> Behalf Of J. van Baardwijk
> At 17:52 26-1-01 -0500, Gautum Mukunda wrote:
>
> >Being an artificial
> >person gives a corporation a group of rights, all of which are
vital
> >to its functioning in an economy. The most important of these is
the
> >right to be sued.
>
> So, for corporations being sued is a *given right*? I'd think
corporations
> would consider being sued a problem, not a right.
Yes, they do. You'd think wrong. If you can't sue a corporation, how
can you hold it accountable to its contracts? And if it can't be held
accountable to a contract, why would you sign one with a corporation?
The right to be sued is the foundation of participation in society.
If you cannot be sued then you cannot participate in society because
you cannot be trusted. Being actually sued is a bad thing, because it
means that someone thinks you have broken a contract. But if you
_can't_ be sued, then no one will ever do business with you. That's
why even the government can be sued in its own courts - a government
that holds itself immune from being sued could not do business with
anyone at anything other than gunpoint.
> How? Certainly not because Bush and his buddies suddenly became
> environmentalists. It happened because environmentalist
> organizations
> became so powerful that the government had no choice but to
> listen to them.
> Politicians aren't all that stupid -- all those people that support
> environmentalist organizations are also the people who will
> vote in the
> next election. And if you don't give a damn about the environment,
those
> people will definitely not vote for *you*...
Why do you care how? What the hell does it matter why they did it? I
don't give a _damn_ what any particular Administration has in its
heart or truly believes. I care what they do. You're exactly right -
environmental organizations became so powerful that they were able to
overwhelm (some) corporate interests that were opposed to
environmental laws. Of course, other corporations are some of the
strongest proponents of environmental laws. This is exactly my point.
The system works very well. The environmental movement gained
popularity, got voter support, and got laws passed. We live in a
democracy and the government is supposed to do what the people want it
to, however much that bothers extremist movements who think that they
should be running the country. So what grounds are there, exactly, to
claim that corporate money dominates the political system? If it did,
_none of these things would have happened_. And if it doesn't, why,
exactly, are people complaining about corporate power and the
corruption of the electoral system?
> Jeroen
********************Gautam "Ulysses" Mukunda**********************
* Harvard College Class of '01 *He either fears his fate too much*
* www.fas.harvard.edu/~mukunda * Or his deserts are small, *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Who dares not put it to the touch*
* "Freedom is not Free" * To win or lose it all. *
******************************************************************
