February 2010
NFU newsletter February 2010 -
Friday, March 19, 2010
Take your place... At the Table
URGENT ACTION NEEDED ON POVERTY & CLIMATE CHANGE AT G8/G20 SUMMITS
Toronto, ONTARIO – A new global campaign, “AT THE TABLE”, wants the voices of the world’s poorest people to be heard when G8 and G20 leaders sit down to make decisions affecting the lives of everyone on this planet.
“AT THE TABLE” launched on March 8, International Women’s Day, in the building where G20 leaders will gather June 26-27. The campaign, backed by a coalition of major Canadian NGOs, labour, student and faith-based groups, calls for bold action to ensure that poverty eradication, climate change and economic reform are high on the agendas of both the G8 and G20 agendas.
Stephen Lewis, a noted international development and HIV and AIDS advocate, called on Summit leaders to live up to their UN Millennium Goals and the promise to halve poverty by 2015. “This is an historic moment for Canada. We are in a position to lead the world in resolving one of the great moral issues of our time.”
Two members of Oxfam’s “W8”, eight high-powered women from the Global South, spoke at the Metro Convention Centre launch. Dorothy Ngoma is President of Malawi’s nurses union and Sandhya Venkateswaran represents the “Don’t Break Your Promises” coalition in India. Women are 70% of the world’s poorest people and W8 leaders are asking global leaders to invest in women and children, as it is a proven way of lifting communities out of poverty.
“The decision to cap Canada’s foreign aid budget is a disastrous setback for those most affected by the economic crisis and climate change.” said Dennis Howlett of MAKE POVERTY HISTORY. “It’s even more urgent now that our voices be heard at the Summit tables.
“We've said we'll give money to the poorest countries to adapt, and we've said we'll phase out subsidies to big oil,” said Tzeporah Berman Executive Director of climate action NGO PowerUP Canada. “Instead we are one of the top ten polluters in the world and are falling behind in the race to create clean energy. As host to the world, Canada has an unavoidable responsibility to stop dodging our commitments and lead.”
Prime Minister Harper and the G8 Summit leaders were present at the launch in the unique form of “Flat Leaders” — downloadable portable images that can be taken to events and “talked to”. AT THE TABLE invites Canadians to join the conversation with the G8/G20 leaders by holding public dinners, roundtables, and online events and posting pictures of their “Flat Leader” at the events. Global partners throughout Africa and all 20 Summit countries will hold similar activities. The campaign will culminate in a Global AT THE TABLE Day of Action in June
Visit the At the Table website here.
“AT THE TABLE” launched on March 8, International Women’s Day, in the building where G20 leaders will gather June 26-27. The campaign, backed by a coalition of major Canadian NGOs, labour, student and faith-based groups, calls for bold action to ensure that poverty eradication, climate change and economic reform are high on the agendas of both the G8 and G20 agendas.
Stephen Lewis, a noted international development and HIV and AIDS advocate, called on Summit leaders to live up to their UN Millennium Goals and the promise to halve poverty by 2015. “This is an historic moment for Canada. We are in a position to lead the world in resolving one of the great moral issues of our time.”
Two members of Oxfam’s “W8”, eight high-powered women from the Global South, spoke at the Metro Convention Centre launch. Dorothy Ngoma is President of Malawi’s nurses union and Sandhya Venkateswaran represents the “Don’t Break Your Promises” coalition in India. Women are 70% of the world’s poorest people and W8 leaders are asking global leaders to invest in women and children, as it is a proven way of lifting communities out of poverty.
“The decision to cap Canada’s foreign aid budget is a disastrous setback for those most affected by the economic crisis and climate change.” said Dennis Howlett of MAKE POVERTY HISTORY. “It’s even more urgent now that our voices be heard at the Summit tables.
“We've said we'll give money to the poorest countries to adapt, and we've said we'll phase out subsidies to big oil,” said Tzeporah Berman Executive Director of climate action NGO PowerUP Canada. “Instead we are one of the top ten polluters in the world and are falling behind in the race to create clean energy. As host to the world, Canada has an unavoidable responsibility to stop dodging our commitments and lead.”
Prime Minister Harper and the G8 Summit leaders were present at the launch in the unique form of “Flat Leaders” — downloadable portable images that can be taken to events and “talked to”. AT THE TABLE invites Canadians to join the conversation with the G8/G20 leaders by holding public dinners, roundtables, and online events and posting pictures of their “Flat Leader” at the events. Global partners throughout Africa and all 20 Summit countries will hold similar activities. The campaign will culminate in a Global AT THE TABLE Day of Action in June
Visit the At the Table website here.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Change the System, Not the Climate
Working TV: New on the Web
Voices from Bolivia and Venezuela on the fight for climate justice after Copenhagen featuring Pablo Solon, Bolivia's representative at the United Nations, lead spokesperson on climate change at the Copenhagen Summit, and Federico Fuentes, a participant in the revolutionary process in Venezuela and writer, on Sunday, March 7, 2010 at the Unitarian Church of Vancouver in British Columbia, Canada.
Watch the videos here.
Watch the videos here.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Report raises troubling questions, suggests reasonable solutions
Matthew Bramley
The Pembina Institute
But that's just part of the story.
The Pembina Institute
A new report from Climate Action Network Canada reaches some troubling conclusions about the federal government's approach to climate science research in Canada.
On Monday, Canwest reporter Mike de Souza and La Presse journalist François Cardinal reported that leaked Environment Canada documents obtained in CAN's research show the federal department's new media relations policy, adoped in 2007, reduced the news media's coverage of Environment Canada climate scientists by 80%, leaving some of Canada's top climate experts "extremely frustrated" and feeling "muzzled".
Read the rest of this article here.
Canada’s Climate Policy Sinks to New Lows
Green Party of Canada
It is not enough that the current Canadian government is moving backward on the issue of climate change, as evidenced by the total lack of funding for climate initiatives in the recent budget, but now government officials are pressuring other countries to do the same. South Africa is the latest victim of Canadian pressure tactics. Committed to a carbon neutral development path, South Africa is understandably attempting to resist a Canadian plan to build a mega coal-fired power plant.
Canadian coal mining company CIC Energy Corp claims to have already sunk a $100 million into the 1,200 MW plant, called the Mmambula power station, planned for the border area of South Africa and Botswana. International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan is lobbying on the company’s behalf, traveling to South Africa this week. Van Loan calls this boondoggle ‘a solution waiting to happen’ for South Africa's energy shortages.
“The international community must wonder what happened to Canada as a once-respected climate leader,” said Elizabeth May, Green Party Leader. “While the rest of the industrialized nations are investing in renewables and clean technologies, Canada is still peddling coal.”
“We will not avoid drastic changes in our climate unless we phase out energy sources like coal plants. There are so many opportunities in clean energy that we are missing out on. Canada is apparently stuck in the dinosaur age – and we know what happened to them.”
Canadian coal mining company CIC Energy Corp claims to have already sunk a $100 million into the 1,200 MW plant, called the Mmambula power station, planned for the border area of South Africa and Botswana. International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan is lobbying on the company’s behalf, traveling to South Africa this week. Van Loan calls this boondoggle ‘a solution waiting to happen’ for South Africa's energy shortages.
“The international community must wonder what happened to Canada as a once-respected climate leader,” said Elizabeth May, Green Party Leader. “While the rest of the industrialized nations are investing in renewables and clean technologies, Canada is still peddling coal.”
“We will not avoid drastic changes in our climate unless we phase out energy sources like coal plants. There are so many opportunities in clean energy that we are missing out on. Canada is apparently stuck in the dinosaur age – and we know what happened to them.”
Climate Catastrophe: Surviving the 21st Century
CommonDreams.org
"The catastrophic impacts of climate change are not only going to take place in the distant future. They are taking place now."--Vandana Shiva, Soil not Oil: Environmental Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis
Climate Stabilization Requires a Cultural and Political Revolution
The climate, energy, and political catastrophe we are facing is mind-boggling and frightening. Yet there is still time to save ourselves, to move beyond psychological denial, despair, or false optimism. There is still hope if we are willing to confront the hydra-headed monsters that block our path, and move ahead with a decisive plan of action. The inspirational message we need to deliver is that we're not just talking about drastically reducing fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution, but rebuilding society, creating in effect a New Woman and a New Man for the 21st Century.
What we are witnessing are the early stages of a mass grassroots consciousness-raising and taking back of power from out-of-control corporations, banks, corporate-controlled media, and politicians. This cultural and political revolution will empower us to to carry out a deep and profound retrofitting of industry, government, education, health care, housing, neighborhoods, transportation, food and farming systems, as well as our diets and lifestyles.
Read the full article at CommonDreams.org.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Money spent on tar sands projects could decarbonise western economies
The Guardian
The £250bn cost of developing Canada's controversial tar sands between now and 2025 could be used to decarbonise the western economy by funding ambitious solar power schemes in the Sahara or a European wide shift to electric vehicles, according to a new report released today.
The same amount of investment would also help the world to hit half of the Millenium Development Goals in the 50 least-developed countries, says the research from The Co-operative and conservation group, WWF, which is released to coincide with a new film, Dirty Oil, being premiered in 25 cinemas around the UK today. It is a hard-hitting documentary narrated by Canadian actor, Neve Campbell.
The moves are all part of a concerted effort to put shareholder and public pressure on BP and Shell which are at the forefront of extracting oil from the carbon-intensive tar sands of Alberta.
The Co-op claims its task has gained urgency by BP unveiling plans last week to speed up new tar sands projects through a tie-up with Devon Energy.
"The sums of money being invested in tar sands developments are enormous and difficult for the average person to grasp," says Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-op.
"This report (The Opportunity of the Tar Sands) puts things into perspective and demonstrates not only the scale of the problem, which could take us to the brink of runaway climate change, but also the opportunity being lost. It is literally a matter of life and death that these enormous oil titans are re-steered to much more sustainable paths," he adds.
The production of tar sands is estimated by critics to emit three times more greenhouse gases than conventional oil production. It is estimated that tar sands production will increase from its 1.3m barrels a day to at least 4m barrels by 2025.
A resolution has been put down by the Co-op and other shareholders to be taken at the BP annual general meeting next month alongside a similar one for Shell asking for a review of the economics and environmental impact of tar sands.
The Co-op and WWF say the combined cost of all tar sands – £250bn – could be used for clean power projects such as the Desertec scheme linking solar plants in North Africa to a "supergrid" which could produce 15% of Europe's electricity by 2050.
See also Actress Neve Campbell toured the Fort McMurray oilsands this week and met with leaders of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Mikisew Cree First Nation.
The same amount of investment would also help the world to hit half of the Millenium Development Goals in the 50 least-developed countries, says the research from The Co-operative and conservation group, WWF, which is released to coincide with a new film, Dirty Oil, being premiered in 25 cinemas around the UK today. It is a hard-hitting documentary narrated by Canadian actor, Neve Campbell.
The moves are all part of a concerted effort to put shareholder and public pressure on BP and Shell which are at the forefront of extracting oil from the carbon-intensive tar sands of Alberta.
The Co-op claims its task has gained urgency by BP unveiling plans last week to speed up new tar sands projects through a tie-up with Devon Energy.
"The sums of money being invested in tar sands developments are enormous and difficult for the average person to grasp," says Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-op.
"This report (The Opportunity of the Tar Sands) puts things into perspective and demonstrates not only the scale of the problem, which could take us to the brink of runaway climate change, but also the opportunity being lost. It is literally a matter of life and death that these enormous oil titans are re-steered to much more sustainable paths," he adds.
The production of tar sands is estimated by critics to emit three times more greenhouse gases than conventional oil production. It is estimated that tar sands production will increase from its 1.3m barrels a day to at least 4m barrels by 2025.
A resolution has been put down by the Co-op and other shareholders to be taken at the BP annual general meeting next month alongside a similar one for Shell asking for a review of the economics and environmental impact of tar sands.
The Co-op and WWF say the combined cost of all tar sands – £250bn – could be used for clean power projects such as the Desertec scheme linking solar plants in North Africa to a "supergrid" which could produce 15% of Europe's electricity by 2050.
See also Actress Neve Campbell toured the Fort McMurray oilsands this week and met with leaders of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Mikisew Cree First Nation.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
In and Out of Crisis
The Global Financial Meltdown and Left Alternatives
Greg Albo, Sam Gindin and Leo Panitch
With the recent publication of their new book on the financial crisis and the crisis of the North American Left, In and Out Of Crisis (PM Press, 2010), ZNet took the opportunity to interview Greg Albo, Sam Gindin and Leo Panitch on some of the themes of the book and the struggles that now confront the Left. The authors all teach political economy at York University, and edit the Socialist Register. The Bullet reproduces that interview here.
Can you tell ZNet, please, what In and Out of Crisis: The Global Financial Meltdown and Left Alternatives is about and what is it trying to communicate?
This book departs from the common tendency on the left no less than on the right to judge economic and political developments through the prism of ‘states versus markets,’ with each crisis marking an oscillation between one pole or the other. There are many conceptual and political traps in such a binary opposition. On the one hand, it suggests that markets can be potentially self-sufficient and that somehow states, as the underwriters of a vast administrative and physical infrastructure necessary for markets to exist at all and as guarantors of private property, can be marginalized.
On the other, it is proposed that the state can compensate for market failures and act as a neutral policy mechanism to offset private interests by governing in the public interest. This misses the point that we are talking about capitalist markets and capitalist states, and the two are deeply inter-twined in the class and power structures of global capitalism. This book especially shows how far this is so in the case of the American state in relation to financial markets.
We hope to dispel some debilitating misconceptions on the left concerning the nature of capitalist crises as well as the relationship between the state, finance and production in the neoliberal era. The book traces the historical process through which, over a century punctuated by previous crises, the American state and finance developed in tandem, and came to play a new kind of imperial role at the center of global capitalism. And in light of the contradictions that were produced in this process, it also traces the development of the crisis that began in 2007 and explains the active role of the American state, both under Bush and Obama, in containing the crisis in ways that reproduced the structures of class inequality and power domestically and internationally.
In addition to this, we analyze the relationship between industry and finance, especially in terms of how it played itself out in the crisis in the auto sector. This means the full class dimensions of the crisis are brought to the fore, and leads to a sober examination of the impasse of the North American labour movement and how seriously this affects the North American left.
Can you tell ZNet something about writing the book?
The interpretation offered in this book is located within the analytical framework of radical political economy, and in particular its lineages in Marx and state theory. It is partly a product of collective efforts, not least the intensive discussions we have had with our graduate students in the political science department at York University. Many of the chapters are based on pieces each of us wrote during the course of the crisis that appeared on The Bullet of the Socialist Project. The three of us found it very stimulating to work together in laying out our overall argument for this book, and clarifying our conceptualization of the neoliberal period of capitalism, our reading of the crisis, and the vision and politics behind the strategic alternatives we want to pose for the North American left.
What are your hopes for the book? What do you hope it will contribute or achieve politically?
The book was conceived at a historic moment when the ruling elites – from the financiers through the Detroit auto executives to liberal politicians – had lost credibility. Yet labour and the left remained on the defensive. Being realistic today means daring to put forward something really new on the political agenda. Rather than perpetuating dependence on markets, competition, private corporations and the values and pressures they represent, the left needs to be organizing around an independent vision.
Our book argues that the alternatives needed are not ‘technical’ solutions to capitalist economic crises, but political ones that challenge property rights in the name of democratic and social rights. This involves a transformation in left culture, one which can't really begin, let alone succeed if it isn't part of the widest degree of discussion and debate about economic and political possibilities, involving mobilization within and across the gender, racial and ethnic diversities of working class communities, and developing strategies for identifying allies and building new popular, union and community capacities. We see the book as a contribution to this.
Even as they tried to stimulate the economy, states were impelled to lay off public sector workers or cut back their pay, and to demand that bailed-out companies do the same. And while blaming volatile derivatives market for causing the crisis, states promoted derivatives trading in carbon credits as a solution to the climate crisis. In the context of such readily visible irrationalities, a strong case can be made that – to really save jobs and the communities that depend on them in a way that converts production to ecologically sustainable priorities during the course of this crisis – we need to break with the logic of capitalist markets rather than use state institutions to reinforce them.
However deep the crisis, however confused and demoralized are capitalist elites both inside and outside the state, and however widespread the popular outrage against them, making the case for such a broader democratization will certainly require hard and committed work by a great many activists. They will need to put their minds not only to demanding immediate reforms but how to finally make a genuine democracy that transcends the capitalist economy and state. We want to clarify that this is on the agenda as a essential precondition for building out of this crisis the new movements and parties that are needed to make such a genuine democracy a real possibility.
The book is published by PM Press/Spectre. A preview is available on Google Books.
From The Bullet
Greg Albo, Sam Gindin and Leo Panitch
With the recent publication of their new book on the financial crisis and the crisis of the North American Left, In and Out Of Crisis (PM Press, 2010), ZNet took the opportunity to interview Greg Albo, Sam Gindin and Leo Panitch on some of the themes of the book and the struggles that now confront the Left. The authors all teach political economy at York University, and edit the Socialist Register. The Bullet reproduces that interview here.
Can you tell ZNet, please, what In and Out of Crisis: The Global Financial Meltdown and Left Alternatives is about and what is it trying to communicate?
This book departs from the common tendency on the left no less than on the right to judge economic and political developments through the prism of ‘states versus markets,’ with each crisis marking an oscillation between one pole or the other. There are many conceptual and political traps in such a binary opposition. On the one hand, it suggests that markets can be potentially self-sufficient and that somehow states, as the underwriters of a vast administrative and physical infrastructure necessary for markets to exist at all and as guarantors of private property, can be marginalized.
On the other, it is proposed that the state can compensate for market failures and act as a neutral policy mechanism to offset private interests by governing in the public interest. This misses the point that we are talking about capitalist markets and capitalist states, and the two are deeply inter-twined in the class and power structures of global capitalism. This book especially shows how far this is so in the case of the American state in relation to financial markets.
We hope to dispel some debilitating misconceptions on the left concerning the nature of capitalist crises as well as the relationship between the state, finance and production in the neoliberal era. The book traces the historical process through which, over a century punctuated by previous crises, the American state and finance developed in tandem, and came to play a new kind of imperial role at the center of global capitalism. And in light of the contradictions that were produced in this process, it also traces the development of the crisis that began in 2007 and explains the active role of the American state, both under Bush and Obama, in containing the crisis in ways that reproduced the structures of class inequality and power domestically and internationally.
In addition to this, we analyze the relationship between industry and finance, especially in terms of how it played itself out in the crisis in the auto sector. This means the full class dimensions of the crisis are brought to the fore, and leads to a sober examination of the impasse of the North American labour movement and how seriously this affects the North American left.
Can you tell ZNet something about writing the book?
The interpretation offered in this book is located within the analytical framework of radical political economy, and in particular its lineages in Marx and state theory. It is partly a product of collective efforts, not least the intensive discussions we have had with our graduate students in the political science department at York University. Many of the chapters are based on pieces each of us wrote during the course of the crisis that appeared on The Bullet of the Socialist Project. The three of us found it very stimulating to work together in laying out our overall argument for this book, and clarifying our conceptualization of the neoliberal period of capitalism, our reading of the crisis, and the vision and politics behind the strategic alternatives we want to pose for the North American left.
What are your hopes for the book? What do you hope it will contribute or achieve politically?
The book was conceived at a historic moment when the ruling elites – from the financiers through the Detroit auto executives to liberal politicians – had lost credibility. Yet labour and the left remained on the defensive. Being realistic today means daring to put forward something really new on the political agenda. Rather than perpetuating dependence on markets, competition, private corporations and the values and pressures they represent, the left needs to be organizing around an independent vision.
Our book argues that the alternatives needed are not ‘technical’ solutions to capitalist economic crises, but political ones that challenge property rights in the name of democratic and social rights. This involves a transformation in left culture, one which can't really begin, let alone succeed if it isn't part of the widest degree of discussion and debate about economic and political possibilities, involving mobilization within and across the gender, racial and ethnic diversities of working class communities, and developing strategies for identifying allies and building new popular, union and community capacities. We see the book as a contribution to this.
Even as they tried to stimulate the economy, states were impelled to lay off public sector workers or cut back their pay, and to demand that bailed-out companies do the same. And while blaming volatile derivatives market for causing the crisis, states promoted derivatives trading in carbon credits as a solution to the climate crisis. In the context of such readily visible irrationalities, a strong case can be made that – to really save jobs and the communities that depend on them in a way that converts production to ecologically sustainable priorities during the course of this crisis – we need to break with the logic of capitalist markets rather than use state institutions to reinforce them.
However deep the crisis, however confused and demoralized are capitalist elites both inside and outside the state, and however widespread the popular outrage against them, making the case for such a broader democratization will certainly require hard and committed work by a great many activists. They will need to put their minds not only to demanding immediate reforms but how to finally make a genuine democracy that transcends the capitalist economy and state. We want to clarify that this is on the agenda as a essential precondition for building out of this crisis the new movements and parties that are needed to make such a genuine democracy a real possibility.
The book is published by PM Press/Spectre. A preview is available on Google Books.
From The Bullet
Friday, March 12, 2010
Corporate Past - Corporate Future…?
By Joel Bakan
New Left Project
Joel Bakan is a Canadian lawyer and writer. The author of several books he is also one of the makers of the award winning documentary The Corporation. He spoke to NLP on the role of corporations in modern society.
How did the corporate form arise?
Various forms of the corporate form have been around for quite a while. Even Roman law had concepts of corporate identity that resemble modern corporate personhood. But the corporation as we know it today is really a product of the 19th century. Industrialization, and particularly the invention of the steam engine, made large-scale enterprise possible for the first time. The prevailing business form, the partnership, could not raise the kind of capital required by these enterprises because the number of investors was limited to the number of people who could practicably work together to run the enterprise.
The genius of the modern corporate form is that it separated ownership from management and thus made it possible for thousands, even millions, of individuals to be owners – to invest in various-sized chunks (shares) of the enterprise, and thus finance it. The task of running things would then be delegated by the shareholders to directors and professional managers. The corporate form could thus pool investment capital money from large numbers of investor/owners and finance large enterprises, such as railroads, steamship lines, and industrial works.
But this new class of anonymous and distant owners, having no real say or role in the conduct of a company’s day-to-day operation, demanded legal protection, whether to ensure their invested capital was used in ways that would benefit them, or to ensure they were not liable for debts and wrongs committed by companies they had no effective control over. Corporate law was reformulated, beginning in the mid-19th century, to provide those protections. The “best interests of the corporation” principle was added, requiring that all decisions made by managers and directors had to be geared to serving the best interests of the corporation and its shareholders; and so too was limited liability, which ensured shareholders would not be liable for company wrongs and debts.
A third principle, corporate personhood, was also necessary. If the people in the corporation – shareholders, managers, directors – were not legally liable or relevant, who was? Who would buy and sell businesses’ property, enter contracts of employment and supply, assume liability at law, and so on? Rights and duties do not exist in thin air. They must attach to a legal subject, a person. So, bingo!, the law invented one. By the strangest of legal alchemies it deemed the corporation itself – an abstract set of legal and institutional relations – to be a person (and so it has remained).
What in your view is wrong with the corporate form?
New Left Project
How did the corporate form arise?
Various forms of the corporate form have been around for quite a while. Even Roman law had concepts of corporate identity that resemble modern corporate personhood. But the corporation as we know it today is really a product of the 19th century. Industrialization, and particularly the invention of the steam engine, made large-scale enterprise possible for the first time. The prevailing business form, the partnership, could not raise the kind of capital required by these enterprises because the number of investors was limited to the number of people who could practicably work together to run the enterprise.
The genius of the modern corporate form is that it separated ownership from management and thus made it possible for thousands, even millions, of individuals to be owners – to invest in various-sized chunks (shares) of the enterprise, and thus finance it. The task of running things would then be delegated by the shareholders to directors and professional managers. The corporate form could thus pool investment capital money from large numbers of investor/owners and finance large enterprises, such as railroads, steamship lines, and industrial works.
But this new class of anonymous and distant owners, having no real say or role in the conduct of a company’s day-to-day operation, demanded legal protection, whether to ensure their invested capital was used in ways that would benefit them, or to ensure they were not liable for debts and wrongs committed by companies they had no effective control over. Corporate law was reformulated, beginning in the mid-19th century, to provide those protections. The “best interests of the corporation” principle was added, requiring that all decisions made by managers and directors had to be geared to serving the best interests of the corporation and its shareholders; and so too was limited liability, which ensured shareholders would not be liable for company wrongs and debts.
A third principle, corporate personhood, was also necessary. If the people in the corporation – shareholders, managers, directors – were not legally liable or relevant, who was? Who would buy and sell businesses’ property, enter contracts of employment and supply, assume liability at law, and so on? Rights and duties do not exist in thin air. They must attach to a legal subject, a person. So, bingo!, the law invented one. By the strangest of legal alchemies it deemed the corporation itself – an abstract set of legal and institutional relations – to be a person (and so it has remained).
What in your view is wrong with the corporate form?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)