The idea that corporations aren't people means that any blame must rest with the people acting through and in the name of the corporation, and any rights and privileges asserted by those people must be their own individual rights.

Which is pretty much the opposite of the insulating effect of both your description and, more to the point, the status quo corporate form.

Ah, I think we have a communication failure, you're supporting the idea a "corporation is a legal person in itself". "Corporations are people" to me means they are a group, corpus, or body, of multiple individual humans who each should be answerable for their actions.

>The idea that corporations aren't people leads to evil.

This seems to, at best, reside outside of practical application.

>The main target of the corporations-are-not-people crowd is the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling striking down limits on independent corporate spending in elections. After that case, groups sprang up to fight corporate personhood. Others rebranded themselves by newly taking aim at it. But they do not limit themselves to attacking the Court’s campaign finance jurisprudence. Most groups make a broader attack on corporations being able to assert any First Amendment speech rights at all; and some have called for disabusing all corporations or businesses of any constitutional right.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/if-corp...

Except that has never, ever been the case. Before this trend of just going after the company as a whole came about, they would go after the executives.

I don't believe yours is a valid concern.

> The idea that corporations aren't people leads to evil.

Define evil please, because I'm of the opinion that the idea that they are people leads to serious unpleasantness all round.