- FOREWORD: I will be editing this for mistakes asap. I simply want to turn this in now in case any issues arise later and I can’t turn it in on time.
The topic of my concern for this summary is simple, yet complex: Business Ethics.
Perhaps not so much in pre-historical times, but, indeed, at the dawn of (written) history, alongside the pharaohs, the pillars and pyramids, the transactions of man begin to show themselves accounted for in great lengths in ancient civilizations such as those of the ever-enigmatic Ancient Egyptians and in Mesopotamia. The Law Code of Hammurabi, historically notorious for its eye-for-an-eye penal code, was the common law set by the Babylonian (Mesopotamian) ruler, Hammurabi, which, even upon a brief skimming, one can see improper economic transactions (of slaves, damaged property, wives, etc.) often yielded a harsh punishment. “He shall be put to death,” is the mainstay punishment for most misdeeds. But what is to be done when all goes well in business? From those times of our ancients trading at distant bazaars, to Columbus “pitching” the Americas to his kingship, running forward onto today’s global capitalism, “money makes the world go round” is seems likely a phrase that may have a longer life-span than we may think.
It seems to be, though, that many would resist this idea; and why, exactly? The conversation is vast and largely endless. In a modern rendition of long-held critiques, YouTube video channel 8-Bit Philosophy presents us with the thought that money and monetary value, as critical as it can be society, should NOT replace society altogether; namely when anything and everything can have a value assigned to it. This can, and likely should be seen by many, be claimed to be WRONG. Alas, we have many individuals who have gone on the historical records as having ruthless business tactics in the days of modern American industrialization, such as Cornelius Vanderbilt and Andre Carnegie, and, in more recent times, say, Starbucks. These individuals and companies have put others out of business; misfortunes like this are ever the reminder that the game of business can at times have a very cruel side to it: competition. For those who decry loses of their wealth at the hands of the “free market”, government-businesses also come into play (let us not forget that we pay the government for their services). In attempts to not destroy the business-class altogether in the realization of some possibly vexing loses, there are moderates like the late Harvard Professor John Rawls, who, in his book “A Theory of Justice” argue for governments to aid with the money they receive from citizens’ taxes to create a system that has competition between businesses, but also makes room for and encourages cooperation. When the morally troublesome problems of business are viewed from the broad scope of considering business but exchange-agreements between individuals, all sorts of things are left to say about it. Some see the corporation as a “legal entity” liable as a person in the eyes of the court; consumer protection laws have been established in the US and elsewhere, but that hasn’t stopped the relatively significant amount of misinformation one can hear and see regulation on marketing material; and, most controversial in this era, are all the endless amount of discourse on the subject of “buying power”; I’m talking about non-governmental business paying out to the government. But some organizations, for example, who fight to keep big businesses out of their locus, they can be said to harm those in the area in need of a job. The meat for this topic is big and inexpensive, and in so far as everyone can have their piece and pose their opinions on the rights and wrongs of business, I am inspired to do the same, by first listening to them all, with hopes that I’ll come out with something perhaps more enlightened than to say, “Business is bad, always has been, and always will be,” as it seems to be the sentiment of many people not playing in the big leagues (mostly my people) today.