[-empyre-] art and ethics

[Christiane Robbins]

No worries especially as there's no difference of opinion here.  I was  
simply trying to draw out your clarification below as I thought it to  
be a significant point.  And ... clearly, emailing and texting do not  
lend themselves to delving into deep (historical) context.

To my mind, this all is circulating around legal fictions  - initially  
that a " freed slave" was considered as an entity apart from that of  
an "American,"  to that of a corporation being considered as a person,  
and to the permutation that the aspect of financing (monetization) of  
"free speech" has now been concretized into our legal system as one  
and the same as the guaranteed right of individual free speech or  
utterance.


C




On Jan 22, 2010, at 10:08 PM, Jun-Ann Lehman wrote:

> Saul: Yes. Something along those lines.
>
> Christiane: Sorry for the opacity. Emailing on mobile phone is hard.
> To clarify. A special amendment should not have been necessary to  
> guarantee the basic rights of freed slaves as long as freed slaves  
> were recognised as full-Americans, which of course, they weren't.  
> The 14th amendment almost reads as absolution for enslavement.  
> Should the 14th amendment, therefore, in this day and age, be  
> regarded as a form of segregation for descendants of freed slaves  
> and abused by corporate America which has the funds to pay lawyers  
> to rake through the constitution for commercial advantage.
>
>
> On 23/01/2010, at 1:16 PM, Saul Ostrow wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the 14th amendment should have been an affirmation of the  
>> rights of all citzens of the United States, regardless of color,  
>> religion or national origin
>>
>>
>> On 1/22/10 5:43 PM, "Christiane Jetztzeit" <cpr at mindspring.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Your point is well taken.  However, I find your statement somewhat  
>> opaque: "But the thing is, u hv to ask why a special amendment  
>> isn't required to guarantee the basic rights of regular Americans."
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 22, 2010, at 1:58 PM, Jun-Ann Lehman wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps the reasons for introducing the 14th amendment were flawed.  
>> Freed slaves shouldn't hv needed to be singled out as a separate  
>> entity requiring basic rights if they had been regarded as a part  
>> of the mainstream post -constitutional American population in the  
>> first place.
>>
>> If the 14th amendment was challenged, it could solve a lot of  
>> problems. The thing is, no one would dare because it guarantees  
>> basic rights for freed slaves. But the thing is, u hv to ask why a  
>> special amendment isn't required to guarantee the basic rights of  
>> regular Americans. Freed slaves should hv been regarded as  
>> Americans protected by the American constitution. Perhaps that's  
>> what the 14th amendment should hv sought to achieve - the INCLUSION  
>> of freed slaves, not their exclusion.
>>
>> jun-ann lehman___ junann at junann.com ___+61 410 506 559___
>>
>> On 23/01/2010, at 7:44, Gerry Coulter <gcoulter at ubishops.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Not to worry Christiane -- Americans will continue to get the  
>> politicians they deserve (as do we all)
>>
>>
>>
>> best
>>
>>
>>
>> gerry
>>
>>
>> From: empyre-bounces at gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au [empyre-bounces at gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au 
>> ] On Behalf Of Christiane Robbins [cpr at mindspring.com]
>>  Sent: January 22, 2010 12:20 PM
>>  To: soft_skinned_space
>>  Subject: Re: [-empyre-] art and ethics
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, I find the unleashing of corporatist art to be among the  
>> very least of worries as a result of yesterday's ruling.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm certain that others can offer a far more delineated and  
>> informed accounting.  However, in the interim, for those of you  
>> unfamiliar with this stunning ruling ( some are referring to it as  
>> a coup ) from January 21, the US Supreme Court basically has  
>> overtly transformed our democracy to that of an oligarchy - all  
>> under the aegis of the guaranteed right of free speech to all "  
>> individuals , " including "corporate personhood."
>>
>>
>>
>> Specifically, and in abbreviated form, the Fourteenth Amendment to  
>> the US Constitution was created at the conclusion of the Civil War  
>> granting basic rights to freed slaves.  Since that point in time it  
>> has often been utilized by attorneys representing corporate  
>> interests to extend additional rights to businesses far more  
>> frequently than to freed slaves. Prior to 1886, corporations were  
>> referred to in U.S. law as "artificial persons." However, in 1886,  
>> after a series of cases brought by lawyers representing the  
>> expanding railroad interests, the Supreme Court ruled that  
>> corporations were "persons" and entitled to the same rights granted  
>> to people under the Bill of Rights. Since this ruling, the States  
>> have lost the legal structures that allowed for people to control  
>> corporate behavior.  In other words, corporations came to acquire  
>> rights reserved for individual citizens.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The US Supreme Court ruled yesterday that corporations (and unions,  
>> lest they not be counted!) now have no limits on their financing  
>> political campaigns to any political campaign or candidate.   
>> Connecting the dots is rather a simple task in this situation.  And  
>> this was all done to ensure free speech...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm hoping that  others can parse this issue for a better  
>> understanding -
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 22, 2010, at 8:26 AM, Timothy Murray wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick, could you explain your reference to the recent Supreme Court
>>
>>
>> ruling to our -empyre- community, since a major proportion of our
>>
>>
>> -empyreans- live outside the US?  I'm also wondering why you think
>>
>>
>> that a ruling regarding political lobbying (if this is what you're
>>
>>
>> referencing) would unleash a genre of corporatist art.
>>
>>
>>  Thanks so much.
>>
>>  Tim
>>
>>
>> international participants...but how to de-link these states seems
>>
>>
>> impenetrable - like the recent Supreme Court ruling that will
>>
>>
>> certainly unleash a whole new genre of freely circulating
>>
>>
>> corporatist art, no?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> nick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Johanna Drucker < <mailto:drucker at gseis.ucla.edu> drucker at gseis.ucla.edu 
>> >
>>
>>
>> To:  <mailto:jhaber at haberarts.com> jhaber at haberarts.com;  
>> soft_skinned_space < <mailto:empyre at gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au> empyre at gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au 
>> >
>>
>>
>> Sent: Mon, January 11, 2010 8:12:46 PM
>>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 62, Issue 13
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> John,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Much different. I agree.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I do want to make a space for art that is not tasked with being the
>>
>>
>> moral conscience of the culture too.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Johanna
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 11, 2010, at 4:09 PM, John Haber wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The analogy to rebranding is very interesting indeed, in an excellent
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> post.  Let me ask more about it, though.  Now, to me it's only an
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> analogy, and of course whatever venting we may wish to have about
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> torture and Israeli policy aren't instantly illuminating regarding  
>> art
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> except as a kind of red flag.  (Hey, there's injustice in the
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> world, so
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> don't let it happen in this realm.)  Indeed, it could actually
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> disguise
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> the problem, by suggesting distinct realms after all, which the whole
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> problematic of complicity in art is supposed to question.  Thus, my
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> question would be this:  if the political analogy is silence, then
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> does
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> that open possibilities for art, in which making visible is part of
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> the
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> game?  Now, I realize that acknowledging something, as argued well,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> doesn't make it go away.  But it's still different from silence.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> empyre forum
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> < <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au> mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au 
>> > <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> < <http://www.subtle.net/empyre> http://www.subtle.net/empyre> <http://www.subtle.net/empyre 
>> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>> empyre forum
>>
>>
>> < <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au> mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au 
>> > <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>>
>>
>> < <http://www.subtle.net/empyre> http://www.subtle.net/empyre> <http://www.subtle.net/empyre 
>> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>> empyre forum
>>
>>
>> <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>>
>>
>> <http://www.subtle.net/empyre> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Timothy Murray
>>  Director, Society for the Humanities
>>   <http://www.arts.cornell.edu/sochum/> http://www.arts.cornell.edu/sochum/
>>  Curator, The Rose Goldsen Archive of New Media Art, Cornell Library
>>   <http://goldsen.library.cornell.edu> http://goldsen.library.cornell.edu
>>  Professor of Comparative Literature and English
>>  A. D. White House
>>  Cornell University
>>  Ithaca, New York 14853
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  empyre forum
>>   <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>  
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>>   <http://www.subtle.net/empyre> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20100123/e48c9e0a/attachment.html