When “The Corporation” came out in 2003, my Grade 7 science teacher had us watch it and at the time I thought it was painfully boring, aside from the parts about advertising to children and corporations sending messages via marketing, because well, I was more of a child at that time. I remain interested in advertising and consumer rights, so viewing this movie for a second time through this lens, definitely made it more interesting. The idea of “Corporate Personhood” as the starting point, sets the stage for a certain way of thinking throughout the film. The suggestion that we anthropomorphize corporations— that we apply human tendencies to the ‘frankenstein’ corporate form that we created, is a strong point, repeated throughout the film. I would agree that we anthropomorphize corporations when we compare them to ‘family.’ I think that this sense of personhood can be taken too far in many cases, in the courts particularly were they have status as ‘legal persons.’ Are these ‘frankenstein’ corporate/legal entities eligible for the same rights as human persons? Well, we trust them to act rationally: they market themselves to us on such a way that we feel as though we are fulfilling a role in society— as “the good consumer” — giving us a false sense of belonging and a reason to trust them– viewing them as “family.”
But, it’s obvious that the corporation is not a conscious being, and it cannot act rationally in the same way that human beings do— they ‘check all the boxes’ of a psychotic personality, when assessed as a living being. A corporate body is not so much “family” and more like a toxic person that you are stuck in a relationship with (i.e “No more Soda beverages for me, I despise Coca-cola! *buys Dasani water*).
Since the corporate form only exists as a creature of statute, the role of lawyers is essential for determining how this ‘psychotic’ person will act, and their limitations. They play an important role in shaping these persons, through their work in acquisitions, closing deals, etc. Because they are the ones drafting the legal documents, they set the boundaries of the corporate entities that they represent. At the end of the day however, we are employed by the client and must perform our legal duties in accordance with their desires. In thinking about the role of lawyers in this way, I envision a struggle between the two “memes” that I particularly felt a connection to— the “High Flyer” versus the “End of the World” meme— do I really want to participate in jeopardizing the future of humanity for the sake of a private jet and Hermes Birkin? o __O
… and while we are thinking about the future of Corporations….
(from Reddit)
Course Facebook Page
I really like your example from Reddit. Thanks for sharing! As the corporate world is developing at such a rapid pace, the reality of this thought experiment may not be that far off in the future.
I like the Reddit meme too! Very interesting. But, even in that example, the car that leases itself, does its own insurance and pays for its own gas, still relies on consumers. It is still dependent on natural persons, just like a corporation, because it requires people requesting rides. It is odd because a car that pays for its own lease, insurance and gas would just be occupying physical space, just the same as if it weren’t a mash of corporations together. The only difference is in our minds in the social construct and artifice that we have created.