# "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:** 15\ **Page:** 8
**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, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/141 "2012-08-14T15:09:33Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > To put perhaps too fine a point on it all, the rise of the SuperPAC has made the whole argument more or less academic. Before all this kerfluffle, the Koch Brothers had about a gazillion times the political power that I did, or you did, Now, its still pretty much the same. > > One possible ray of sunshine, still dim, but possible: there are some signs that political advertising doesn’t have the clout it used to have. Perhaps one day soon our Corporate Insect Overlords will begin to think that such massive outlays of cash are not cost effective. Of course, that will mean they simply move that money into more effective lobbying, but still… The Koch brothers had power, but Citizens United and other Supreme Court decisions have ADDED to their power: they can make donations in UNLIMITED amounts, in secret, to SuperPACs. That’s where those half a million dollar checks have been coming from. And only a naive fool would believe that corporations/plutocrats make donations of that size without expecting some specific paybacks down the line, or that politicians don’t give full attention to individuals who write half million dollar (or more) checks to a SuperPAC that helps get him elected. Finally, only a naive fool does not believe that SuperPACs don’t secretly coordinate with the SuperPACs that help get them elected). I know you don’t hold these beliefs, elucidator, just wanted to get those thoughts out there in a probably futile effort to reduce the amount of fake naivete around here. ---
**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, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/142 "2012-08-14T15:11:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > So the NY Times, a for profit company, does not have free speech rights. Neither does Miramax, or HBO, or Viacom. Good to know. True, the only thing they will be permitted to say henceforth is, “adaher misrepresents Evil Captor’s posts.” ---
**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, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/143 "2012-08-14T15:17:20Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > 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? Oh, I can easily resolve your difficulties here, rat. I don’t advocate forbidding corporations from indulging in political speech. I advocate controls on the amount they can spend on political speech. We should be able to establish a limit that coffee stands and dog walkers can spend on political speech that would give them more than ample ability to express themselves monetarily … say, $2500. Which would at the same time curb the excesses of the big corporations. You’re welcome! ---
**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, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/144 "2012-08-14T15:20:18Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > 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 Actually, ambition is not a cognate of “wants to make money” – one can be ambitious to achieve any number of goals, not related to money making. But you apparently think it’s the same thing as “greed.” Very revealing! Thank you! ---
**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 14, 2012, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/145 "2012-08-14T15:39:53Z")
Well at least you are honest about wanting to further your views by removing the voice of others. I personally find that moraly repugnant and will fight it but thanks for being honest Evil Captor. ---
**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 14, 2012, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/146 "2012-08-14T15:41:47Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > The Koch brothers had power, but Citizens United and other Supreme Court decisions have ADDED to their power: they can make donations in UNLIMITED amounts, in secret, to SuperPACs. That’s where those half a million dollar checks have been coming from. And only a naive fool would believe that corporations/plutocrats make donations of that size without expecting some specific paybacks down the line, or that politicians don’t give full attention to individuals who write half million dollar (or more) checks to a SuperPAC that helps get him elected. Finally, only a naive fool does not believe that SuperPACs don’t secretly coordinate with the SuperPACs that help get them elected). I know you don’t hold these beliefs, elucidator, just wanted to get those thoughts out there in a probably futile effort to reduce the amount of fake naivete around here. Citizens united didn’t uphold the reporting requirements and applied to super pacs?!?!?! It slices, it dices, it juliennes!!! ---
**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 14, 2012, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/147 "2012-08-14T16:08:36Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Oh, I can easily resolve your difficulties here, rat. I don’t advocate forbidding corporations from indulging in political speech. I advocate controls on the amount they can spend on political speech. We should be able to establish a limit that coffee stands and dog walkers can spend on political speech that would give them more than ample ability to express themselves monetarily … say, $2500. Which would at the same time curb the excesses of the big corporations. You’re welcome! Either way you are being an advocate for government suppression of politically unpopular speech. At least you are also admiting that effective speach takes money so you do agree with a large portion of the SCOTUS opinion in citizens united. ---
**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, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/148 "2012-08-14T16:14:46Z")
I think the words “and other Supreme Court decisions” are intended to convey that Citizens United is not the only and unique decision that enhances the power of the monied to affect elections. Hence, your objection may be charitably described as a misunderstanding. Though it must be noted that \*\*Evil’s \*\* posts \*are \*awfully dense and difficult to understand… Not for me, of course, 'cause I’m really fucking smart, but we must be mindful of the limitations of others. ---
**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 14, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/149 "2012-08-14T16:17:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I think the words “and other Supreme Court decisions” are intended to convey that Citizens United is not the only and unique decision that enhances the power of the monied to affect elections. Hence, your objection may be charitably described as a misunderstanding. > > Though it must be noted that \*\*Evil’s \*\* posts \*are \*awfully dense and difficult to understand… Not for me, of course, 'cause I’m really fucking smart, but we must be mindful of the limitations of others. No, the only thing that currently allows “secret donations” to super pacs is IRS regulations. There is no such SCOTUS decision. [http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/08/super-pacs-funneling-money-through.html](http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/08/super-pacs-funneling-money-through.html) ---
**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, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/150 "2012-08-14T17:08:41Z")
> [@For You](#): > > But political campaign speech is not regulated on the basis of source, it is regulated on the basis of its nature. We’re talking about limits on corporate speech, which is based on the source. > [@](#): > > 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. Such regulation is unconstitutional. If any kind of speech is protected, it’s political speech. (I wasn’t the one who brought up equal protection, but it’s not in Article I either, it’s in the 14th amendment). ---
**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, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/151 "2012-08-14T17:11:03Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > The Koch brothers had power, but Citizens United and other Supreme Court decisions have ADDED to their power: they can make donations in UNLIMITED amounts, in secret, to SuperPACs. That’s not power, that’s the potential for influence. Power and influence are two very different things. > [@](#): > > That’s where those half a million dollar checks have been coming from. And only a naive fool would believe that corporations/plutocrats make donations of that size without expecting some specific paybacks down the line, or that politicians don’t give full attention to individuals who write half million dollar (or more) checks to a SuperPAC that helps get him elected. Finally, only a naive fool does not believe that SuperPACs don’t secretly coordinate with the SuperPACs that help get them elected). I know you don’t hold these beliefs, elucidator, just wanted to get those thoughts out there in a probably futile effort to reduce the amount of fake naivete around here. “Only a naive fool would believe X” is a really lazy debate tactic. ---
**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, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/152 "2012-08-14T17:13:12Z")
> [@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. Sigh. Newspapers, TV stations, churches, political parties, charities, social groups, political activist and human rights groups…all not humans, all strickly legal entities. Should they have no rights? Or should only those who want to make a profit have no rights because there’s a conflict of interest with the good of the public? Including humans? How about you stop trying to control the process and let the voters handle it? ---
**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, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/153 "2012-08-14T17:16:27Z")
> [@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. So what? They can still speak. It’s often a fundamental part of their mission. If the government leaves them alone, fine, but when it comes after them, they have a right to speak out against it. And hey, there are thousands of groups that were formed specifically for the purpose of speech, particularly to affect public policy. Just check the Washington DC phone directory and you’ll see. ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/154 "2012-08-14T19:09:49Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Actually, ambition is not a cognate of “wants to make money” – one can be ambitious to achieve any number of goals, not related to money making. But you apparently think it’s the same thing as “greed.” Very revealing! Thank you! Wow, that rocketed right over your head. The “noun” I was “conjugating” was “the desire to make money.” My point was that when **I** want to make money, it’s healthy ambition, but when the **other guy** wants to make money, it’s evil greed. This was a jab at your calling corporations “amoral” and “greedy” simply because their purpose (SOLE purpose, you seem to think) is to make money. I’m sorry; I should have stated that less subtly for you. ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2012, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987/155 "2012-08-14T19:13:28Z")
> [@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 trite, so awkward, and so nonsensical. News flash: we all (businesses of all types included) get to “influence the electoral process” **for any reason we wish**. It’s called “democracy.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporation-consummate-evil-how-can-a-corporation-be-a-person/630987.md?page=7)