As an attorney and former college agitator (long, long ago), I read with profound interest Ted Nace's "Gangs of America", which along the line of Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States" challenges us to imagine an economic and legal universe other than the one we live in. Most Americans, and especially attorneys who are the high priests to the corporations, take it for granted (kind of like the inhabitants of the "Matrix") that multi-billion dollar corporations should enjoy and have always enjoyed preferential tax treatment, tort immunity, and government handouts by the gazoo.
What is valuable about such authors as Nace and Zinn is that they break free from the trap of blaming our current social and economic inequalities on a select group of evil men in the White House or Congress. While alternative historical analysis became an endangered species when Berlin Wall fell, the need for other voices did not go away. It is not enough to simply bash the current Administration a la Michael Moore, Jim Hightower and Al Franken, although such rants have their place. Nace tells us instead that it is vital to understand that such governments are organic to the same economic and legal system which allows Wall-Marts, Enrons and Worldcoms to flourish. If a non-entity such as Bush were not around to elect, there would be plenty others to take his place to service the machinery. If we do not get the government we deserve, at least we get the best goverment corporate money can buy. This power is enabled by a steadly-built array of laws to establish the modern limited liability corporation and its holding companies as a superior economic and legal entity ahead of the individual, despite the fact that the Constitution nowhere provides such status.
"Gangs of America" stakes out the historical origins of the status of the modern corporation as a preferential legal entity enjoying rights and freedoms superior to that of the individual. This is all true. While I was familiar with the late 19th century cases which gave recognition to the corporation as a "person", Nace adds additional color to the facts of these decisions, which I certainly did not hear in law school. Rather, in corporations class, liberals devoted their time to debating the nuances of "shareholder democracy", a concept which, applied to giant megaliths such as Pepsico, has all the relevance of Stalin's Inner Circle...
It takes considerable courage to tackle such a subject on a macro level without clinging to the conventional icons of either capitalist or Marxian theory, or conventional legal analysis. Rather, what is being attempted is close to a pure historical analysis which follows the paths of money and influence in a very practical way. This is, ultimately, a very important book.