Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lebell
No.
It took me awhile to internalize that Corporations are not people AND that they are made up of people.
This means that any corporate identity a particular corporation holds is held by those who live today, and not those who controlled it during a particular time in history.
If J.P. Morgan was still holding assets that could be traced to profits made from slavery, then I could see a logical argument for using those assets for racial healing (NOT reparations, however).
As they do not, then I don't see the issue, other than an attempt at good will publicity.
|
Lebell,
I wonder if you would reconsider your position in light of the fact that corporations have rights of persons under the law. In some cases, more rights than persons.
In essense, a corporation is viewed under the law as an entity that holds and uses its possessions just like your conceptions of what a person does.
When you apply those factoids to this kind of a situation, it would be more accurate to think of a single 200 year old entity that has possessed things in the past and traded things with others--more like a 200 year old person than a great-grandfather to grandfather to father to son type of entity.
The corporate 'identity' is still held by the corporation today as it was decades or centuries ago. That doesn't shift as a function of who is sitting in the boardroom.