3 ms·
But we already embraced this way of thinking since introduction of „corporate personhood”.
by ozim 3mo ago
But we already embraced this way of thinking since introduction of „corporate personhood”.
- ghaff 3mo agoOne can disagree about aspects of corporate financing of elections etc. while also accepting that everything doesn't get thrown up in the air if a corporate officer leaves for another company. Corporations are established entities that effectively act as a person for certain purposes--though one is welcome to disagree about the extent of those purposes. I expect most people here wouldn't, for example, be opposed to corporations donating to open source projects or other charitable causes.
- idiotsecant 3mo agoThis is a strawman. Why do you have to be a person to donate to charities?
- ghaff 3mo agoCorporations donate to 501(c)3s as entities and even have matching gifts. In fact, a lot of charities have corporations/foundations as some of their largest contributors.
- ozim 3mo agoThere is a world of difference between supporting open source software or any pro bono foundation and supporting election candidacy. I think a 2yo will get the distinction and you are asking for clarification? Besides that go read up on 80’s literature on corporations. Like Gibson or Stephenson.