Frames /sing


Tag Archives: Bill Moyers

Corporations are Objects called Persons: More so Soon

There is a pressing, and perhaps under-reported Supreme Court case that is set for this month which may determine if corporations finally attain something closer to full subjectivity, citizen status in the additional protections under the 1st Amendment in the United States. A New York Times article here. The legal knot stems from a film – Hillary the Movie – produced by some corporate monies that was going to be run during Hillary Clinton’s, now non-existent national Presidential run.

It seems a good time to revisit just how Corporations became persons in America in the first place. Selections from the 2003 film The Corporation, including contributions by Chomsky.

I won’t say much on this, but as I am in favor of ontologies that want to make of any corporate organization an object of force, drive and thought, it is valuable to see the kind of social (economic, political) differences that are made when IN LAW coporations of people are given person status. It is interesting that in the ontological trend towards objects, we have still to be aware that objects are being turned into persons with possibily dramatic results. As one person puts it in the documentary, it took 600,000 lives to grant certain rights to persons (the 14th amendment), and a stroke of a pen to give them to corporations.

I do not adhere to the hysteria of “corporations are psychotic persons” that the film forwards (in later parts), but the level of abstraction and nexus between Law and subjectivity is an significant one. What changes when economic entities become political subjectivities? And, when corporations are transnational, is this not the first transcendent citizenry, the unworking of the other eco-political entity called the State?

Bill Moyer interviews two major players in the Supreme Court case here.

Martha Nussbaum and Hecuba: The Living Latticework of Ethics

Polyxena (much welcoming) and the Chorus

University of Chicago professor, Martha Nussbaum, speaks emotionally and clearly about the tender nature of ethical binding, “we are more like a plant, than a gem”, as she summons up the lessons from Euripedes’s play. She communicates in body and mind the tenuous connections which make up our sense-making dimensions of the world, the fast and terror-ible filaments which communicate our living nature: ethos.

[from grundlegung, from The Brooks Blog]

We can become shattered and animalized, when the bodily components of our trust become broken. And goodness is the openness to this kind of risk. But Nussbaum’s personal appeal, “I wake up at night thinking of Euripedes’ Hecuba…” calls to mind the haunting moment wherein the chorus women speak as one woman, a conflation of plural and first persons: she readies herself for bed, unbeknowingly perched on the destruction all that makes sense, in the towers of Ilium. This is the scene of two that “haunt” me from the play:

I, my curls in twisting
Turbans was rhythming,
Out from golden mirrors gazing
Into the bottomless rays,
That readied I might fall into bed,
But up a roar rose in the city.  (922-927)

How this is the tension of Iium in all the twistings that satisfy and pacify, golden, and the then discordant escalation that amplifies and signals. The “I” collapses into a single horrifying moment.

Secondly, there is the report of Talthybius, to Hecuba, of the kind of death that Polyxena her beautiful daughter suffered, when the Greeks had commended that she be put to death as a sacrifice on the tomb of Achilles so as to sate his ghost (the ghost of their inequities):

And when she heard the word of commanders
Loosening the cloth from the peak of the shoulder
She tore it to the hollow of her ribs, navel-low,
And showed her breast, as lovely as a goddess’
Statue. Then sinking to her knees she spoke these
Words of surpassing bravery: “Here young man, if
It is my breast you want to strike, strike here… (556-565)

Apart from Nussbaum’s sensitive reading of the fragility of ethical behavior I think stands these two limits of the feminine body, that which is recursively wound in peace, the self-enjoyment which circulates upon its own, with an infinitesimal relationship to the depth of rays and their mirror in its own gaze (an operation which is variously projected upon the woman, yet in fact is polyvalent);

but also, unlike the shattered nature of Hecuba’s fate, her dog-becoming – and I disagree that becoming-animal is necessarily a “shattering”, as it is also a potentiating of the body, a fractaling – there is Polyxena’s display of the body in defiance, the abject resistance to order, subverting the very sexualized mechanism of a “breast”, making oneself a site of protest and eruption. This a core Greek Tragedy notion. In this way, the surface volume of the fragility that Nussbaum points out touches at its surface, the Body Without Organs, as how Deleuze and Guattari may have conceived it. The surface of the human is inhuman, there, the breast and the mirror meet.

If we are more like a plant than a gem, then perhaps we are more like a rhizome than a tree.