Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY
/
In Praise of the Heroic Entrepreneur
In Praise of the Heroic Entrepreneur
Nov 13, 2024 11:25 PM

Over the last fifty years, the dogma of “corporate social responsibility” has e the favorite tool of American liberals to cajole and shame the owners and managers of corporations into adopting major features of their liberal social agenda. John Hood has written this book to attack this dogma and defend the moral way in which the vast majority of American businesses are run.

One assumption behind the liberal dogma is the alleged conflict between a mitment to profit-seeking for its shareholders and what liberals view as the business world’s propensity to overlook or reject important ethical and social responsibilities. Liberals seem to believe that the people who own and manage corporations will do almost anything to make a profit, including destroying the environment, cheating their customers, and taking advantage of their workers. Instead of thinking first of maximizing return to owners and panies that are operated in a “responsible” way will make the attainment of various social goals as important or more important than profit-seeking.

Corporate Social Responsibility

Hood contends that the people who own and manage businesses do not need governmentally mandated incentives to support and promote social progress. When the facts are examined, he argues, it is clear that the vast majority of these people have handled their corporation’s affairs in morally and socially responsible ways. Hood’s book is full of examples of such activity, including preserving the environment, revitalizing inner cities, enhancing worker safety, and promoting family values. Corporations have helped to bring about important advances for workers, families, consumers, and munities. The owners and managers of many American businesses were busy creating jobs, expanding educational opportunities, and supporting family values long before any ivory tower liberal dreamed up the idea of corporate social responsibility.

Besides meeting the moral obligations Americans typically expect all citizens to observe, management’s primary responsibility is to the firm’s shareholders. The pursuit of the highest return to shareholders provides important guidance as managers select their priorities from available options. For example, what should corporations do with unexpected revenues? Should they be passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices, spent to raise wages for employees, given to shareholders in the form of higher dividends, or donated to local charities?

Who Are Our Heroes?

The title of Hood’s book summarizes nicely what he views as the major task of his work. Someone once said you can tell a lot about a person by learning who his heroes are. For most Americans these days, their “heroes” provide fleeting entertainment on an athletic field, movie screen, or television set. For a few, the “heroes” are champions of this or that radical cause, the pursuit of which promises important human liberties and places harmful obstacles in the path of the few people in our society who are willing to assume the risks and make the sacrifices that have significantly improved the quality of life in America and solved major human problems. The fact that so few of us think of a business career as a heroic enterprise reveals a lot about the success of liberalism’s negative propaganda.

In Hood’s words, “most of the good things that happen in this world can only happen because somebody else is also generating wealth.… There is no way you have munities in this country, there is no way you have hospitals, there is no way you have homes for the aged, there is no way you have the social programs that deal with poverty and all, unless you’re also generating wealth.” While this may seem like a marvelously plicated idea, it has yet to occur to one large group of people running for political office.

Hood provides numerous examples from many walks of life that show how American business “creates jobs, treats workers fairly, supports educational innovation, trains employees, contributes to the health of cities, discovers new drugs and medical treatments, makes workplaces and products safer, conserves resources, invents ways to save energy and reduce or eliminate waste, gives women and minorities unparalleled economic opportunities, and contributes to the stability and quality of life of families. It does all these things not in spite of its search for the highest possible return to shareholders, but because of it.”

Hood contends that wise owners and managers will understand the importance of properly moral behavior: “American businesses contribute to the progress and well-being of society because they must. If firms mistreat workers, they cannot be productive. If firms ignore issues of education and skills among young people, they will not be productive in the future. If they discriminate against women and minorities, they pay the price in the market for employees and for consumers. If they ignore the wastes they generate, they pay higher energy bills and disposal fees. Most importantly, if firms fail to take advantage of the opportunities they see to create new products or services to solve society’s problems, then they will surely lose profits to their competitors.” The incentives of the market are much more effective than those of government in promoting mon good.

Different Institutions, Different Roles

One of Hood’s more important arguments centers around the rather obvious fact that different institutions have different roles. While the purpose of government is taking and protecting things and the objective of charity is giving things away, the purpose of business is making and selling things. This means that social responsibility for a business is different from that of a government or charity. It is unwise and often harmful to attribute to businesses the social responsibilities of government or charities. When its owners or managers try to operate a corporation as if it were a government or charity, they risk harm both to the shareholders and to mon good.

According to Hood, the social responsibility of corporations should not be measured in terms of such things as layoffs, charitable donations, health insurance coverage, or racial quotas. Instead, the ethical questions that ought to be directed at corporations should focus on whether firms are earning their money through illegal activities involving force or fraud, whether the firm’s disposable e is being used in a productive manner, whether managers are utilizing worthwhile technology and strategies pete for workers and customers, whether managers are avoiding discriminatory practices, and whether the training of workers helps them to be productive and safe. Businesses can indeed serve the broader public interest when they pursue their primary task, namely creating wealth for their owners and customers.

It is for these reasons that business is a heroic enterprise and worthy of our praise. Artificial and faulty notions of corporate responsibility only serve to obscure and hinder the truly beneficial products mercial activity. Hood’s book offers an important corrective to the unfair and negative distortion of the corporate world that unfortunately now prejudices the thinking of so many Americans.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY
How Dispensationalism Got Left Behind
Whether we like it or not, Americans, in one way or another, have all been indelibly shaped by dispensationalism. Such is the subtext of Daniel Hummel’s provocative telling of the rise and fall of dispensationalism in America. In a little less than 350 pages, Hummel traces how a relatively insignificant Irishman from the Plymouth Brethren, John Nelson Darby, prompted the proliferation of dispensational theology, especially its eschatology, or theology of the end times, among our ecclesiastical, cultural, and political...
Up from the Liberal Founding
During the 20th century, scholars of the American founding generally believed that it was liberal. Specifically, they saw the founding as rooted in the political thought of 17th-century English philosopher John Locke. In addition, they saw Locke as a primarily secular thinker, one who sought to isolate the role of religion from political considerations except when necessary to prop up the various assumptions he made for natural rights. These included a divine creator responsible for a rational world for...
Spurgeon and the Poverty-Fighting Church
Religion & Liberty: Volume 33, Number 4 Spurgeon and the Poverty-Fighting Church by Christopher Parr • October 30, 2023 Portrait of Charles Spurgeon by Alexander Melville (1885) Charles Spurgeon was a young, zealous 15-year-old boy when he came to faith in Christ. A letter to his mother at the time captures the enthusiasm of his newfound Christian faith: “Oh, how I wish that I could do something for Christ.” God granted that wish, as Spurgeon would e “the prince of...
Conversation Starters with … Anne Bradley
Anne Bradley is an Acton affiliate scholar, the vice president of academic affairs at The Fund for American Studies, and professor of economics at The Institute of World Politics. There’s much talk about mon good capitalism” these days, especially from the New Right. Is this long overdue, that a hyper-individualism be beaten back, or is it merely cover for increasing state control of the economy? Let me begin by saying that I hate “capitalism with adjectives” in general. This...
C.S. Lewis and the Apocalypse of Gender
From very nearly the beginning, Christianity has wrestled with the question of the body. Heretics from gnostics to docetists devalued physical reality and the body, while orthodox Christianity insisted that the physical world offers us true signs pointing to God. This quarrel persists today, and one form it takes is the general confusion among Christians and non-Christians alike about gender. Is gender an abstracted idea? Is it reducible to biological characteristics? Is it a set of behaviors determined by...
Mistaken About Poverty
Perhaps it is because America is the land of liberty and opportunity that debates about poverty are especially intense in the United States. Americans and would-be Americans have long been told that if they work hard enough and persevere they can achieve their dreams. For many people, the mere existence of poverty—absolute or relative—raises doubts about that promise and the American experiment more generally. Is it true that America suffers more poverty than any other advanced democracy in the...
Creating an Economy of Inclusion
The poor have been the main subject of concern in the whole tradition of Catholic Social Teaching. The Catholic Church talks often about a “preferential option for the poor.” In recent years, many of the Church’s social teaching documents have been particularly focused on the needs of the poorest people in the world’s poorest countries. The first major analysis of this topic could be said to have been in the papal encyclical Populorum Progressio, published in 1967 by Pope...
Adam Smith and the Poor
Adam Smith did not seem to think that riches were requisite to happiness: “the beggar, who suns himself by the side of the highway, possesses that security which kings are fighting for” (The Theory of Moral Sentiments). But he did not mend beggary. The beggar here is not any beggar, but Diogenes the Cynic, who asked of Alexander the Great only to step back so as not to cast a shadow upon Diogenes as he reclined alongside the highway....
Jesus and Class Warfare
Plenty of Marxists have turned to the New Testament and the origins of Christianity. Memorable examples include the works of F.D. Maurice and Zhu Weizhi’s Jesus the Proletarian. After criticizing how so many translations of the New Testament soften Jesus’ teachings regarding material possessions, greed, and wealth, Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart has gone so far to ask, “Are Christians supposed to be Communists?” In the Huffington Post, Dan Arel has even claimed that “Jesus was clearly a Marxist,...
Lord Jonathan Sacks: The West’s Rabbi
In October 1798, the president of the United States wrote to officers of the Massachusetts militia, acknowledging a limitation of federal rule. “We have no government,” John Adams wrote, “armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, and revenge or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.” The nation that Adams had helped to found would require the parts of the body...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2024 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved