| << Rhythmic adventures | 2004 > June | The CD that wouldn't mount >> |
Tuesday, 22 June 2004
The Corporation ::
I saw The Corporation Sunday night. It’s a scathing and depressing indictment, yet there is a thread of compassion. It’s not us vs. them—well, at one level it is—but part of the message is that we are all responsible for having created these “embodiments” (a strange word to see repeatedly in a patent yesterday, especially after seeing the film the night before!). And therefore we are all responsible for working to change things for the better. You must see the film!
Several things stuck with me.
One was how early corporations had to be granted charters by the state, charters that set clear boundaries on the corporation’s activities. Rights to use resources considered part of the commons was being granted to the corporation as a privilege, with responsibilities. The law now supposedly requires corporations to put nothing above their responsibilities to their shareholders—but what do their charters say about the responsibilities associated with their privilege to exist in the first place? I don’t know but I’d like to. (The film documented a movement to revoke Unocal’s California charter. Though it did not do so, the state government did acknowledge that it had the right to revoke the charter.)
The film refers the term externality. In the context of corporate activities, it’s a side effect on others but which does not directly affect the corporation. Environmental impact might be the best example. I found myself thinking about diffusion of responsibility, which every first-year college psych student learns about. “Someone else will do something about it, it’s not my problem.”
The activities of these entities have become everyone’s problem.
| << Rhythmic adventures | 2004 > June | The CD that wouldn't mount >> |