Oh I didn't how that, thanks for the lesson.

Tbf it just sounds...so American, so I assumed, my bad. But East India Company was involved...whew I guess that does make sense, oof.

What is unique in the US is the interaction between corporate personhood and our First Amendment and the way that our courts have applied that to limit political campaign finance laws, and a lot of “corporate personhood” controversy is really about that, not actually about corporate personhood as a broad concept.

People also get confused about the Citizens United ruling. It had nothing to do with corporate personhood.

The ruling said that since a person has first amendment rights, those same rights extend to a group of people—any group—whether it’s a non profit organization, a corporation, or something else.

Well, it's also what allows the executives, boards, and owners of companies to be divorced from the consequences of their actions in a legal sense much of the time.

Source of it being older than christianity?