The First Entry -- Something Old

Here's a blast from the past. I wrote this a decade ago. Thankfully, libertarians and the Randinistas don't own the political internets these days the way they used to, but it's still good to remember that these guys are useful idiots, carrying water for the corporate agenda. Note that Harry Browne ran for president on the Libertarian ticket in 1996 and 2000. He died this year.

I spend a lot of time on the Internet, and I'm surrounded by Libertarians, Objectivists and other free trade radicals, and so I find that I'm interested in what they believe if only in self-defense. I've found that the Libertarian Presidential platform is a handy document, since it seems to succinctly outline Libertarian beliefs (the government doesn't work and all we need to do is emasculate it and things will be great for everyone who matters). I just went back and looked at it again to check on something and was struck by an omission that I hadn't noticed before. The word "corporation" appears only once in the platform, and then only in a slighting reference to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Why is this? It seems to be a glaring oversight. After all, if we were to wake up tomorrow in a country that ran under Libertarian principles, corporations would be major beneficiaries of the change. Many, if not all, of the regulations and laws that currently check corporate activity would be removed, which would certainly improve their position in the world. Given that recent polls have indicated that many Americans view "big business" as being as great, if not greater, threat to their freedom than "big government," it would be reasonable for the Libertarian platform to address the issue--but it doesn't.

Libertarians like to think of themselves as champions of the rights of individuals. They also talk a lot about personal responsibility. This is bruited about USENET at least as often as the idea that they are champions of the Constitution. If this is the case, doesn't it make sense to remove those corporate protections that unfairly shield individuals (corporate officers and shareholders) from their own actions? Yet there isn't a word in the platform about removing the special status that our government has bestowed upon corporations over the years. Is this an oversight, or is it something else?

If elected, would Harry Browne remove the legal fiction of corporations as individuals (with many of the rights granted to individuals under the Constitution), thereby making owners, corporate officers, and shareholders legally responsible for their actions? Would he get rid of limited liability, thereby ensuring that those responsible individuals are not unfairly protected from paying what they owe when they are found liable for damages? Would he return to the individual states the control they had in the last century, when they routinely demanded that any corporation doing business within their boundaries be chartered in the state and that the charter include the purpose of the business and length of time the corporation could exist--along with the ability to pull the charter and dissolve the corporation should the charter's terms be broken or overstepped?

If Libertarians are serious about uncoupling government from business, these seem like reasonable, even necessary actions. In fact, it seems like limited action. Perhaps the true libertarian solution would be to remove the legal concept of incorporation altogether. I'd be interested in knowing if these are, indeed, ideas with which Libertarians agree, and if so, why nothing in the party platform reflects it.