81,836
edits
Stakeholder capitalism: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|devil|{{image|Stakeholder capitalism|png|}} }}=== Adam Smith’s Dangerous Idea === | {{a|devil|{{image|Stakeholder capitalism|png|}} }} | ||
Once upon a time, not | <nowiki>=== Adam Smith’s Dangerous Idea ===</nowiki> | ||
Once upon a time, not long ago, a [[shareholder]] was an opaque yet sacred being, somewhat divine, to whose improving ends everyone engaged in a company’s operation twitched their every fibre. | |||
This ''[[Shareholder capitalism|will to shareholder return]]'' sprang from the brow of [[Adam Smith]] and his [[invisible hand]]: | This ''[[Shareholder capitalism|will to shareholder return]]'' sprang from the brow of [[Adam Smith]] and his [[invisible hand]]: | ||
| Line 7: | Line 8: | ||
This was, a ''breathtaking'' insight; no less [[Darwin’s Dangerous Idea|dangerous]] than [[Darwin’s Dangerous Idea|Charles Darwin]]’s: from collected, unfettered, selfish actions [[emerges]] optimised community welfare. | This was, a ''breathtaking'' insight; no less [[Darwin’s Dangerous Idea|dangerous]] than [[Darwin’s Dangerous Idea|Charles Darwin]]’s: from collected, unfettered, selfish actions [[emerges]] optimised community welfare. | ||
The modern corporation is | The modern corporation is the philosophical embodiment of that idea. ''Look after the [[shareholder]]s, and society will look after itself.'' | ||
By pursuing only its shareholders’ enrichment the corporation, so the theory had it, was more nimble, more responsive to society’s demands, and | By pursuing only its shareholders’ enrichment the corporation, so the theory had it, was more nimble, more responsive to society’s demands, and could allocate capital wherever the community most needed it. | ||
“Compare this,” declared gleeful proselytes, “with the disasters of central planning, five-year plans, great leaps forward and so on.” | “Compare this,” declared gleeful proselytes, “with the disasters of central planning, five-year plans, great leaps forward and so on.” | ||
| Line 22: | Line 23: | ||
Dangerous, even: in 2003, legal academic Joel Bakan put the argument that since a [[Legal person|corporation]]’s sole statutory motive is the short-term enrichment of its owners, it has the clinical characteristics of a ''psychopath''.<ref>Joel Bakan, ''The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power'' (2003)</ref> | Dangerous, even: in 2003, legal academic Joel Bakan put the argument that since a [[Legal person|corporation]]’s sole statutory motive is the short-term enrichment of its owners, it has the clinical characteristics of a ''psychopath''.<ref>Joel Bakan, ''The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power'' (2003)</ref> | ||
Things have only got worse since for Adam Smith’s conviction in the [[Emergence|emergent]] goodness of shareholder profit | Things have only got worse since for Adam Smith’s conviction in the [[Emergence|emergent]] goodness of shareholder profit. | ||
We are cancelling and redrawing the world: let us cancel and redraw our corporate aspirations too. Shareholder capitalism is, by design, venal, selfish and riven with [[Unconscious bias|bias]]. Its stampede for profit demonstrates an abject want of care for everyone else. | We are cancelling and redrawing the world: let us cancel and redraw our corporate aspirations too. Shareholder capitalism is, by design, venal, selfish and riven with [[Unconscious bias|bias]]. Its stampede for profit demonstrates an abject want of care for everyone else. | ||
| Line 34: | Line 35: | ||
This view seems so modern, so [[empathetic]] and so ''right'' — so ''fit for [[Twitter]]'' — that it is hard to see how anyone can ever have thought otherwise. | This view seems so modern, so [[empathetic]] and so ''right'' — so ''fit for [[Twitter]]'' — that it is hard to see how anyone can ever have thought otherwise. | ||
But still, this is a striking reversal | But still, this is a striking reversal. Even the Business Roundtable got in on the act: recently, it “redefined the purpose of a corporation” away from ''the outright pursuit of profit'' towards ''promoting an economy that serves all Americans''. | ||
Even | |||
{{Quote|“It affirms the essential role corporations can play in improving our society,” said Alex Gorsky,<ref>No relation to ''that'' [[Good luck, Mr. Gorsky|Mr. Gorsky]], as far as we know.</ref> Chairman and CEO of Johnson & Johnson and Chair of the Roundtable’s Corporate Governance Committee,<ref>Not trying to be funny or anything, but is being Chairman ''and'' CEO really the best example for a chair of a corporate governance committee to set?</ref> “when [[CEO|CEOs]] are truly committed to meeting the needs of all [[stakeholder]]s.”}} | {{Quote|“It affirms the essential role corporations can play in improving our society,” said Alex Gorsky,<ref>No relation to ''that'' [[Good luck, Mr. Gorsky|Mr. Gorsky]], as far as we know.</ref> Chairman and CEO of Johnson & Johnson and Chair of the Roundtable’s Corporate Governance Committee,<ref>Not trying to be funny or anything, but is being Chairman ''and'' CEO really the best example for a chair of a corporate governance committee to set?</ref> “when [[CEO|CEOs]] are truly committed to meeting the needs of all [[stakeholder]]s.”}} | ||