Debunking the end of history thesis for corporate law

What Mr Giraldi calls the “Russian account of events” was first presented on another site precisely by “former intelligence officers”. It certainly is a plausible scenario but it very definitely does not exonerate the Syrians or the Russians, nor does it demolish Trump’s causus belli. Quite the contrary indeed. It amounts to a plea of guilty. In that version, the Syrians admit that they caused the gas to be released. Logically, if Syrian intelligence was able to identify the building as a target, shouldn’t they also have been able to determine what was inside it and that, therefore, an air attack would provoke a catastrophe? The intelligence blunder may well have been the fault of the ever-inefficient Russians but can’t you just imagine the howls of protest there would be if the US committed such a blunder? When Putin or one of his pals does it, it’s all just a regrettable but excusable mistake! Double standards!

In their article, “The End of History for Corporate Law,” Henry Hansmann and Reinier Kraakman proclaimed the triumph of the shareholder primacy norm over competing progressive theories of the corporation. This Article debunks Hansmann and Kraakman’s “end of history” thesis on both . and Canadian corporate law grounds. A critical examination of high-profile . corporate law jurisprudence indicates that the shareholder primacy norm cannot be supported, even by cases such as Dodge v. Ford and Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., which exist at the foundation of shareholder primacy arguments. Further, Canadian corporate law jurisprudence and the structure of Canadian corporate law statutes reveal the complete lack of support for shareholder primacy arguments north of the forty-ninth parallel, further impeding Hansmann and Kraakman’s claim. This state of affairs demonstrates that Hansmann and Kraakman’s “end of history” thesis is, at best, premature and, at worst, incorrect.

Most people don’t have any of that information about Mandela. They claim to have seen people in the streets during his funeral in the ’80’s. I seriously doubt any of the 19 Million people who voted for Mandela in the first Democratic election EVER to be held in South Africa share the memory of Nelson Mandela dying in the ’80’s!!!! It would be like you thinking your beloved Mother died in the ’80’s….oops she’s still alive!
None of the ME are important to the people who have the shared misinformation memories, of movies, ads, history…geography/movies/maps in the case of New Zealand and Iceland moving…..has anyone who has this experience actually lived or even been to these places? Do the people who live in these countries claim they have moved across the globe?
I’ve yet to hear of one instance. Below someone insists New Zealand has moved because it isn’t on the globe in the movie Dazed and Confused! Something might be going on with some movies (they’re famous for filming the same scene in different ways, changing names, playing JOKES…they are MOVIES could anything be less scientific?) but the way memories are stored is well known and quite predictable.

Debunking the end of history thesis for corporate law

debunking the end of history thesis for corporate law


debunking the end of history thesis for corporate lawdebunking the end of history thesis for corporate lawdebunking the end of history thesis for corporate lawdebunking the end of history thesis for corporate law