C2C Corporate Literacy – The Sperm Is Mine – The Power of the Sperm in Defining and Shaping Identity

A child is related to the sperm but the sperm donor (father) is not the child. Yes, the sperm belongs to the father but once it is deployed and strikes, the outcome is a human being with the same rights as those of the sperm donor.

A sperm donor is related to the outcome but does not enjoy any ownership rights including taking away the life of that child just like withdrawing cash from an ATM or bank.

The sperm produces a sovereign person and as such a parent or shareholders cannot claim any rights over another human actor.

The same applies to a company which in all facts and truth is a creature of law and so, once created, it assumes its own persona and its rights and obligations are prescribed by law.

Shareholders give birth to a company and after that their liability is limited to the shares they hold in the company.

In order to limit liability of shareholders, the genius of the founding fathers of corporate civilization is that they vested the control and management of the company in directors who owe a duty to the company.

Such directors are personally liable and culpable for their decisions and actions in relation to the affairs of the company.

The construct that commonly terms ownership in relation to anything of value is not only elusive but there exists no shared understanding of what it is and is never meant to be.

What if the identity of children is never treated as separate and distinct from the identity of parents? How many times do we see parents being implicated in the choices that actions of their children?

It is often the case that parents refer to their children as if these children are not sovereign actors with the same rights as parents to make their own decisions and act upon them independently.

In the same vein, it is often the case that shareholders refer to companies as their creation with alter egos fully oblivious of the limitations imposed on them by the operation of the Companies that vests the control and management of company in its directors.

Whose child is it absent the sperm that gives it life? When does life begin? After its commencement, who does the outcome belong to? Are children capable of being owned?

These and many other questions are what provoked me to be a member of the 1873 Network and also to be part of a member-based C2C initiative, a platform to raise awareness on the urgency and the need to build community power around established problems.

What is self-evident is that we are all created as equals and endowed by the creator with unalienable rights including the right to choose.

The fact that no shared understanding exists on what ownership in relation to juristic persons exists must be a source of concern given that the introduction of corporate civilization has enabled individual actors to associate in the name of a company to deliver promises.

Ownership follows the right to pursue happiness which manifests itself in property, a consequence of effort and passion.

Imagine one creates a company and forgets to give it life, what would follow? The idea to establish a company has to be underpinned by value transmitted and exchanged in its name.

The case of Setheo Engineering is one example that help expose the pervasiveness of ownership ignorance that is prevalent.

Is a company, just like a child capable of being owned? The answer is NO. Shareholders are not share owners.

We learn that a shareholder possesses what one may call a negative right to prevent people from controlling and directing a company in which he or she may hold shares in.

Like a child, once a company is incorporated, it becomes a separate and distinct legal persona that possesses its own bundle of rights but how many people genuinely believe that they are related to a company as owners when the law provides otherwise? Many!

But where is wisdom and understanding to be found when the people who pretend to know better are actually deficient of the knowledge about companies?

Imagine a lawyer telling you that I own my law firm when this thinking is inimical to the dictates of corporate civilization, the chaos that follows is unimaginable.

Just share this article and see what reactions you get from people who you may look up as better informed citizens on corporate matters who would argue that a company is owned by shareholders and directors owe a duty to shareholders when this is not the case.

The level of ignorance on corporate matters is so astonishing that if nothing is done urgently, a generation of corporate illiterates will acquire a real life and the victims will be the majority who know no better.

Imagine if the few who pretend to know better actually know nothing, what would be the incentive for acquiring knowledge? It is always embarrassing when ignorance is displayed with much arrogance.

Corporate literacy does matter and so, you and I have a duty to improve literacy lest we all perish in ignorance wrongly clothed as wisdom.

Mutumwa Mawere is a businessman with interests in mining, manufacturing and agro industries, financial services (banking and insurance), telecommunications, publishing, investment holdings, transport and logistics, and international trading, among others.