A Mind of its Own
Sam Aurelius Milam III
In
recent articles, I've commented about the misbehavior of corporations and
suggested various responses to that misbehavior. However, it would
be better to correct the misbehavior than to merely respond to it.
To accomplish such change will require a careful understanding of corporations.
Understanding begins with definitions. Here's an excerpt Bouvier's
Law Dictionary, published in 1889.
"CORPORATION (Lat. corpus, a body).
A body, consisting of one or more natural persons, established by law,
usually for some specific purpose, and continued by a succession of members.
"It is this last characteristic of a corporation, sometimes called its
immortality, prolonging its existence beyond the term of natural life,
and thereby enabling a long-continued effort and concentration of means
to the end which it was designed to answer, that constitutes its principal
utility. A corporation is modelled upon a state or nation, and is
to this day called a body politic as well as corporate, thereby
indicating its origin and derivation ...." |
|
According
to Bouvier's Law Dictionary, a corporation may, within the limits of its
charter or act of incorporation, lawfully do all acts that a natural person
may do. This anthropomorphism of corporations is widely accepted.
Of course, a corporation isn't a person. There are many things that
a person can do that a corporation cannot do. A corporation cannot
get pregnant. It cannot be put in jail. It cannot bleed.
Most important, it cannot make decisions and then be responsible for the
consequences. Only people can do that. A corporation isn't
a person. It is property. Nevertheless, the view of corporations
as being alive in some sense has persisted over the years. Black's
Law Dictionary (1979) refers to corporations as artificial persons or legal
entities having personality and existence distinct from that of the members
(people). Someone with a vivid imagination might conclude that corporations
are man's first successful creation of artificial intelligence. Whether
or not this is actually true, the notion is intriguing. Corporations
do exhibit behavior that is analogous to that of living creatures, and
which suggests volition. Although they cannot become pregnant, they
do reproduce. They grow. They interact with or dominate others
of their kind. They respond to external stimuli, consume resources
and generate waste. The analogy can be stretched even further.
Suppose that the people within a corporation are the cells of its body.
The legal definition does call a corporation a body. Its departments
are then its organs. Its communications network functions as its
nervous system. Imagine that the employees have no volition, but
merely respond organically to nerve signals from other parts of the corporation.
They do seem to behave that way. The analogy is fictional, of course.
However, it is fascinating and it might be useful. If you view corporations
as living creatures, call them Overcreatures, then you might gain a different
perspective on the nature and control of corporations. Some perplexing
things about them could make more sense. I'll admit that the Overcreature
idea is a strange notion. However, if we are to remedy corporate
misbehavior, rather than just keep responding to it, then we must find
a different way to control the corporations. Perhaps a different
way of thinking about them is the first step. This Overcreature idea
might help. Ponder it for a while, and see if you find it useful
in understanding corporations.![10x5 Page Background GIF Image](../../Images/10x5_Page_Background.gif)
Part
of the credit for the Overcreature idea goes to Don J. Cormier, with whom
I discussed it at length, long ago at Mere Keep.
editor
The Origins of Species
Sam Aurelius Milam III
In
1889, Bouvier's
Law Dictionary listed eight different kinds of corporations.1
In 1979, Black's Law Dictionary listed 24 different kinds of corporations,2
and five different ways of classifying them.3
Does this constitute evolution in the Overcreature Kingdom, the creation
of new "species" of corporations?
|
^
|
Aggregate corporations, civil corporations,
ecclesiastical corporations, eleemosynary corporations, lay corporations,
private corporations, public corporations, and sole corporations. |
|
^
|
Business corporations, brother-sister
corporations, civil corporations, close corporations, closely held corporations,
corporations de facto, corporations de jure, collapsible corporations,
corporations sole, eleemosynary corporations, joint venture corporations,
migratory corporations, moneyed corporations, municipal corporations, public-service
corporations, non-stock corporations, not-for-profit corporations, professional
corporations, quasi corporations, quasi public corporations, Subchapter
S corporations, spiritual corporations, trading corporations, and tramp
corporations. |
|
^
|
Public or private, ecclesiastical
or lay, aggregate or sole, domestic or foreign, subsidiary or parent. |
Frontiersman@ida.net |
Frontiersman
479 E. 700 N., Firth, Idaho 83236 |
January 1998
Page 1
|
|