Do you think the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 offers sufficient safeguards to protect whistle-blowers from corporate retaliation? Do you think our current lending crisis could have been averted had employees blown the whistle? Do you think that corporate America is capable of policing itself? Or do you think we need stiffer government regulation at least in terms of financial transparency?
I think the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 is a legitimate step in the right direction to encourage employees to more carefully consider the impacts of their actions in a moral context. However, though it will offer better protections to employees who ultimately become whistleblowers, I question whether or not it will increase the number of whistleblowers or increase the frequency with which they choose to go public with their accusations.
The general status of societal morality combined with the internal culture of organizations is still the driving force behind the actions of employees. In an increasingly amoral culture with a decidedly relativistic bend, I wonder if our very perception of morality (what is right and what is wrong) is becoming so skewed socially that it reduces the number of individuals willing to come forward with allegations of wrongdoing. If such a pool of individuals willing to step forward to prevent immoral corporate behavior is reduced, it does not bode well for improved corporate performance. If this is combined with corporate cultures willing to stifle whistle-blowing in pursuit of the almighty bottom line, even legislation like the SOA is only one small finger in the dike holding back a mighty ocean.
As for whether or not our current lending crisis could have been prevented by whistleblowers, I don’t think so. Perhaps its scope could have been reduced but I don’t believe it would have eliminated. I think there was a systemic and pervasive willful blindness to reality and commitment to selfish gain as profits soared. Even today, as a real estate agent, I see an industry that still silently craves a return to the “boom years,” even at the cost of the consumer. I still routinely observe mortgage brokers and lenders that would repeat previous offenses if given half a chance. Still they would loan money to borrowers who are not credit worthy if there was a way for them to pawn off the risk.
To me this indicates that current policies and procedures enacted since the crash are more of a knee-jerk reaction to the circumstances rather than a heartfelt morph to higher responsibility and accountability. Policies seem to have been instituted more as survival mechanisms rather than as means to a better more equitable moral future.
In light of this, can corporate America police itself? I think it is capable. That this automatically implies willingness is another matter entirely. American corporations do have the resources and ingenuity to implement self-policing at all levels. However, this requires a commitment from the top down, and a willingness of management to follow-up all private allegations of misconduct as vigorously as if they were under a watchful public eye.
I do not necessarily think more regulation is the answer. Discussions of the merits of capitalism and government regulation are for another time and place, but I will simply posit that I think government regulation can only go so far. As an old preacher once said, “Gentlemen, there comes a time when we cannot legislate the heart.” This is to say, at some point, our collective corporate behavior must stem from an internal desire to operate profitably, both monetarily and morally rather than simply choosing to get away with as much as possible in the context of current law. Our fundamental corporate culture must be founded on solid moral policies from which ethically sound profitability may be sustained. I know this is easier said than done, but it certainly is worthwhile goal for which to strive.
Approximately 582 words
Friday, December 11, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
The Manhattan Declaration
I urge my friends to participate in this worthwhile project. Let your voice be heard!
http://manhattandeclaration.org/
http://manhattandeclaration.org/
Friday, November 13, 2009
More Business Writing...
Do you think that business has an obligation to protect the environment beyond what the law requires? Be sure to explain the views of Bowie and Hoffman. With whom would Friedman side? Why?
First allow me to summarize the views of both men and answer the last question first. Then I will briefly delve into my opinion.
Bowie feels that business has two responsibilities when it comes to their environmental interaction: first, obey the law; second, do not interfere with the law-making process. In this way he feels the market and its stakeholders (including government) will determine what the appropriate level of involvement for the business is. He feels that the business will be prevented from improperly influencing the development of such legislation if they are not allowed to meddle in the process.
Hoffman, on the other hand, feels that business has an environmental responsibility that exceeds the limits of the law and should approach that responsibility from a naturalistic, biocentric perspective rather than from a humanistic homocentric one. In other words businesses should be proactively involved not just reactively involved, regardless of how it impacts its profits.
Bowie’s view would be the perspective most closely in alignment with Friedman’s theories. His response is true to the Friedman position of allowing the market to determine its own course and allow those with purchasing power to guide it.
Hoffman did not seem to think that equating environmental responsibility with a business’s self-interest was an adequate ethical foundation. I can see his point, but I tend to disagree a little bit. I agree with Hoffman on the basic idea that businesses should possibly have a responsibility above the law. However, I feel this is nearly always justified by a business’s own self-interest.
In the case he mentioned of the business-owner who bankrupted his business trying to achieve environmental responsibility, I feel there were several real errors in judgment. Thus, I do not feel that is the best case to represent a concept of social responsibility. As Hoffman indicated, it is one extreme. However, I do think responsible businesses must participate in a steady focused long-term campaign of environmental responsibility. They must do this to preserve their resources, their capital, the good will of their stakeholders, and steady long-term profits. Additionally, this concept is not untrue to shareholders because a responsible posture reduces the probability for lawsuits, clean-up costs, and health care coverage costs due to hazards resulting from unsafe and irresponsible behavior.
Hoffman did not seem to have much confidence in the long-term planning abilities of corporations (which I admit has been justified by corporate behavior in the last fifteen years). However, this is not a good excuse to not teach a long-term paradigm shift to corporations beginning with the lowest echelon of management. As has been repeatedly discussed and demonstrated, American culture and business – from the ground up – needs to retrain itself on impulse control, long-term planning, community cognizance, and quality management. This will facilitate the environmental responsibility desired by Hoffman.
At a more fundamental level, this discussion needs to consider the effects of world-view on how an individual approaches this debate. In a nutshell, the evolutionary bias of belief in the survival of the fittest lends itself to irresponsible behavior justified as we elbow and stomp our way over species and environments more fragile than ourselves. Juxtaposed to that idea, the Christian worldview provides a framework for the sacredness of all life, the value of the environment as a magnificent and precious creation, and the command for responsible stewardship of all resources. I understand this is a complex and far-reaching discussion that cannot be adequately treated here, but it is a foundational element of the discussion and should not be forgotten.
Overall this is a complex issue and I don’t think any one approach is sufficient. I think the marketplace is the ideal place for these changes to be made, supplemented by proactive businesses, and guided by active government regulation. Additionally, based on my belief in the Christian worldview, I would have to agree that business sometimes may have a responsibility above the law. However, this responsibility extends to all of us as individuals as well. Businesses are not to pursue this responsibility alone. All of us have the responsibility to do our part even above and beyond the law if necessary.
First allow me to summarize the views of both men and answer the last question first. Then I will briefly delve into my opinion.
Bowie feels that business has two responsibilities when it comes to their environmental interaction: first, obey the law; second, do not interfere with the law-making process. In this way he feels the market and its stakeholders (including government) will determine what the appropriate level of involvement for the business is. He feels that the business will be prevented from improperly influencing the development of such legislation if they are not allowed to meddle in the process.
Hoffman, on the other hand, feels that business has an environmental responsibility that exceeds the limits of the law and should approach that responsibility from a naturalistic, biocentric perspective rather than from a humanistic homocentric one. In other words businesses should be proactively involved not just reactively involved, regardless of how it impacts its profits.
Bowie’s view would be the perspective most closely in alignment with Friedman’s theories. His response is true to the Friedman position of allowing the market to determine its own course and allow those with purchasing power to guide it.
Hoffman did not seem to think that equating environmental responsibility with a business’s self-interest was an adequate ethical foundation. I can see his point, but I tend to disagree a little bit. I agree with Hoffman on the basic idea that businesses should possibly have a responsibility above the law. However, I feel this is nearly always justified by a business’s own self-interest.
In the case he mentioned of the business-owner who bankrupted his business trying to achieve environmental responsibility, I feel there were several real errors in judgment. Thus, I do not feel that is the best case to represent a concept of social responsibility. As Hoffman indicated, it is one extreme. However, I do think responsible businesses must participate in a steady focused long-term campaign of environmental responsibility. They must do this to preserve their resources, their capital, the good will of their stakeholders, and steady long-term profits. Additionally, this concept is not untrue to shareholders because a responsible posture reduces the probability for lawsuits, clean-up costs, and health care coverage costs due to hazards resulting from unsafe and irresponsible behavior.
Hoffman did not seem to have much confidence in the long-term planning abilities of corporations (which I admit has been justified by corporate behavior in the last fifteen years). However, this is not a good excuse to not teach a long-term paradigm shift to corporations beginning with the lowest echelon of management. As has been repeatedly discussed and demonstrated, American culture and business – from the ground up – needs to retrain itself on impulse control, long-term planning, community cognizance, and quality management. This will facilitate the environmental responsibility desired by Hoffman.
At a more fundamental level, this discussion needs to consider the effects of world-view on how an individual approaches this debate. In a nutshell, the evolutionary bias of belief in the survival of the fittest lends itself to irresponsible behavior justified as we elbow and stomp our way over species and environments more fragile than ourselves. Juxtaposed to that idea, the Christian worldview provides a framework for the sacredness of all life, the value of the environment as a magnificent and precious creation, and the command for responsible stewardship of all resources. I understand this is a complex and far-reaching discussion that cannot be adequately treated here, but it is a foundational element of the discussion and should not be forgotten.
Overall this is a complex issue and I don’t think any one approach is sufficient. I think the marketplace is the ideal place for these changes to be made, supplemented by proactive businesses, and guided by active government regulation. Additionally, based on my belief in the Christian worldview, I would have to agree that business sometimes may have a responsibility above the law. However, this responsibility extends to all of us as individuals as well. Businesses are not to pursue this responsibility alone. All of us have the responsibility to do our part even above and beyond the law if necessary.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
The Present Crisis
Below is a poem that has a lot of good lines that are even applicable to politics today. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you James Russell Lowell:
[Written in 1844, this poem provided inspiration for the leaders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. When deciding on a name for their new publication in 1910 they agreed that the name of their magazine should be The Crisis.]
WHEN a deed is done for Freedom, through the broad earth's aching breast
Runs a thrill of joy prophetic, trembling on from east to west,
And the slave, where'er he cowers, feels the soul within him climb
To the awful verge of manhood, as the energy sublime
Of a century bursts full-blossomed on the thorny stem of Time.
Through the walls of hut and palace shoots the instantaneous throe,
When the travail of the Ages wrings earth's systems to and fro;
At the birth of each new Era, with a recognizing start,
Nation wildly looks at a nation, standing with mute lips apart,
And glad Truth's yet mightier man-child leaps beneath the Future's heart.
So the Evil's triumph sendeth, with a terror and a chill,
Under continent to continent, the sense of coming ill,
And the slave, where'er he cowers, feels his sympathies with God
In hot tear-drops ebbing earthward, to be drunk up by the sod,
Till a corpse crawls round unburied, delving in the nobler clod.
For mankind are one in sprit, and an instinct bears along,
Round the earth's electric circle, the swift flash of right or wrong;
Whether conscious or unconscious, yet Humanity's vast frame
Through its ocean-sundered fibres feels the gush of joy or shame;-
In the gain or loss of one race all the rest have equal claim.
Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of Truth with Falsehood, for the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah, offering each the bloom or blight,
Parts the goats upon the left hand, and the sheep upon the right,
And the choice goes by forever 'twixt that darkness and that light.
Hast thou chosen, O my people, on whose party thou shalt stand,
Ere the Doom from its worn sandals shakes the dust against our land?
Though the cause of Evil prosper, yet 't is Truth alone is strong,
And, albeit she wander outcast now, I see around her throng
Troops of beautiful, tall angels, to enshield her from all wrong.
Backward look across the ages and the beacon-moments see,
That, like peaks of some sunk continent, jut through Oblivion's sea;
Not an ear in court or market for the low foreboding cry
Of those Crises, God's stern winnowers, from whose feet earth's chaff must fly;
Never shows the choice momentous till the judgement hath passed by.
Careless seems the great Avenger; history's pages but record
One death-grapple in the darkness 'twixt old systems and the Word;
Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne,-
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
We see dimly in the Present what is small and what is great,
Slow of faith how weak an arm may turn this iron helm of fate,
But the soul is still oracular; amid the market's din,
List the ominous stern whisper from the Delphic cave within,-
"They enslave their children's children who make compromise with sin."
Slavery, the earth-born Cyclops, fellest of the giant brood,
Sons of brutish Force and Darkness, who have drenched the earth with blood,
Famished in his self-made desert, blinded by our purer day,
Gropes in yet unblasted regions for his miserable prey;-
Shall we guide his gory fingers where our helpless children play?
Then to side with Truth is noble when we share her wretched crust,
Ere her cause bring fame and profit, and 't is prosperous to be just;
Then it is the brave man chooses, while the coward stands aside,
Doubting in his abject sprit, till his Lord is crucified,
And the multitude make virtue of the faith they had denied.
Count me o'er the earth's chosen heroes,- they were souls that stood alone,
While the men they agonized for hurled the contumelious stone,
Stood serene, and down the future saw the golden beam incline
To the side of perfect justice, mastered by their faith divine,
By one man's plain truth to manhood and to God's supreme design.
By the light of burning heretics Christ's bleeding feet I track,
Toiling up new Calvaries ever with the cross that turns not back,
And these mounts of anguish number how each generation learned
One new word of that grand Credo which in prophet-hearts hath burned
Since the first man stood God-conquered with his face to heaven upturned.
For Humanity sweeps onward: where today the martyr stands,
On the morrow, crouches Judas with the silver in his hands;
Far in front the cross stands ready and the crackling fagots burn,
While the hooting mob of yesterday in silent awe return
To glean up the scattered ashes into History's golden urn.
'Tis as easy to be heroes as to sit the idle slaves
Of a legendary virtue carved upon our father's graves,
Worshippers of light ancestral make the present light a crime;-
Was the Mayflower launched by cowards, steered by men behind their time?
Turn those tracks toward Past or Future, that make Plymouth Rock sublime?
They were men of present valor, stalwart old iconoclasts,
Unconvinced by axe or gibbet that all virtue was the Past's;
But we make their truth our falsehood, thinking that hath made us free,
Hoarding it in mouldy parchments, while our tender spirits flee
The rude grasp of that great Impulse which drove them across the sea.
They have rights who dare maintain them; we are traitors to our sires,
Smothering in their holy ashes Freedom's new-lit altar-fires;
Shall we make their creed our jailer? Shall we, in our haste to slay,
From the tombs of the old prophets steal the funeral lamps away
To light up the martry-fagots round the prophet of today?
New occasions teach new duties; Time makes ancient good uncouth;
They must upward still, and onward, who would keep abreast of Truth;
Lo, before us gleam her campfires? We ourselves must Pilgrims be,
Launch our Mayflower, and steer boldly through the desperate winter sea,
Nor attempt the Future's portal with the Past's blood-rusted key.
- James Russell Lowell
The Present Crisis
[Written in 1844, this poem provided inspiration for the leaders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. When deciding on a name for their new publication in 1910 they agreed that the name of their magazine should be The Crisis.]
WHEN a deed is done for Freedom, through the broad earth's aching breast
Runs a thrill of joy prophetic, trembling on from east to west,
And the slave, where'er he cowers, feels the soul within him climb
To the awful verge of manhood, as the energy sublime
Of a century bursts full-blossomed on the thorny stem of Time.
Through the walls of hut and palace shoots the instantaneous throe,
When the travail of the Ages wrings earth's systems to and fro;
At the birth of each new Era, with a recognizing start,
Nation wildly looks at a nation, standing with mute lips apart,
And glad Truth's yet mightier man-child leaps beneath the Future's heart.
So the Evil's triumph sendeth, with a terror and a chill,
Under continent to continent, the sense of coming ill,
And the slave, where'er he cowers, feels his sympathies with God
In hot tear-drops ebbing earthward, to be drunk up by the sod,
Till a corpse crawls round unburied, delving in the nobler clod.
For mankind are one in sprit, and an instinct bears along,
Round the earth's electric circle, the swift flash of right or wrong;
Whether conscious or unconscious, yet Humanity's vast frame
Through its ocean-sundered fibres feels the gush of joy or shame;-
In the gain or loss of one race all the rest have equal claim.
Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of Truth with Falsehood, for the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah, offering each the bloom or blight,
Parts the goats upon the left hand, and the sheep upon the right,
And the choice goes by forever 'twixt that darkness and that light.
Hast thou chosen, O my people, on whose party thou shalt stand,
Ere the Doom from its worn sandals shakes the dust against our land?
Though the cause of Evil prosper, yet 't is Truth alone is strong,
And, albeit she wander outcast now, I see around her throng
Troops of beautiful, tall angels, to enshield her from all wrong.
Backward look across the ages and the beacon-moments see,
That, like peaks of some sunk continent, jut through Oblivion's sea;
Not an ear in court or market for the low foreboding cry
Of those Crises, God's stern winnowers, from whose feet earth's chaff must fly;
Never shows the choice momentous till the judgement hath passed by.
Careless seems the great Avenger; history's pages but record
One death-grapple in the darkness 'twixt old systems and the Word;
Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne,-
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
We see dimly in the Present what is small and what is great,
Slow of faith how weak an arm may turn this iron helm of fate,
But the soul is still oracular; amid the market's din,
List the ominous stern whisper from the Delphic cave within,-
"They enslave their children's children who make compromise with sin."
Slavery, the earth-born Cyclops, fellest of the giant brood,
Sons of brutish Force and Darkness, who have drenched the earth with blood,
Famished in his self-made desert, blinded by our purer day,
Gropes in yet unblasted regions for his miserable prey;-
Shall we guide his gory fingers where our helpless children play?
Then to side with Truth is noble when we share her wretched crust,
Ere her cause bring fame and profit, and 't is prosperous to be just;
Then it is the brave man chooses, while the coward stands aside,
Doubting in his abject sprit, till his Lord is crucified,
And the multitude make virtue of the faith they had denied.
Count me o'er the earth's chosen heroes,- they were souls that stood alone,
While the men they agonized for hurled the contumelious stone,
Stood serene, and down the future saw the golden beam incline
To the side of perfect justice, mastered by their faith divine,
By one man's plain truth to manhood and to God's supreme design.
By the light of burning heretics Christ's bleeding feet I track,
Toiling up new Calvaries ever with the cross that turns not back,
And these mounts of anguish number how each generation learned
One new word of that grand Credo which in prophet-hearts hath burned
Since the first man stood God-conquered with his face to heaven upturned.
For Humanity sweeps onward: where today the martyr stands,
On the morrow, crouches Judas with the silver in his hands;
Far in front the cross stands ready and the crackling fagots burn,
While the hooting mob of yesterday in silent awe return
To glean up the scattered ashes into History's golden urn.
'Tis as easy to be heroes as to sit the idle slaves
Of a legendary virtue carved upon our father's graves,
Worshippers of light ancestral make the present light a crime;-
Was the Mayflower launched by cowards, steered by men behind their time?
Turn those tracks toward Past or Future, that make Plymouth Rock sublime?
They were men of present valor, stalwart old iconoclasts,
Unconvinced by axe or gibbet that all virtue was the Past's;
But we make their truth our falsehood, thinking that hath made us free,
Hoarding it in mouldy parchments, while our tender spirits flee
The rude grasp of that great Impulse which drove them across the sea.
They have rights who dare maintain them; we are traitors to our sires,
Smothering in their holy ashes Freedom's new-lit altar-fires;
Shall we make their creed our jailer? Shall we, in our haste to slay,
From the tombs of the old prophets steal the funeral lamps away
To light up the martry-fagots round the prophet of today?
New occasions teach new duties; Time makes ancient good uncouth;
They must upward still, and onward, who would keep abreast of Truth;
Lo, before us gleam her campfires? We ourselves must Pilgrims be,
Launch our Mayflower, and steer boldly through the desperate winter sea,
Nor attempt the Future's portal with the Past's blood-rusted key.
- James Russell Lowell
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
War in Afghanistan: The Way Forward, by Rick Alexander 10/05/2009
Here is a paper I just wrote for my Business, Government, Society class. Enjoy!
War. We are all too familiar with war. The United States has been continually engaged in conflict somewhere in the world for more than two decades, with no end in sight. Daily decisions are made that affect our nation, its position in world affairs, and the futures of our children. In spite of the importance of these stakeholders, it often seems we have little understanding of the context and impact of these serious choices. Now, as President Obama is confronted with keeping his campaign promises to refocus on Afghanistan and withdraw from Iraq, how do we evaluate his performance? What has been the impact of the war in Afghanistan and what will it continue to be on business, government, and society at home and more importantly in Afghanistan?
Historically, Afghanistan has been sporadically at war for nearly two centuries with various European and Eurasian interests (primarily Britain, Russia, and Pakistan) beginning with the first Anglo-Afghan War in 1839. In the past four decades, Afghanistan has been roiled by nearly continual fighting, multiple regime changes, natural disasters, rending cultural shifts, and a burgeoning narcotics trade funding diverse warring factions. (www.afghan-web.com)
Still reeling from the terrorist attacks on the New York World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the United States naively entered Afghanistan thirsty for bloody retribution facing an enemy it barely knew or understood. Fast forward to today, nearly eight years later. Sidetracked by a war in Iraq for so long that its initial gains in Afghanistan faltered, the United States faces a resurgent Taliban reinforced by extremists from all over the world.
On August 30, 2009 General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. Commander in Afghanistan released his stark assessment that victory in Afghanistan was far from a sure thing. He stated, “Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near term (next 12 months) – while Afghan security capacity matures – risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible (Washingtonpost.com).” It is in this grim context we consider the impacts of this particular war on our businesses, our government, and our society and look for a way forward.
Let us first examine the facet of Government since it is the primary policy driver for a war. Undoubtedly war is a heavily governmental function. Broad powers are granted by the Constitution to the Congress and particularly the President for the conduct of war (usconstitution.net). This places responsibility for wartime decision-making squarely on the shoulders of the executive and legislative branches of government (though one might allege duration of such conflicts seems to be dictated more by public sentiment than consistent policy). President Obama seems understandably reluctant to make a quick decision on the matter. Nevertheless, at some point in the immediate future, he will give direction to his administration on how to proceed. Whether it is an escalation of commitment or a reduction of force, the policy will have broad implications for business, government, and society here and abroad.
Let us consider for a moment some of the possible consequences. If the government pursues a policy of force reduction, it will risk international loss of face. It will increase the risk of resurgent terrorist groups and their infrastructures as threats to the Afghan people, the United States, and its allies. It may result in reductions to loss of American lives but will not necessarily result in a decrease in overall loss of life. It will be more likely to create a climate favorable to an increase in human rights violations and war crimes similar to those seen in the 1990s under the Taliban (www.afghan-web.com). It will rapidly reverse the gains in education and equality made on behalf of women and girls in the country. It will increase the success of the narcotics trade fueled by the opium poppy (www.fas.org). It will reduce the volume of international aid flowing into the country for the betterment of its people and devalue the billions of dollars invested in the country by NGOs, aid groups, and multinational corporations. This is only a limited summary of the likely impacts of a policy of force reduction.
On the other hand, if an escalation of commitment is approved by the Obama Administration, there is little doubt U.S. and allied casualties will increase and the fight will be long and difficult. International perception of the Obama administration will be impacted. And, while initial success may be experienced in focused battle, the protracted struggle against the insurgency will take place on much more fragile turf: the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.
Such a commitment will cost billions of dollars. However, such a commitment might also result in a better human rights climate for the nation, a stronger more equitable education system, reductions in the narcotics trade, and robust international business investment (and that’s the beginning). Such gains should result in long-term stability and the opportunity for prosperity in Afghanistan. Though such an outcome is uncertain, its possibility should make us seriously consider its advantages. In light of the pros and cons presented here, we can see that the repercussions of governmental policy will be broad and deep in Afghanistan as well as in the United States and abroad.
After we recognize the role of government, we should experience a realization of our role in society. As U.S. citizens, we have the responsibility to remain informed and aware in order to hold our government officials accountable for the decisions they make while at the same time possessing an understanding of the scope and difficulty of such decisions.
Additionally we have a rich and diverse cultural heritage that should not only enable us to empathize with the Afghan people but should also motivate us to help improve the lives of their people from a civil rights perspective. In our nation we have fought long and hard to achieve equitability among races, sexes, and social classes in education, suffrage, and employment (to name a few). While many would argue we have far to go, we certainly have raised the bar worldwide on what it means to live free. Afghanistan still faces the challenges of politics inseparable from religion, inequity between sexes, sub-par education, and complex multiculturalism with four major languages, 30 minor languages, and multiple dialects spoken within its own borders (indexmundi.com).
With a deep cultural understanding of what it means to achieve unity from diversity, we should champion the Afghan people who yearn for the same peace and prosperity we enjoy. Having kicked down the door of their nation in pursuit of our own international policies, it is the least we can do in return.
The actions of our nation should first be rooted in a firm societal belief in justice and equity. This should be exercised through concrete coherent governmental policy. However, this is not to say there is no profit potential to the United States. Nobility of action might very well result in profitability for business. Additionally through reciprocity, successful business often results in domestic success.
How is this possible? Market capitalism with all its flaws has resulted in a worldwide betterment of the standard of living for millions. Even from a governmental policy perspective, the strength of communist ideology in China seems to have been weakened by the pervasive influence of materialism and the system of free enterprise that feeds it. Though there are still “haves” and “have-nots” in the world today, the “have-nots” have far more than they otherwise would have. Our textbook stated, “Even as economic growth has widened the gap between rich and poor, it has dramatically reduced the proportion of the poor in the total population (Steiner, 24-25).”
With this in mind, I envision the positive possibilities before us for business in Afghanistan. The Afghanistan Investment Support Agency touts itself as “a fast growing emerging market of strategic importance close to some of the largest and fastest-growing markets in the world.” With strong markets for the expansion and modernization of infrastructure and telecommunications, reinvigoration of the harvesting of natural resources, and the availability of large quantities of relatively inexpensive labor, the potential for massive profits does exist. Though faced with many security challenges, businesses who survive in this climate remain poised for sustainable long-term profits.
This sounds like a greedy misappropriation of nobility and military power. It would be if it were not for the advances already made and those still to come in corporate social responsibility. As we have studied this term, business wields great power. If that power is used maliciously, it can be a vile thing indeed. However, if that power is harnessed for good, it may result in sweeping positive changes.
By exercising the seven levels of power in the seven environments of business, corporations may initiate and motivate sustainable positive change. Exercising economic and technological power in Afghanistan can mean providing infrastructural stability through the provision of electrical power, stable telecommunications, potable water, and consistently navigable roads. These foundational elements - once established - will enable better medical facilities and treatment, permanent schools, and the movement of goods and services more efficiently within and without the country.
As these sectors stabilize and grow, they will provide employment to the people which results in further stabilization. This comes not only from providing an occupation for idle hands but also from increasing money flow within local and national markets and generating revenue from taxes to support governmental services. As governmental services become more sophisticated, businesses may wield political and legal power to influence positive changes. These positive circumstances may perpetuate over time.
Businesses can increase the chances of success by exercising environmental power, cultural power, and power over individuals through corporate social responsibility. They do this by encouraging technological and professional advances ethically and in an environmentally safe manner. If in the course of providing employment they teach ethics, professionalism, and efficiency, these become intangible local exports to the society in which they function. Along with these “intangibles” may come better physical and mental health and more opportunities for individual peace and happiness. Overall, they may translate into a better way of life for the entire community.
In conclusion we see that our government will set the course for our national and international policies. Within the framework of those policies, businesses may be encouraged to seek profits in the emerging markets of Afghanistan. If they are so motivated, businesses will serve an integral role in the stabilization of a war weary nation. Through their policies and procedures as they implement their individual strategies to achieve profit, these same businesses may wield their seven powers for the good of their business and the good of the Afghan people.
As U.S. citizens it will be our societal responsibility to hold our government and businesses accountable for their actions and policies to ensure that both the government and the corporations exercise their corporate social responsibilities in a consistent manner. If we do this successfully, we may rescue what otherwise might have been a lost cause and someday see the end in sight.
1. http://www.afghan-web.com/history/chron/index4.html 20091003
2. http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/Assessment_Redacted_092109.pdf
20091003
3. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html 20091003
4. http://www.afghan-web.com/history/chron/index4.html 20091003
5. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32686.pdf 20091003
6. http://www.indexmundi.com/afghanistan/demographics_profile.html 20091003
7. Steiner, John F. & George A., Business, Government, and Society: A Managerial Perspective, 2009
8. http://www.aisa.org.af/ 20091003
What I think of Cash for Clunkers...
1. Do you agree with the Cash for Clunkers bill to get people to drive with fuel efficient vehicles? Why or Why not? No I do not agree with the "Cash for Clunkers" program. Though there is much less gasoline consumed... overall, other resources are utilized in the manufacture, maintenance, and disposal of these newer vehicles (Think Lithium). Also, electric cars consume fossil fuels at night while they're plugged in to recharge. This combination of factors reduces the gain in my mind.
2. How effective has the program been on economic stimulus?
This is the sad part. I think all the gains are temporary at best and certainly artificial. They are not sustainable and do not fix some of ... Read Morethe core problems in our economy. Rather than a "dot com bubble" or "real estate bubble," we create a "stimulus bubble." When it pops, where do we go from there?
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Calvary Love
This is pretty powerful stuff worth genuine consideration.
Calvary Love
by Amy Carmichael
If I belittle those whom I am called to serve, talk of their weak points in contrast perhaps with what I think of as my strong points; if I adopt a superior attitude, forgetting "Who made thee to differ? And what hast thou that thou hast not received?" then I know nothing of
If I find myself taking lapses for granted, "Oh, that's what they always do," "Oh, of course she talks like that, he acts like that," then I know nothing of Calvary love.
If I can enjoy a joke at the expense of another; if I can in any way slight another in conversation, or even in thought, then I know nothing of
If I can write an unkind letter, speak an unkind word, think an unkind thought without grief and shame, then I know nothing of
If I do not feel far more for the grieved Savior than for my worried self when troublesome things occur, then I know nothing of
If I can rebuke without a pang, then I know nothing of
If my attitude be one of fear, not faith, about one who has disappointed me; if I say, "Just what I expected" if a fall occurs, then I know nothing of
If I am afraid to speak the truth, lest I lose affection, or lest the one concerned should say, "You do not understand," or because I fear to lose my reputation for kindness; if I put my own good name before the other's highest good, then I know nothing of
If I am content to heal a hurt slightly, saying "Peace, peace," where there is no peace; if I forget the poignant word "Let love be without dissimulation" and blunt the edge of truth, speaking not right things but smooth things, then I know nothing of
If I hold on to choices of any kind, just because they are my choice, then I know nothing of
If I am soft to myself and slide comfortably into self-pity and self-sympathy; If I do not by the grace of God practice fortitude, then I know nothing of
If I myself dominate myself, if my thoughts revolve round myself, if I am so occupied with myself I rarely have "a heart at leisure from itself," then I know nothing of Calvary love.
If, the moment I am conscious of the shadow of self crossing my threshold, I do not shut the door, and keep that door shut, then I know nothing of
If I cannot in honest happiness take the second place (or the twentieth); if I cannot take the first without making a fuss about my unworthiness, then I know nothing of
If I take offense easily, if I am content to continue in a cool unfriendliness, though friendship be possible, then I know nothing of
If I feel injured when another lays to my charge things that I know not, forgetting that my sinless Savior trod this path to the end, then I know nothing of
If I feel bitter toward those who condemn me, as it seems to me, unjustly, forgetting that if they knew me as I know myself they would condemn me much more, then I know nothing of
If souls can suffer alongside, and I hardly know it, because the spirit of discernment is not in me, then I know nothing of
If the praise of others elates me and their blame depresses me; if I cannot rest under misunderstanding without defending myself; if I love to be loved more than to love, to be served more than to serve, then I know nothing of
If I crave hungrily to be used to show the way of liberty to a soul in bondage, instead of caring only that it be delivered; if I nurse my disappointment when I fail, instead of asking that to another the word of release may be given, then I know nothing of Calvary love.
If I do not forget about such a trifle as personal success, so that it never crosses my mind, or if it does, is never given room there; if the cup of flattery tastes sweet to me, then I know nothing of
If in the fellowship of service I seek to attach a friend to myself, so that others are caused to feel unwanted; if my friendships do not draw others deeper in, but are ungenerous (to myself, for myself), then I know nothing of Calvary love.
If I refuse to allow one who is dear to me to suffer for the sake of Christ, if I do not see such suffering as the greatest honor that can be offered to any follower of the Crucified, then I know nothing of
If I slip into the place that can be filled by Christ alone, making myself the first necessity to a soul instead of leading it to fasten upon Him, then I know nothing of
If my interest in the work of others is cool; if I think in terms of my own special work; if the burdens of others are not my burdens too, and their joys mine, then I know nothing of
If I wonder why something trying is allowed, and press for prayer that it may be removed; if I cannot be trusted with any disappointment, and cannot go on in peace under any mystery, then I know nothing of
If the ultimate, the hardest, cannot be asked of me; if my fellows hesitate to ask it and turn to someone else, then I know nothing of
If I covet any place on earth but the dust at the foot of the Cross, then I know nothing of
That which I know not, teach Thou me, O Lord, my God.
Amy Carmichael, "
Sunday, May 17, 2009
My Favorite Credo
by Sam Shoemaker |
| I stand by the door. I neither go too far in, nor stay too far out, The door is the most important door in the world- It is the door through which people walk when they find God. There's no use my going way inside, and staying there, When so many are still outside and they, as much as I, Crave to know where the door is. And all that so many ever find Is only the wall where a door ought to be. They creep along the wall like blind people, With outstretched, groping hands. Feeling for a door, knowing there must be a door, Yet they never find it ... So I stand by the door. The most tremendous thing in the world Go in, great saints, go all the way in-- There is another reason why I stand there. I admire the people who go way in. Sam Shoemaker, founder of Faith At Work at Calvary Episcopal Church in New York City, in 1926, was also one of the spiritual leaders who helped draft the 12 Steps of A.A. |
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Random Rambling
Dear Me!I really don't know what to put here. Way too much has been going on lately for me to put it all down. Between, school, real estate, work, kids, a broken air conditioner, a broken van, grass to mow, cars to wash, shopping to do, bills to pay, warm weather to enjoy, tests to take, marketing to do, emails to manage, social networking to complete, etc., where do I jump in? Such is life! It's been hectic but good lately though, so I can't complain.
Tonight I am going to saute some shrimp (in butter of course, with a wee bit of pepper) and generally enjoy my last weekend of scrumptious food before beginning my dietary and workout regimen on Tuesday to alter my lifestyle and waistline substantially. The goal over the next 6-12 months is to travel backward away from the 216lb toward the 185lb mark that is ideal for me...here's hoping for success! It's going to be rough I know. The "before" picture is at the right...we'll have to post an "after" shot in 6 months or so...if this works! Wish me luck!
Tonight I am going to saute some shrimp (in butter of course, with a wee bit of pepper) and generally enjoy my last weekend of scrumptious food before beginning my dietary and workout regimen on Tuesday to alter my lifestyle and waistline substantially. The goal over the next 6-12 months is to travel backward away from the 216lb toward the 185lb mark that is ideal for me...here's hoping for success! It's going to be rough I know. The "before" picture is at the right...we'll have to post an "after" shot in 6 months or so...if this works! Wish me luck!
Well, that's all for now. Talkatchalater!
- Rick Alexander
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Easter Weekend
We had a wonderful Easter weekend. On Friday night, I sat down with the family to share communion with them in our living room and explain to my children the real meaning of Good Friday.Then on Sunday, after Morning Worship, we went to some friends' place for Sunday Dinner and fellowship in celebration of the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. The children participated in the family's traditional Easter egg hunt and got to see doggies, geese, and turkeys. I liked some of the classic cars there. You'll see those pictures below. Altogether, it was a blessed day as we remembered Christ the Savior and an empty tomb. I trust your weekend was as joyful as ours has been. Have a great week!
- Rick
We talked about the nails used on Jesus.
We broke bread and drank grape juice and discussed their symbology.
Some of the classic cars at our friends' house.
Ooh La La!
Beautiful Flowers
Close up!
LOOT ;-)
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Online Books
Here is a great free resource if any of you are interested. There are lots of books on here from which to choose and peruse. Enjoy!
Friday, March 13, 2009
The Weekend
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)