Specters, Inc.: The Elusive Basis of the Corporation

Abstract

In this article we discuss the political and economic consequences of the contemporary legal theory of incorporation. We argue that incorporation has developed historically in a way that makes it internally inconsistent, but that this inconsistency is useful for the powerful because of its legal and economic effects. The corporation can “shape shift,” which is very helpful for claiming some rights and disavowing certain responsibilities. Of course this flexibility comes at the expense of consistent concepts and this leads to the creation of what we term an “ideal‐type reified singular representation.” We go on to show the far‐reaching effects of this representation for legal studies, economics, and political theory, and show it worked in the pro‐corporate decision in the recent Citizens United case. We conclude by providing several alternative ways to think about the nature of corporate organization.

Moral Agency in Charities and Business Corporations: Exploring the Constraints of Law and Regulation

“…It can therefore be argued that despite shareholders' position at the centre of corporate governance having received sustained criticism in recent years (e.g. from Ireland 2010;Sacconi 2011;Deakin 2012;Stout 2012b;Veldman and Parker 2012), while the law concentrates authority in their hands, there is reason to ask to what end they should use it. This is especially the case in the context of 'shareholder activism' and calls for greater 'say on pay' (Marriage 2017;Marlow 2017).…”

Modern Management: Origins and Development

“…Legal scholars have been debating these matters for centuries; even the Roman law on which modern corporate law is based was ambiguous. Today legal scholars see two possibilities; that the firm is (1) an 'unnatural person' with some of the rights citizens have to own property, to sue and be sued, and to contract or (2) it is a managed aggregation of people and assets (Veldman and Parker, 2012). The first frames managing as dealing with markets, the second as dealing with internal matters.…”

They Reap but Do Not Sow: How Multinational Corporations Are Putting an End to Virtuous Capitalism

“…In addition, any pressure from society on government would have to be of such a significant magnitude that it would overcome the powerful resistance by industry trade groups and individual MNCs to any suggested changes in corporate governance standards or tax laws. History shows that the power of the corporation, especially in United States, tends to outweigh those of society when it comes to government action that regulates the behavior of MNCs (Veldman and Parker ). Indeed, because of intense lobbying of government officials and heightened involvement in political campaigns by large corporations and their industry trade groups, the well‐being of society is most often subjugated to the interests of big business.…”