"It was the doctrine of the corporation as a trust.
A corporation, as the founders understood it and as American law understood it for the first century of the republic, was not a private entity that the state was somehow obliged to leave alone. A corporation was a privilege granted by a state legislature, for a specific public purpose, for a limited duration, under specific conditions, revocable if the conditions were violated. The legal name for this was the charter, and the charter was understood as a trust. The corporation existed because the public had granted it permission to exist. The permission carried obligations. The obligations were enforceable. The charter could be revoked."
This is it, Mike. When We The People decide that corporations are not inevitable, but rather, permitted, we might have a chance.
Mike - this is one of your most succinct and important essays to-date. In your retirement one day, after the majority has fought and reclaimed the politic in this country, you might consider a teaching doctorate. Thank you for your work ethic, commitment to the constitution and for possessing the skill to synthesize complex issues into everyday speak. You are a leader in this generations fight to regain public control. Keep up the effort. It is so needed…..and appreciated by many.
For all that, it's also true that everything from their mouths is a confession, a projection. They are looting productivity gains from the communities that support production and workers who put in the time. They know damned well that they are riding a wave of privilege that they dare not fall off, and construct their own life-saving jetskis in words. Take it back, America. Democratize the economy; it's our money, our time, our sweat, our livelihoods.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
As as right-libertarian (who loves Rand) I still think it should be common knowledge that a corporation is a creation of state law for limited purpose. I'll believe a corporation is a person when Texas executes one.
As for Atlas Shrugged, I actually read it before reading Rand's non-fiction essays, in which she says things to the effect of "if you want a more detailed example of this case, read Atlas Shrugged" or "I cannot put this any better than I did in Atlas Shrugged." So I read it to see what she was talking about. And I realized I didn't need to read it in the first place. I was LIVING IN IT.
The thing is, the anti-reason, anti-conceptual mentality that Rand identified as the real problem with the world (above the 'producer v. looter' conflict) is most thoroughly embodied in the people who see Rand as a model.
"In 1962 I was a Conservative. I believed privilege could only be justified by service, high taxes on very high incomes were necessary to prevent an entrepreneurial economy becoming a rentier economy, and Keynesian growth would finance public service improvements and a welfare state that steadily reduced inequality. I was suspicious of ideologically driven, large-scale change. These were the mainstream policies of the Macmillan government at the time. In 60 years I have moved from centre right to hard left without changing my opinions."
"In our civilized societies we are rich. Why then are the many poor? Why this painful drudgery for the masses? Why, even to the best paid workman, this uncertainty for the morrow, in the midst of all the wealth inherited from the past, and in spite of the powerful means of production, which could ensure comfort to all, in return for a few hours of daily toil?
"The Socialists have said it and repeated it unwearyingly. Daily they reiterate it, demonstrating it by arguments taken from all the sciences. It is because all that is necessary for production—the land, the mines, the highways, machinery, food, shelter, education, knowledge—all have been seized by the few in the course of that long story of robbery, enforced migration and wars, of ignorance and oppression, which has been the life of the human race before it had learned to subdue the forces of Nature. It is because, taking advantage of alleged rights acquired in the past, these few appropriate to-day two-thirds of the products of human labour, and then squander them in the most stupid and shameful way. It is because, having reduced the masses to a point at which they have not the means of subsistence for a month, or even for a week in advance, the few can allow the many to work, only on the condition of themselves receiving the lion's share. It is because these few prevent the remainder of men from producing the things they need, and force them to produce, not the necessaries of life for all, but whatever offers the greatest profits to the monopolists. In this is the substance of all Socialism." (Peter Kropotkin, "The Conquest of Bread")
Also, as I've seen noted, one of Yarvin's favourite moves is to claim that FDR and Stalin are essentially indistinguishable in all relevant particulars.
Great piece. If you haven’t done so already, you should listen to the most recent interview that Tim Miller of the Bulwark does with Jason Calacanis. Miller asks him why Silicon Valley is still supportive of Trump when in order to stay on his good side, they have to grovel - like bringing gold bars into the oval office, or attending the Melania documentary opening night. Wouldn’t a capitalist benefit from rule of law rather than the whims of a president - and not just Trump, any president?
Calacanis’ answer astonished me, and it wasn’t until I read this piece that I could explain it. He said that the business people he knows (i.e. Silicon Valley) like that they can bring gifts to Trump and get an audience with him in return for something they want.
That’s because they’re not capitalists. They are economic royalists. Like the nobility of the medieval times, they would much prefer to offer ceremony and tidings of their respect for the ruler in order to get favorable treatment - the rule of law doesn’t apply to them.
I always thought Atlas Shrugged was an astonishingly stupid book. Who built the houses the god kings chose to live in during their self imposed exile? Who grew their food and prepared it? Who did their laundry and raised their children? I actually would want filming rights for this community. The argument among these titans about who backed up the toilet and should have to snake it would be must see TV.
Brilliant!! But how do we cut through the Gordian knot that has surrounded us? How can the truth reach the public when even now the media is progressively being bought up by the royalists.
This is a well argued and researched presentation of the origins of current corporate capture of our economies, social relationships, and our political apparatus. The difficulty of course will be in the dismantling of the systemic “ viral infection “of these systems and the mindset of multiple generations and their conditioning through ( mis)education and habit.
"It was the doctrine of the corporation as a trust.
A corporation, as the founders understood it and as American law understood it for the first century of the republic, was not a private entity that the state was somehow obliged to leave alone. A corporation was a privilege granted by a state legislature, for a specific public purpose, for a limited duration, under specific conditions, revocable if the conditions were violated. The legal name for this was the charter, and the charter was understood as a trust. The corporation existed because the public had granted it permission to exist. The permission carried obligations. The obligations were enforceable. The charter could be revoked."
This is it, Mike. When We The People decide that corporations are not inevitable, but rather, permitted, we might have a chance.
Mike - this is one of your most succinct and important essays to-date. In your retirement one day, after the majority has fought and reclaimed the politic in this country, you might consider a teaching doctorate. Thank you for your work ethic, commitment to the constitution and for possessing the skill to synthesize complex issues into everyday speak. You are a leader in this generations fight to regain public control. Keep up the effort. It is so needed…..and appreciated by many.
Sincerely.
This is brilliant. I will be sharing it widely.
For all that, it's also true that everything from their mouths is a confession, a projection. They are looting productivity gains from the communities that support production and workers who put in the time. They know damned well that they are riding a wave of privilege that they dare not fall off, and construct their own life-saving jetskis in words. Take it back, America. Democratize the economy; it's our money, our time, our sweat, our livelihoods.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
Also, what you write arguably feels Burkean, and, thus, may represent authentic American conservatism.
As as right-libertarian (who loves Rand) I still think it should be common knowledge that a corporation is a creation of state law for limited purpose. I'll believe a corporation is a person when Texas executes one.
As for Atlas Shrugged, I actually read it before reading Rand's non-fiction essays, in which she says things to the effect of "if you want a more detailed example of this case, read Atlas Shrugged" or "I cannot put this any better than I did in Atlas Shrugged." So I read it to see what she was talking about. And I realized I didn't need to read it in the first place. I was LIVING IN IT.
The thing is, the anti-reason, anti-conceptual mentality that Rand identified as the real problem with the world (above the 'producer v. looter' conflict) is most thoroughly embodied in the people who see Rand as a model.
Economic royalists a great way to put it with these people 😎
I honestly wish Musk could actually build a rocket to Mars and these losers would just leave all of us alone. Atlas shrugged is the dream.
https://existentialcomics.com/comic/655
"In 1962 I was a Conservative. I believed privilege could only be justified by service, high taxes on very high incomes were necessary to prevent an entrepreneurial economy becoming a rentier economy, and Keynesian growth would finance public service improvements and a welfare state that steadily reduced inequality. I was suspicious of ideologically driven, large-scale change. These were the mainstream policies of the Macmillan government at the time. In 60 years I have moved from centre right to hard left without changing my opinions."
"In our civilized societies we are rich. Why then are the many poor? Why this painful drudgery for the masses? Why, even to the best paid workman, this uncertainty for the morrow, in the midst of all the wealth inherited from the past, and in spite of the powerful means of production, which could ensure comfort to all, in return for a few hours of daily toil?
"The Socialists have said it and repeated it unwearyingly. Daily they reiterate it, demonstrating it by arguments taken from all the sciences. It is because all that is necessary for production—the land, the mines, the highways, machinery, food, shelter, education, knowledge—all have been seized by the few in the course of that long story of robbery, enforced migration and wars, of ignorance and oppression, which has been the life of the human race before it had learned to subdue the forces of Nature. It is because, taking advantage of alleged rights acquired in the past, these few appropriate to-day two-thirds of the products of human labour, and then squander them in the most stupid and shameful way. It is because, having reduced the masses to a point at which they have not the means of subsistence for a month, or even for a week in advance, the few can allow the many to work, only on the condition of themselves receiving the lion's share. It is because these few prevent the remainder of men from producing the things they need, and force them to produce, not the necessaries of life for all, but whatever offers the greatest profits to the monopolists. In this is the substance of all Socialism." (Peter Kropotkin, "The Conquest of Bread")
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Government
Also, as I've seen noted, one of Yarvin's favourite moves is to claim that FDR and Stalin are essentially indistinguishable in all relevant particulars.
Bravissimo
Great piece. If you haven’t done so already, you should listen to the most recent interview that Tim Miller of the Bulwark does with Jason Calacanis. Miller asks him why Silicon Valley is still supportive of Trump when in order to stay on his good side, they have to grovel - like bringing gold bars into the oval office, or attending the Melania documentary opening night. Wouldn’t a capitalist benefit from rule of law rather than the whims of a president - and not just Trump, any president?
Calacanis’ answer astonished me, and it wasn’t until I read this piece that I could explain it. He said that the business people he knows (i.e. Silicon Valley) like that they can bring gifts to Trump and get an audience with him in return for something they want.
That’s because they’re not capitalists. They are economic royalists. Like the nobility of the medieval times, they would much prefer to offer ceremony and tidings of their respect for the ruler in order to get favorable treatment - the rule of law doesn’t apply to them.
This isn’t capitalism.
I always thought Atlas Shrugged was an astonishingly stupid book. Who built the houses the god kings chose to live in during their self imposed exile? Who grew their food and prepared it? Who did their laundry and raised their children? I actually would want filming rights for this community. The argument among these titans about who backed up the toilet and should have to snake it would be must see TV.
“It should be illegal to be as wealthy as you” Sam Seder
https://youtu.be/gKDrmWidXsY?si=xNYG_XegEu6iNmuR
Brilliant!! But how do we cut through the Gordian knot that has surrounded us? How can the truth reach the public when even now the media is progressively being bought up by the royalists.
This is a well argued and researched presentation of the origins of current corporate capture of our economies, social relationships, and our political apparatus. The difficulty of course will be in the dismantling of the systemic “ viral infection “of these systems and the mindset of multiple generations and their conditioning through ( mis)education and habit.