{"title":"The Harm Principle and Corporations","authors":"A. Cohen","doi":"10.4324/9781003015123-15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I defend what may seem a surprising view: that John Stuart Mill’s famous harm principle would, if taken to be what justifies government action, disallow the existence of corporations. My claim is not that harmful activities of currently existing corporations warrants their losing corporate status according to the harm principle. The claim, rather, is that taken strictly, the harm principle and the legal possibility of incorporation are mutually exclusive. This view may be surprising—and I do not at all mean to attribute it to Mill—but if I am right, it should be obvious. It should also encourage us to think more about the nature of the markets within which business occurs. In the first section, I layout the view that follows from accepting the harm principle. In the second section, I explain the basic nature of legal incorporation. In the third section, I lay out the brief, but I think decisive, argument that the endorsement of the harm principle (as understood in the first section) is necessarily opposed to legal incorporation. I consider objections in the final section.","PeriodicalId":167105,"journal":{"name":"Toleration and the Challenges to Liberalism","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toleration and the Challenges to Liberalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003015123-15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this paper, I defend what may seem a surprising view: that John Stuart Mill’s famous harm principle would, if taken to be what justifies government action, disallow the existence of corporations. My claim is not that harmful activities of currently existing corporations warrants their losing corporate status according to the harm principle. The claim, rather, is that taken strictly, the harm principle and the legal possibility of incorporation are mutually exclusive. This view may be surprising—and I do not at all mean to attribute it to Mill—but if I am right, it should be obvious. It should also encourage us to think more about the nature of the markets within which business occurs. In the first section, I layout the view that follows from accepting the harm principle. In the second section, I explain the basic nature of legal incorporation. In the third section, I lay out the brief, but I think decisive, argument that the endorsement of the harm principle (as understood in the first section) is necessarily opposed to legal incorporation. I consider objections in the final section.
在本文中,我为一个看似令人惊讶的观点辩护:约翰•斯图尔特•密尔(John Stuart Mill)著名的伤害原则,如果被用来证明政府行为的正当性,就不允许公司的存在。我的主张并不是说,根据损害原则,现有公司的有害活动保证了它们失去公司地位。更确切地说,严格地说,损害原则和合并的法律可能性是相互排斥的。这种观点可能令人惊讶——我根本不想把它归因于米尔——但如果我是对的,它应该是显而易见的。它还应该鼓励我们更多地思考商业活动所在的市场的性质。在第一部分中,笔者从接受损害原则出发,阐述了其所遵循的观点。在第二部分,我解释了法人的基本性质。在第三部分,我列出了一个简短的,但我认为是决定性的论点,即对伤害原则的认可(如第一部分所理解的)必然反对法律合并。我在最后一节考虑反对意见。