This essay was like a refreshing glass of water in a town that hasn’t had their ground water stolen by Poland Spring or poisoned by BP. Fantastic work.
For some reason Marx's remark about history repeating itself first as tragedy then as farce came to mind while reading this. Except in reverse, because if the way people have responded to the artificial entity of corporate personhood is an indication of how they will respond to the coming power of the future AI entity, it should be something!
I’m gonna need ya to do more stuff on the Royal Family. We’re seeing good schadenfreude and guillotine sales on the Royal Family stuff. Pretty sure it's on topic even.
Wow! I'm only half way through and I'm LMAO (and I haven't even started drinking yet)! I went back to the email to make sure I was "Subscribed" and YES, I AM!
Care to run for political office? You have my vote!
Should have mentioned the 1886 Supreme Court ruling in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company that first granted legal corporate personhood and thereby started the entire catastrophe.
I was also thinking of another way that 'corporations as 'persons'' falls apart...If a corporation IS a "person", then it is a person in a permanent comatose vegetative state that requires an ACTUAL person to act as 'power of attorney'...
I totally see the gaslighting mind-fuck that they attempting with this ridiculous ruling, but it so CLEARLY acts as a shield for ACTUALY people against the decisions those ACTUALY people want...
I SUPPOSE there is an argument to be made (although not in good faith) that the collective 'will' of voting stockholders 'creates' an entity that counts as a person?
Don't kick the robot dogs! HACK the robot dogs and train them to chase billionaires.
This essay was like a refreshing glass of water in a town that hasn’t had their ground water stolen by Poland Spring or poisoned by BP. Fantastic work.
For some reason Marx's remark about history repeating itself first as tragedy then as farce came to mind while reading this. Except in reverse, because if the way people have responded to the artificial entity of corporate personhood is an indication of how they will respond to the coming power of the future AI entity, it should be something!
This was so what I needed to read this morning, I subscribed at the highest level
Thank you Michele, you are a hero of journalism.
Happy to help. Plus, you balance out The Bulwark pretty well. And are totes hilarious
This article is the reason I subscribed to your feed. Such a refreshing outlook on a legal construct
I’m gonna need ya to do more stuff on the Royal Family. We’re seeing good schadenfreude and guillotine sales on the Royal Family stuff. Pretty sure it's on topic even.
Wow! I'm only half way through and I'm LMAO (and I haven't even started drinking yet)! I went back to the email to make sure I was "Subscribed" and YES, I AM!
Care to run for political office? You have my vote!
excellent!
My spouse tells me it did not sound natural
Keep trying.
As in....?
Should have mentioned the 1886 Supreme Court ruling in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company that first granted legal corporate personhood and thereby started the entire catastrophe.
1886? Wow. Ouch that is depressing
Amen!
I was also thinking of another way that 'corporations as 'persons'' falls apart...If a corporation IS a "person", then it is a person in a permanent comatose vegetative state that requires an ACTUAL person to act as 'power of attorney'...
I totally see the gaslighting mind-fuck that they attempting with this ridiculous ruling, but it so CLEARLY acts as a shield for ACTUALY people against the decisions those ACTUALY people want...
I SUPPOSE there is an argument to be made (although not in good faith) that the collective 'will' of voting stockholders 'creates' an entity that counts as a person?
Its ALL such bullshit
ACTUAL...not 'ACTUALY'
(: