Carpooling with Corporations

what portions?

link?

This "corporations are people" red herring is just an excuse to restrict expression, namely when people (who may be associated with a corporation) produce speech you disagree with.

Also, media corporations are apparently exempt from this outrage.

 

I understand
My point is that corporations have far more rights and privileges
than mere people . . . .
These would be examples of I guess you could call 'quasi' equivalent powers

at the end of the day
Whether they are people or not . . they are buying politicians
left right and center

Rocket River

 

That's a naive way of characterizing corporate speech. The views expressed by the corporation are those of the power brokers of the corporation and made in the interests of the corporation, not all the constituent workers, customers, and/or shareholders of that corporation. The views and goals of a corporation can fly in the face of the self-interests of all 3 constituent parties, and yet still get expressed and lobbied for. Why allow the corporation to piggyback on the free speech rights of its constituents when it isn't aligned with their interests?

I think a corporation -- created for profiting from a commercial enterprise -- is a different species from an organization made specifically for advocacy. If you give money to the NRA to protect your gun rights, they are exercising speech with your express permission. A corporation doesn't have that. The constituents in a corporation have their own speech rights. They can use them as individuals. They can ban together in a voluntary (corporation-friendly if they want) advocacy group to use them in concert. Why do we need to empower an organization that's not built for speech and in which power relationships are distorted? It's not a fair playing field when some can co-opt the free speech of others through such commercial entities.

 

:grin:

This is what I call a dumb quote, qutoing for the sake of gettin past the editor's desk. Why even bother ask him.