This Dark Age

A manual for life in the modern world.

By Daniel Schwindt

NOTICE:
This Dark Age is now available in paperback on Amazon. The print version is MUCH cleaner than this online version, which is largely unedited and has fallen by the wayside as the project has grown. If you’ve appreciated my writing, please consider leaving a review on the relevant paperback volumes. The print edition also includes new sections (Military History, War Psychology, Dogmatic Theology).

Volume 1 | Volume 2 | Volume 3| Volume 4 | Volume 5 | Volume 6

Corporations and the personification of money

Given what has already been said about the primacy of money in the American political system, we cannot avoid mentioning the role of corporations.

To begin with, we can again refer to the Founders, whose works are so rarely read by those who so frequently invoke them. What would the Founders say about corporations in their republic?

First, Thomas Jefferson:

“I hope we shall take warning… and crush in it’s birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and to bid defiance to the laws of their country.”[1]

Second, James Madison:

“There is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property… The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuse.”[2]

It seems pretty clear from the attitudes expressed above that the Founders may not have been keen on the idea of “monied corporations” using their “accumulation of property” to influence and determine political decisions, and the Tillman Act of 1907 made this explicit. Nonetheless, various legal battles continued to be brought before the court until finally, in the 2010 case of Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the campaign contributions of corporations could not be prohibited, on the grounds that, at least in this respect, corporations qualified as persons under the First Amendment.

The implications here are vast, and we cannot explore them all. Suffice to say that we now live in a nation where a piece of legal paperwork–the corporation–is considered a person, while a human fetus is not. Regardless of your stance on abortion, this speaks profoundly about the mentality underlying our legal system.

Spengler said that in order to make use of constitutional rights, one must first have money. If we compare the corporation and the fetus, the first of which has limitless finds, the second of which has none whatsoever, it seems he was right.

[1] Letter to George Logan, 12 November 1816.

[2] Detached Memoranda, 1817.

Share This