Originally Posted by a knight
An instinctual repulsion to collectivist entities coercing behaviour in society is not of and by itself a bad thing. The problem with many modern American libertarians is that they arrogantly refuse to apply the concept equally to all of society's collectives, ignoring, and often even deifying the fictional business constructs of collectivism; and their elevation in our society to the status of "person". Also, libertarians should not be opposed to collectives, per se; the opposition is to acts which are forced upon others by them. Liberty implies a freedom of association with others, but not a right to enslave them. To castrate the state, while leaving the corporation intact, would be to ensure not a future of liberty, but of neofeudalism...
Well said, my friend. This is one of the nonsensicalities I am constantly confronted with. I am, I suppose, an anti-corporatist. Even more than with other forms of property, corporations are explicitly a creation of the state, and beholden to it. The "personhood" concept is anathema to me, and should be to any true libertarian, but I am constantly astounded that corporations are defended as the virtual deification of "lassez-faire" economics. It is not that I disagree with corporations, per se, but they should not be put in a superior position to the individual, which they are in our current construction - economically, politically, and socially. Any "rights" that corporations possess are not collective, but the interests of the individuals who own and operate the corporation. Of itself the corporation possesses nothing, nor should it.

A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich