> Being a corporation, it should not be allowed to be a player in geopolitics.
Says who? Corporations have been waist deep in geopolitics since (at least) the beginning of the 20th century. see British Petroleum & the Iran coup, or Hearst and the American-Spanish war ("You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war.")
Here's a list of corporations that are also players in geopolitics
- Fox Media (and anything owned by Rupert Murdock)
My claim was a moral one. An entity like a corporation exists to make profit for shareholders and is therefore an amoral, psychopathic entity. Being subject to a corporation is fuctionally no different than being subject to a dictator or a king; it is a morally repugnant condition.
Says who? Corporations have been waist deep in geopolitics since (at least) the beginning of the 20th century. see British Petroleum & the Iran coup, or Hearst and the American-Spanish war ("You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war.")
Here's a list of corporations that are also players in geopolitics
- Fox Media (and anything owned by Rupert Murdock)
- Oil companies (e.g. Haliburton)
- Movie studios
- Fracking companies
- Numerous corporations behind TPP/TTIP