Corporations are not entitled to have a self-preservation right; a company that serves society as best it can while still surviving has not yet given as much as it must. Groups and collectives of individuals do not have the rights that those individuals themselves do; they exist only because society permits them to, and I say that they have a moral imperative to exist only for society's benefit. A company's profits should always be reinvested in the company to make it better able to serve its customers; the executives are entitled to only as much money as the actual work they do would indicate. That our society fails to recognize this basic truth, and continues to allow robber barons to "buy the rights" to something and rake in obscene amounts of cash for the hard work of legions of minions - it infuriates me. That these people are criminals and thieves is so absurdly obvious that I can't believe there aren't thousands of people lining up for the opportunity to shoot them. Why does it seem that only I have a moral center, that I seem to be the only person who wants things to be different?
For the moment, I still have enough common sense to realize the answer: I am not the only person who wants things to be different, there are many people who feel exactly as I do, and who fail to put their money where their mouth is exactly as I do. I'm not willing to trade my life for that of some fatcat who hurts the world just by existing; ergo, I am in no position to ask anyone else to do so either. My frustration is understandable, but impossible to act upon in any reasonable or realistic way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The difficult but important thing to realize When you consider the worst relics of capitalism, like meager wages and benefits for rank and file workers, or like the customer-hurting policies you've been protesting at work, is that it's not just a matter of a bunch of evil people who've forced their way to the top. Rather, modern corporations have evolved into a system of economic efficiency in which any major change hurts people. Everyone works in their own best interest, which usually means to make as much money as possible, and while everyone at every level has a little leeway, there's not much anyone can do, short of Congress capping bonuses for underperforming companies (kudos to the president for trying this kind of thing), or a working-class revolution with all its pitfalls.
ReplyDeleteExecutives who want to change policies for the betterment of mankind have to answer to their bosses, and the bosses have to answer (typically) to the board of directors, and the board of directors has to answer to the shareholders, and the shareholders have to answer to their own economic needs; i.e. the people they buy goods and services from, and those people have to answer to the people they buy from, who work for the companies and have to answer to executives. It's all a big loop in which anyone who deviates loses money, and may not be able to afford to do so.
The consolation to all this social Darwinism is that it's often possible to make the most moral option also be the best economic option. An informed consumer base is a great way to do this, for example, because if customers protest a practice, it will change the bottom line until the practice is abandoned.
This makes a hilarious counterpoint to the anarchist-cynic rant I just posted. How dare you come on my blog and be sensible, dammit! :D
ReplyDelete