry, but speech rights are not conditioned on whether one is “evil” or amoral or likes making a profit. ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/125 "2012-08-13T22:49:59Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That’s not the same argument, and the thread title is a parody. The OP is making fun of that position, not putting it forth as a serious argument. I’d like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for clarifying this for the shockingly high proportion of posters on this thread who didn’t comprehend it. I also was tangentially making an ironic comment on the fact that the same people who most strenuously object to corporate “personhood” also accuse corporations of committing evil acts–something only a person could presumably do. ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/126 "2012-08-13T22:52:31Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Possibly, although the use of the term “greed” is what we in the business call “appeal to emotion”. At this point, I’d like to do something we English major types used to call “conjugating the noun”: Ambition: I want to make money Avarice: You want to make money Greed: He wants to make money ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/127 "2012-08-13T22:53:21Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Free speech applies to all speech … The legal system is there to address such overly broad, naïve interpretations of the constitution. Not all speech is protected by the first amendment. Libel is one example. IP trespass is another. Hate speech restrictions have not been ruled unconstitutional at least up to this point. Otherwise we would have chaos. The courts are there to infer what reason should be allow, lest we become bound to a handful of words that fail to account for the complexity of society. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/128 "2012-08-13T23:06:19Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > I’d like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for clarifying this for the shockingly high proportion of posters on this thread who didn’t comprehend it. > > I also was tangentially making an ironic comment on the fact that the same people who most strenuously object to corporate “personhood” also accuse corporations of committing evil acts–something only a person could presumably do. Too bad they don’t look up the word “corporation” and learn that is from the Latin word corpus or a “body of people.” Populus Romanus, cities, political parties, clubs, trade groups etc…were all “corporations” and legal fictional persons. Just like how today the US most cities, charities, churches, coffee stands, unions and dog walkers are “corporations” They also like to ignore that “corporations” or groups of were gaining rights so were individuals. They also ignore how the incorporation of the Bill of Rights for groups of people roughly correlates to the incorporation of the Bill of Rights for individuals. This is where it exactly correlates with the “Obama is a Muslin” ignorance from the far right. So a hand full of people who happened to be Muslims committed an act of terror…does that mean all Muslims would? If not why would it matter if he was Muslim. So a tiny number of groups of people do nasty things to make money, does that mean all corporations would? Does the city of Seattle or my local coffee kiosk want to keep me down? ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/129 "2012-08-13T23:15:37Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > I’d like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for clarifying this for the shockingly high proportion of posters on this thread who didn’t comprehend it. > > I also was tangentially making an ironic comment on the fact that the same people who most strenuously object to corporate “personhood” **also accuse corporations of committing evil acts–something only a person could presumably do.** For instance? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/130 "2012-08-14T00:11:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Might have well been relevant when corporations were groups, but now they are persons. Person is a singular noun. By the miracle of legalistic absurdity, they _are_ individuals. False. Corporations have ALWAYS, by definition, been a sort of limited person, but nobody has ever said they are people just like real people. They’re a legal fiction, and everyone knows it. No court or legislature has said they are persons in every sense. To say otherwise is a straw man. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/131 "2012-08-14T00:13:40Z")
> [@For You](#): > > The legal system is there to address such overly broad, naïve interpretations of the constitution. It is neither. > [@](#): > > Not all speech is protected by the first amendment. Libel is one example. IP trespass is another. Hate speech restrictions have not been ruled unconstitutional at least up to this point. So what? There are exceptions. Doesn’t justify this one. You cannot have an exception based on the source of the speech being singled out as somehow having “too much” speech. That’s blatantly violative of the 1st. > [@](#): > > The courts are there to infer what reason should be allow, lest we become bound to a handful of words that fail to account for the complexity of society. Yes, and the courts ruled that speech is free, regardless of the source. Like I said. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/132 "2012-08-14T00:26:39Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Sorry, but speech rights are not conditioned on whether one is “evil” or amoral or likes making a profit. Nor is free speech necessarily an individual right. The 1st amendment protects free speech, not an individual’s right to free speech. Same with freedom of the press. It’s not only individuals who can print pamphlets, broadsides, and newspapers. Corporations like the NYT are protected, too. I can’t imagine anyone objecting to that, but somehow we are expected to believe that “speech” is limited to individuals. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/133 "2012-08-14T00:41:43Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Nor is free speech necessarily an individual right. The 1st amendment protects free speech, not an individual’s right to free speech. Same with freedom of the press. It’s not only individuals who can print pamphlets, broadsides, and newspapers. Corporations like the NYT are protected, too. I can’t imagine anyone objecting to that, but somehow we are expected to believe that “speech” is limited to individuals. Exactamundo. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/134 "2012-08-14T00:42:22Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So what? There are exceptions. Doesn’t justify this one. You cannot have an exception based on the source of the speech being singled out as somehow having “too much” speech. That’s blatantly violative of the 1st. But political campaign speech is not regulated on the basis of source, it is regulated on the basis of its nature. The fact that most individuals have limited ability to make significantly impactful statements means in and of itself that any regulation on campaign speech must pertain to organizations and, in the current system, money. And the equal protection clause is not in the first amendment, it is in Article I. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 9:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/135 "2012-08-14T09:28:35Z")
> [@For You](#): > > What? Groups are formed to accomplish what individuals alone or in contention would find difficult or insurmountable, not specifically to engage in messaging, political or otherwise. My mother’s _Ladies’ Sewing Circle and Terrorist Society_ was not formed for the purpose of disseminating messages, information and propaganda outside the group, its purpose as a group is to collaborate in patterns, techniques and fiendish plans. Communicating with outsiders is not always a significant function of a group (except perhaps by blowing them up). > > Consider for example the Tillamook County Creamery Association, which began as a sort of co-op of area dairy farmers to facilitate the shipment, and later processing, of their product. The aspect of forming a group for the purpose of gaining a stronger voice is largely missing here, unless you somehow equate speech with commerce. > > Corporations are formed to do a thing, usually the speech thing is more of a side effect. Right. There are groups without a political message. Your mother’s sewing group doesn’t march on Washington because there is no reason to do so. Now if Congress wanted to impose a 1000% tax on sewing machines, I can’t see the rationale behind saying that her group couldn’t issue a statement opposing that tax, or campaigning against the Congressman who proposed it. Or are you saying that groups can ONLY form for the purpose of sharing sewing patterns or promoting dairy products, but once those things are threatened with adverse legislation they must keep their yaps shut? Or they can gather and scream through a bullhorn, but not publish a circular outlining their positions? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/136 "2012-08-14T12:16:58Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > You know, this gets really tiresome. We’re debating here. As many folks have noted time and again, your normal prose is often impenetrable… Pretty much you and **Bricker** , actually. And, somehow, by dint of hard work and head scratching, you both seem to manage, somehow, to get enough of it to tell me I’m wrong, even as you tell me you don’t get it. But don’t put yourself out on my account, **John**. Too dense for you, don’t read it. I’ll get over it. Sure, it’ll be hard, at first, but somehow, some day… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/137 "2012-08-14T13:42:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Pretty much you and **Bricker** , actually. In your dreams. > [@](#): > > And, somehow, by dint of hard work and head scratching, you both seem to manage, somehow, to get enough of it to tell me I’m wrong, even as you tell me you don’t get it. Only after much teeth pulling to get a statement of policy, and only when I think you are wrong. > [@](#): > > But don’t put yourself out on my account, **John**. Too dense for you, don’t read it. Oh, it’s no trouble at all. I consider it a public service. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/138 "2012-08-14T14:24:53Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Sorry, but speech rights are not conditioned on whether one is “evil” or amoral or likes making a profit. A legal machine designed to be an amoral profit-making device probably should not have free speech rights. It’s not human. It’s strictly a legal entity, the courts should say, “Organizations whose only interest in the electoral process is maximizing the wealth of their owners are a clear and present danger to democracy, and limits on the amount of their spending are reasonable and appropriate in the interests of maintaining a functioning democracy.” So simple, so elegant, and so true. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/139 "2012-08-14T14:34:27Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > SuperPAC’s legality was not related to Citizens United, they are also still open to regulation but the FEC has been slow to act. Direct contributions to candidates by corps is still Illegal. AS to the airspace, big players had an option, just buy a media company then you are not under restrictions. This was not an option for citizen groups. Well that’s another issue, Fox News, which is clearly an instance of which you speak, has done great damage to American democracy … in fact, a recent survey showed that televisions viewers who got most or all of their news from Fox News knew less about current events than those who didnt follow current events at all. Not sure of the solution to that one, I’ll think on it. > [@](#): > > You have given no evidence for this outside of broad sweeping conjecture. Well which part do you find uncredible? > [@](#): > > Note that Americans wasted more on one week of lottery tickets last year than the entire amount spend on lobbying in the year. Yeah, our Congressmen are not just corrupt, but damned cheap. > [@](#): > > The political will of the people will never be expressed if they expect it to happen through apathy. Some of the most powerful lobbies in DC are groups of citizens who are not rich. E.G. the NAR, AARP, NRA and Teachers and labor unions. How does apathy relate to anything I just wrote? Oh, and the NRA is backed by the big gun manufacturers, and the AARP is backed by insurance companies. Did you know, for example, that a large majority of NRA members favor regulations to make it more difficult for nut cases to get assault weapons? Like, 61%? But THAT legislation will never pass, because the gun manufacturers don’t want it … a psycho’s money is as good as anybody else’s. So … no, you’re completely wrong. Also teacher and labor unions are also not just about money … they also seek to improve working conditions and safety for their members, laudable goals I’m sure you’ll agree. > [@](#): > > But I will ask you, if you are in favor of gagging “corporations” do you also support gagging ABC/CBS Fox, News Corp and the New York times? If not by what standard to you exempt them? Please. Gagging. Telling someone they can talk in their indoor voice but not scream and shout is not gagging. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/140 "2012-08-14T15:04:11Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > A legal machine designed to be an amoral profit-making device probably should not have free speech rights. It’s not human. It’s strictly a legal entity, the courts should say, “Organizations whose only interest in the electoral process is maximizing the wealth of their owners are a clear and present danger to democracy, and limits on the amount of their spending are reasonable and appropriate in the interests of maintaining a functioning democracy.” > > So simple, so elegant, and so true. So the NY Times, a for profit company, does not have free speech rights. Neither does Miramax, or HBO, or Viacom. Good to know. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987.md?page=8)