Real0ne
Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
|
In 1886 the supreme court ruled that a corporation has "personhood". Hence elevating them to the same level as a human person. (you and I). Constitutionally corporations were limited to stricly "serving the public good and were only authorized privileges UNDER you and I, and after that ruling have equal rights to you and I. (keep in mind that in feudal societies, you and I would have privileges not rights) a slave has privileges given to them by ther masters.
Rights and Privileges
Before 1886: Only Humans Had Human Rights
Rights and PrivilegesOnly humans were “endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights” and those human rights included the right to free speech, the right to privacy, the right to silence in the face of accusation, and the right to live free of discrimination or slavery.
After 1886: After the Corporate Theft of Human Rights
While to this day unions, churches, governments, and small unincorporated businesses do not have “human rights” (but only privileges humans give them), corporations alone have moved into the category with humans as claiming rights instead of just privileges.
Politics
Before 1886:
In many states, it was a felony for corporations to give money to politicians, political parties, or try to influence elections: “They can’t vote, so what are they doing involved in politics?!”
After 1886:
Corporations claimed the human right of free speech, expanded that to mean the unlimited right to put corporate money into politics, and have thus taken control of our major political parties and politicians
Business
Before 1886:
States and local communities had laws to protect and nurture entrepreneurs and local businesses, and to keep out companies that had been convicted of crimes.
After 1886:
Multi-state corporations claimed such laws were “discrimination” under the 14th Amendment (passed to free the slaves) and got such laws struck down; local communities can no longer stop a predatory corporation.
War
Before 1886:
Government, elected by and for “We, The People,” made decisions about how armies would be equipped and, based on the will of the general populace, if and when we would go to war. Prior to WWII there were no permanent military manufacturing companies of significant size.
After 1886:
Military contractors grew to enormous size as a result of WWII and a permanent arms industry came into being, what Dwight Eisenhower called “the military/industrial complex.” It now lobbies government to buy its products and use them in wars around the world.
Regulation
Before 1886:
Corporations had to submit to the scrutiny of the representatives of “We, The People,” our elected government.
After 1886:
Corporations have claimed 4th Amendment human right to privacy and used it to keep out OSHA, EPA, and to hide crimes.
Purpose
Before 1886:
Corporations were chartered for a single purpose, had to also serve the public good, and had fixed/limited life spans.
After 1886:
Corporations lobbied states to change corporate charter laws to eliminate “public good” provisions from charters, to allow multiple purposes, and to exist forever.
Ownership
Before 1886:
Just as human persons couldn’t own other persons, corporations couldn’t own the stock of other corporations (mergers and acquisitions were banned).
After 1886:
Corporations claim the human right to economic activity free of regulatory restraint, and the still-banned-for-humans right to own others of their own kind.
The Rise of The Corporation
quote:
ORIGINAL: Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. — U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 (letter to Col. William F. Elkins) Ref: “The Lincoln Encyclopedia”, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Richard Robbins [A U.S.] Supreme Court ruling in 1886 ... arguably set the stage for the full-scale development of the culture of capitalism, by handing to corporations the right to use their economic power in a way they never had before. Relying on the Fourteenth Amendment, added to the Constitution in 1868 to protect the rights of freed slaves, the Court ruled that a private corporation is a natural person under the U.S. Constitution, and consequently has the same rights and protection extended to persons by the Bill of Rights, including the right to free speech. Thus corporations were given the same “rights” to influence the government in their own interests as were extended to individual citizens, paving the way for corporations to use their wealth to dominate public thought and discourse. The debates in the United States in the 1990s over campaign finance reform, in which corporate bodies can “donate” millions of dollars to political candidates stem from this ruling although rarely if ever is that mentioned. Thus, corporations, as “persons,” were free to lobby legislatures, use the mass media, establish educational institutions such as many business schools founded by corporate leaders in the early twentieth century, found charitable organizations to convince the public of their lofty intent, and in general construct an image that they believed would be in their best interests. All of this in the interest of “free speech.” — Richard Robbins, Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism, (Allyn and Bacon, 1999), p.100 (Bold Emphasis Added)
quote:
The doctrine of corporate personhood creates an interesting legal contradiction. The corporation is owned by its shareholders and is therefore their property. If it is also a legal person, then it is a person owned by others and thus exists in a condition of slavery -- a status explicitly forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. So is a corporation a person illegally held in servitude by its shareholders? Or is it a person who enjoys the rights of personhood that take precedence over the presumed ownership rights of its shareholders? So far as I have been able to determine, this contradiction has not been directly addressed by the courts.
http://www.ratical.org/corporations/SCvSPR1886.html#118US394
Does anyone recall the people authorizing the supreme court to change the constitution? The government being a corporation, is it surpizing they have granted themselves imunity and executive priviledge? (and it scrapes that fine line of legal as a result of this ruling!!!!!)
So here we are, we "give corporations" a grant to make a new drug, then they charge us an atronomical amount for those drugs. that we paid for the R&D on in the first place! Then they pass it out like candy, get sued, and apply to the government for us to bail them out.
Giving employees a dime raise will bankrupt them but they can afford to pay ceo's millions and build new buildings over seas.
They can use their profits to bribe gov officials donate to candidates according to the corporate interests NOT ours and they have many times the cash to than we do.
Thats fair right?. I mean thats good for the country isnt it?
It seems the supeme court has given us a contradiction in law doesnt it.
< Message edited by Real0ne -- 11/8/2007 6:22:06 AM >
_____________________________
"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile
Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?
Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!
"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session
|
Legal Paradox - The Rise of The Corporation - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread