Ian Murray wrote: > > > Trivially true. The larger issue is the interests and norms that went > into the *creation* of corporate personhood and their utter lack of > justificatory objectivity in mitigating the illusion of non-circularity
This is trivial, in so far as it avoids the issue that under capitalism capital is truth except when countered by superior strength. You can't get around Thrasymachus. (And strength superior to capital can never be more than temporary: as in the case of the sit-down strikes. The total balance of forces was temporarily (very temporarily) against capital. Hence the Sit-Down strikes were legal. Arguing what "should" be true is avoiding the problem of building a counter-power. (Engels's preface to the first German edition of PoP is good on this. Carrol
