NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Social Responsibility - Necessity or Good PR? (1) Ever since the concept of Globalization was being introduced to the citizens in Western countries, its proponents have been trying to legitimize the gap between poor and rich, associated with this concept, by suggesting that Globalization has no other purpose but benefiting humanity. They want to divert peoples attention from the fact that Globalization makes exploitation of human and natural recourses more effective, with the ultimate goal of turning workers into modern day slaves, deprived of any constitutional rights whatsoever. When we keep this in mind, it will allow us to draw parallels between Communism and Globalization - both concepts are based on good intentions that simply do not correspond to the objective reality. It is not simply a coincidence that spiritual and often biological descendents of Bolshevik commissars, turned into the ardent supporters of neo-Liberalism, within a matter of very short time.
One of them is Joseph Stiglitz, who in his book Making Globalization Work strives to put a friendly mask on the ugly face of Globalization. Even a brief analysis of his work leaves no doubt as to the fact that it does not address peoples concerns, in regards to Globalization, because author bases the ideological premise of his work on metaphysical denial of surrounding reality. The purpose of Making Globalization Work is to justify governments bureaucracy becoming involved in regulation of economic processes. In preface to his book author says: Economists who place less importance on reducing income inequality are more prone to think that the actions governments might take to reduce that inequality are too costly, and may even be counterproductive.
These "free market" economists are also more inclined to believe that markets, by themselves, without government intervention, are efficient (Stiglitz). Stiglitz suggests that economical inequality among people is something artificially created. He does not seem to understand the objective reasons that are behind African nations inability to break out of poverty or to simply maintain civilization that was brought to them by European settlers. According to Stiglitz, it is citizens in developed countries that should be instilled with historical guilt over the fact that many people in Africa, Asia and Latin America were never able to evolve beyond the Stone Age. Authors twisted sense of logic allows him to conclude that the process of Globalization needs to be referred to as something that might benefit people in underdeveloped countries, in economical sense of this word.
It does not take a genius to realize that Stiglitz ideas are Communist in their essence. We have all heard it before since there is much of economic inequality among worlds nations, a some kind of world government needs to be set up, which will regulate nations access to natural resources. Stiglitz suggests that establishment of multicultural paradise Earth is easily achievable, for as long as nations are willing to surrender their national sovereignty to cosmo political experts, who predictably enough consist of representatives of chosen people. Earths resources is a pie, which simply needs to be cut into fair pieces.
Author does not specify who is going to be in charge of cutting, but it can be easily figured out, given Stiglitz's ethnic background. If we paraphrase George Orwell: All people are equal, but some of them are more equal then others. We can only wonder why Stiglitz's masterpiece is being discussed as something that has academic validity, despite the fact that it emanates an unbearable stench of Communism. Even authors seemingly logical statements, such as: For many (MNC) firms, social responsibility is as much a moral issue as an economic one cannot stand criticism. As economist, Stiglitz should be well aware that the process of economic activity is based on the principle of making profit. This principle is simply irreconcilable with the principle of social responsibility in countries affected by Liberalism, because Liberalism denies the notion of national solidarity as something that is opposite to the illusionary ideals of multiculturalism.
Stiglitz keeps repeating continuously that managers must be socially responsible, managers need to be environmentally aware, companies must strive to benefit local communities, however, he does not bother to substantiate his point of view. Why should manager be concerned about environment, for example, given the fact that he is being taught from his early years in elementary school that, in this country, nothing matters but money? Of course, he can pretend that he is concerned about it; the way companies pretend that they believe in the effectiveness of affirmative action policy, only to maintain their reputation as progressive institutions. It is absolutely inappropriate to replace financial motivation with social one, when it comes to managing economics.
Communists had done it once and they failed miserably. Nowadays, such companies as McDonalds and Wal-Mart have also decided that it is much simpler to instill their employees with team spirit, as something that would guarantee workers loyalty, instead of providing workers with financial benefits in exchange for such loyalty. As result, Wal-Marts annual employee turnover ratio, for example, accounts for 55 %. Native-born Americans would never want to work for Wal-Mart, which is the reason why this company is being continuously sued for hiring illegal immigrants. Such Wal-Marts practice undermines socio-political stability in this country, which is why it should have been closed down long ago, if our politicians were concerned more about the well-being of their fellow citizens than about the prospects of being reelected for the second term. Replacing economic motivation with social one, when it comes to designing economic policies, is a pure Communism.
It appears that Stiglitz would be able to benefit society to far greater extent, if he was given a shovel and told to do something useful, instead of being allowed to teach economical nonsense at Columbia University. (2) Stiglitz points out at countries where bureaucrats are in control of national economies as examples of fair societies. Stiglitz is particularly fond of Sweden: There are, for instance, other forms of market economies - such as that of Sweden, which has sustained robust growth - that have led to quite different societies, marked with better health care and education and less inequality (Stiglitz). However, he does not mention the fact that almost every Swedish engineer or software programmer dreams of immigrating to U. S. , because for Swedish professional people, it does not make any sense to return 65 % of their paychecks back to the government in taxes, in order for the bureaucrats to provide a comfortable living to the hordes of immigrants from Third World, who rarely bother to even learn the language of the country where they came to live. The concern about well-being of poor children of Somalia is nothing but hypocrisy, on the part of Stiglitz. He is well aware that there is a direct link between our ability to choose among twenty different kinds of watermelons at Safeway, in the middle of winter, and the fact that often half of population, in countries where these watermelons come from, lives in the state of poverty.
There is simply not enough room under the sun for all. The Earth is already being overpopulated and this process keeps gaining momentum, whereas the amount of natural resources in the world is limited. Within the last 25 years, population of Ethiopia has tripled, while being subjected to never-ending famine and civil wars. Apparently, 60 %- 70 % of worlds population simply does not have a ticket to sail in the spaceship Earth.
The problem with Globalization is that, despite its proclaimed objectives of creating a more effective worlds economy, this process has no other purpose then concentrating the bulk of worlds resources in the hands of financial elite. In its turn, this elite could not care less about maintaining the pace of cultural and technological progress, associated with Western civilization. This is the reason why promoters of Globalization are strongly in favor of legalizing 12 million of illegal Mexicans in this country, while understanding perfectly well that it will only speed up the process of America turning into Third World country itself. It does not bother hook-nosed experts as Stiglitz, because they do not have a spiritual affiliation with countries where they promote their poisonous ideas. All that matters for the pushers of Globalization, are the prospects of making immediate profit, at the expense of turning the lives of future generations into living hell.
This is why only very naive people can seriously believe in the ideals of social awareness, when they are being promoted by apologists of modern Communism. There always used to be enough injustice, throughout the history, but never before the pure evil used to endorse itself with such outrageous cynicism as Globalization does. The rate of poverty in Third World countries continues to rise. This is despite the fact that every WTO meeting begins with the publicity stunts, as the discussion of how to end hunger in developing countries.
It is not a secret that many Western companies move their production lines to Third World countries. There is a new politically correct term for this process outsourcing. The workforce in these countries is incredibly cheap. In China, for example, the average workers salary at textile factory consists of 10 dollars a day.
In addition, there are no laws that would protect employees rights. Workers at Nike's factories in Thailand are often being forced to work for as long as 12 hours a day, without holidays. The production cost of pare Nike's shoes is about 10 dollars, while this company sells them for $ 80 - 100 in U. S.
This illustrates the essence of Globalizm the merciless exploitation of indigenous populations in countries of Third World. Still, Stiglitz suggests that people should not run into early conclusions, regarding Globalization, even when they feel that their life force is being sucked out of them by transnational corporations. According to the author of Making Globalization Work, once financial tycoons become bored of collecting the most exquisite cars, buying Faberge eggs or acquiring the whole islands for throwing private parties, they will inevitably consider making drinking water available in such countries as Haiti or Chad. Thus, Globalization should benefit all. Apparently, Stiglitz believes in inner goodness of capitalist moneybags, even though that it is most likely that he was simply being paid by such moneybags to promote friendly image of Globalization.
For anyone, whose ability to think logically has not been completely destroyed by politically correct brainwashing, the absurdity of such statement is self-evident. Only the racially homogeneous societies, which are based on the concept of national solidarity, can enjoy social justice, without resorting to mass shootings of representatives of bourgeoisie, as Communists did. In his book, Stiglitz keeps whining about inequality, elimination of which he somehow links with Globalization. This proves him as person who is not being overly burdened with intellect, because it is peoples biological inequality that prevents societies from being plunged into social entropy, when any cultural or scientific progress becomes impossible. As one old saying goes road to hell is made out of good intentions.
It is because of their concerns for equality that Commies killed 60 million people in Russia alone, prior to the outbreak of WWII. It is also concerns for equality that financial elites use as excuse nowadays, while depriving citizens in Western countries of their civil freedoms. One of the leading critics of Globalization from the left is Noam Chomsky. In his book What Uncle Sam Really Wants, Chomsky proves that American governments political demagogy only serves one purpose providing an ideological support for the American large corporations, while they are trying to take over the world. If this was the case, we could only support it. However, the problem is that the promotion of American interests is the last thing that instigators of Globalization care about.
They are incapable of thinking about anything but money, which is why they were being associated with spiritual corruption, throughout the centuries. Thus, in order to conclude this paper, we need to say once again that the principle of social responsibility, within a context of Globalization, is nothing but good PR. People who can only think about continuing to enrich themselves, with the mean of transferring financial assets from country to country, without regard to local laws, despite the fact that they already can satisfy their wildest desires - cannot be socially responsible in a priori. Bibliography: Abdelhadi, B. 2005.
Criticism of Globalization: Positive and Negative Aspects. ISESCO New Headquarters. [Online]. Available at: web Bianco, A. 2006. The Bully of Bentonville. Currency Press, Sydney. Buchanan, P. 2002.
The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization. St. Martin's Press, New York. Chomsky, N. 1993. What Uncle Sam Really Wants. Z Communications. [Online].
Available at: web Fishman, C. 2003. The Wal-Mart You Don't Know. Fast Company. Com. [Online]. Available at: web Goldhagen, D. 2004. The Globalization Of Anti-Semitism.
Christian Action for Israel. [Online]. Available at: web Girls, E. 2000. Contemporary Globalization and its Ethical Challenges. BNET Research Center. [Online]. Available at: web Marx, K. and Engel, F. 1848.
Manifesto of the Communist Party. The Australian National University. [Online]. Available at: web Stiglitz, J. 2006. Making Globalization Work. Penguin Allen Lane, UK.
Soon, M. 2006. Malls, Multiplexes and McDonald's - The New Communist World Order. Blogcritics Magazine. [Online] Available at: web Outline: Part one Part two
Free research essays on topics related to: socially responsible, uncle sam, third world countries, politically correct, wal marts
Research essay sample on Social Responsibility Necessity Or Good Pr
