Corporate Fiduciary Duty Law as the Heart of the Beast of Capitalism

Abstract This Commentary choreographs corporate fiduciary duty law in the United States against the backdrop of political-economic theory, and posits that such law is the heart of capitalism. Theorists invoked chronologically are Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Max Weber, Antonio Gramsci, Milton Friedman, and David Harvey. Roadmap cases revisited are Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. (1919) , Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co. (1985) , Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. (1986) , eBay Domestic Holdings, Inc. v. Newmark (2010), and McRitchie v. Zuckerberg (2024). The golden thread throughout is shareholder primacy: in other words, the law’s serving capital. The law, however, is not only a reflection of society but also an expression of societal aspirations that sometimes go beyond the existing social system and signal change. Someday, the law might evidence negation of the negation, and the powers-that-be will be obligated to act as fiduciaries for workers, communities, and (even, perhaps) the environment, rather than for capital.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Global Jurist
Published
2026-06-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2026-0033
Primary Topic
Legal principles and applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Corporate Fiduciary Duty Law as the Heart of the Beast of Capitalism

Ryan J. Fisher
Global Jurist
Legal principles and applications
article

Corporate Fiduciary Duty Law as the Heart of the Beast of Capitalism

Ryan J. Fisher
article en

Abstract

Abstract This Commentary choreographs corporate fiduciary duty law in the United States against the backdrop of political-economic theory, and posits that such law is the heart of capitalism. Theorists invoked chronologically are Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Max Weber, Antonio Gramsci, Milton Friedman, and David Harvey. Roadmap cases revisited are Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. (1919) , Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co. (1985) , Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. (1986) , eBay Domestic Holdings, Inc. v. Newmark (2010), and McRitchie v. Zuckerberg (2024). The golden thread throughout is shareholder primacy: in other words, the law’s serving capital. The law, however, is not only a reflection of society but also an expression of societal aspirations that sometimes go beyond the existing social system and signal change. Someday, the law might evidence negation of the negation, and the powers-that-be will be obligated to act as fiduciaries for workers, communities, and (even, perhaps) the environment, rather than for capital.

Global Jurist
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Legal principles and applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Corporate Fiduciary Duty Law as the Heart of the Beast of Capitalism — Ryan J. Fisher · Global Jurist (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS