Karl+Marx+and+Capitalism+_+search+log

[|Glossary]** Trash
 * Resources
 * [|Sirs]**

Karl Marx and Capitalism website sources

//__Essential Question: What are alternatives to the capitalistic mode of economy?__

Intro: The beginning of the rise of industry in Europe and North America in the late 18th Century, heralded an unprecedented growth of wealth, territory, and resources for western nations. Much of this growth is attributed to the rise of capitalism, a system, as Karl Marx(19th Century social theorist, economist, and philosopher) pointed out, is pockmarked with flaws and paradoxes.// What are these flaws and paradoxes? Are there alternatives to Capitalism? This pathfinder is designed to allow an researcher to become familiar with different types of economic systems, and to view them through a critical and objective lens.

this is a good start - in the next few sentences describe how the pathfinder will assist the user - explain what this pathfinder will be useful for - Ms. Tamarkin
Search term**: Karl Marx + Political Theorist** Title**: [|MARX, KARL HEINRICH]** *Who is Karl Marx?""" //**Source:**// //The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ideas// //**Author:**// //na// //**Publication Date:**// //2004// //**Page Number:**// //n.p.// //**Database:**// //SIRS Renaissance// //**Service:**// //SIRS Knowledge Source <[|http://www.sirs.com>//]//
 * Citation**: //**Title:**// //[|Marx, Karl Heinrich]//


 * Summary**: "German philosopher, economist, and social theorist whose account of class change through conflict, "the materialist conception of history" is known as historical, or dialectical, materialism (see Marxism). His Das Kapital/Capital (1867-95) is the fundamental text of Marxist economics, and his systematic theses on class struggle, history, and the importance of economic factors in politics have exercised an enormous influence on later thinkers and political activists."


 * Subject heading**: [|Marx, Karl (1818-1883)]

//3 things I discovered:// //2 things I found interesting// //1 question I still have Why do so many students believe Marx to be solely a communist advocate?//
 * 1) "German philosopher, economist, and social theorist whose account of class change through conflict, "the materialist conception of history" is known as historical, or dialectical, materialism (see Marxism)."
 * 2) "Marx never again held a job after moving to London and was dependent on financial handouts and a fixed annual settlement from Engels until he inherited a small legacy from his mother in the late 1870s."
 * 3) Marx's philosophical work owed much to Hegel's work although he later rejected his idealism.
 * 1) That Marx had to depend on his close friend Engel among other people to survive in his later years.
 * 2) "Marx never lived to finish this work and it remained unread and almost unreviewed for over two decades. Engels spent over ten years after Marx's death preparing the second and third volumes for publication (1885, 1894).//"//

Vocab: Marxism, Hegel, anarchism, social theorist, Engel

//**Search term**: Karl Marx AND Capitalism //**Citation**:// **Title:** [|Approaching Socialism]
 * Title**: [|Approaching Socialism]// ***This article is a good counterbalance of thought and will help the reader achieve a greater level of objectivity***
 * Source:** Monthly Review Vol. 57, No. 3
 * Author:** Harry Magdoff and Fred Magdoff
 * Publication Date:** July/Aug. 2005
 * Page Number:** 19-61
 * Database:** SIRS Researcher
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source <[|http://www.sirs.com]>

//**Summary**: "'The critical social, economic, and environmental problems of the world are inherent to capitalism. Thus, capitalism must be replaced with an economy and society at the service of humanity--necessitating also the creation of an environment that protects the earth's life support systems....above are suggested basic principles and issues that will need consideration during the construction of a socialist society. The experiences of the Soviet Union and China indicate that the attainment of a mobilized and educated populace willing and capable of taking power--understanding the basic problems and limitations and capable of checking the growth of a new bureaucratic class or strata--will not come easily. However, we must learn how to do so if there is to be any hope of significantly improving the conditions of the vast number of the world's people who are living hopelessly under the most severe conditions while also preserving the earth as a livable planet. This is necessary not only for humans but for all the other species that share the planet with us and whose fortunes are intimately tied to ours.'// **(Monthly Review)** //The authors opine that capitalism is the cause of social and economic strife and should be replaced by socialism."


 * Subject heading**: [| Bureaucracy], [|Capitalism], [|Capitalism, History], [|Central planning], [|China, History, 20th century], [|China, Politics and government], [|Cost and standard of living], [|Economics, Sociological aspects], [|Imperialism], [|Income distribution, China], [|Industrialization], [|Mixed economy], [|Poverty], [|Statistics], [|Reform], [|Socialism], [|Socialism, China], [|Socialism, Soviet Union], [|Soviet Union, Economic policy], [|Soviet Union, History, 20th century], [|Soviet Union, Politics and government], [|Wealth]

3 things I discovered:// > **This is kind of related to an inital question you had about "What are the holes in the argument against capitalism." The fact that there are examples of societies that did use a capitalist economic system and were able to distribut resrouces effectively. The logic of capitalism - is it correct to assume that there is scarcity? - Are there enough resources to distribut ethings equitably?** //2 things I found interesting// //1 question I still have// > ===//**This is a really good question question - how could you find the answer?** Some search terms may include: democratic participation or cooperative governance - maybe "participatory economics"//===
 * 1) The leading argument against socialism is that it's "...against human nature."
 * 2) Christopher Columbus remarked about native culture in the Americas: "'Nor have I been able to learn whether they held personal property, for it seemed to me that whatever one had, they all took shares of....They are so ingenuous and free with all they have that no one would believe it who has not seen it; of anything they possess, if it be asked of them, they never say no; on the contrary, they invite you to share it and show as much love as if their hearts went with it.'"
 * 1) Capitalism leads to imperialism: "'...capitalism is a system that must expand--leading to colonial and imperial wars and economic domination of poorer countries.'"
 * 1) "'The European settlers in the thirteen colonies in what became the United States had no doubts about their superiority in every way over the "wild savage" Indians. But let us take a look at the Iroquois Nations. They had democracy involving not political parties but people's participation in decision-making and in removing unsatisfactory officials. Women voted with the men and had special responsibilities in certain areas. At the same time the "civilized" settlers relied on white indentured servants and black slaves and severely constrained women's rights. It took three and a half centuries after the pilgrims landed to free the slaves and four centuries for women to get the right to vote!'"
 * 2) "'If human nature, values, and relations have changed before, it hardly needs pointing out that they may change again. Indeed, the notion that human nature is frozen into place is simply another way that those supporting the present system attempt to argue that society is frozen in place. As John Dewey wrote in an article on "Human Nature" for The Encyclopeia of the Social Sciences //in 1932'"//
 * 1) //Has western governments 'brainwashed' its individuals into believing that capitalism and individuality is the only option for governing?//

Vocab: socialism, Anthropologists, mercantile (or merchant) capitalism, industrial capitalism, //backward-looking framing effects//

//**Search term:** Capitalism AND downward redistribution
 * Title**: [|Why the Poor Don't Soak the Rich]
 * Citations**:// **Title:** [|Why the Poor Don't Soak the Rich]
 * Source:** Daedalus
 * Author:** Ian Shapiro
 * Publication Date:** Winter 2002
 * Page Number:** 118-128
 * Database:** SIRS Researcher
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source <[|http://www.sirs.com>//]


 * Summary**: "'Aspirations do not form in vacuums. People must be able to picture realistically the good for which they will strive. If the gap between where a person is and where he or she might hope to be is too great, certain goods are likely to seem out of reach--and hence outside the range of realistic aspirations.' //**(Daedalus)**// This article looks at why the poor remain poor."

Subject Heading: [|Capitalism], [|Democracy], [|Income distribution], [|Poor], [|Social classes], [|U.S., Economic conditions], [|U.S., Politics and government], [|U.S., Social conditions]

//3 things I learned// 2 things I found interesting > Every one of these assumptions is questionable--and every one of them deserves to be questioned. > Aspirations do not form in vacuums. People must be able to picture realistically the goods for which they will strive. If the gap between where a person is and where he or she might hope to be is too great, certain goods are likely to seem out of reach--and hence outside the range of realistic aspirations. There thus arises the possibility of an //empathy gulf//, a situation in which people who are situated in one stratum of society may find it literally impossible to imagine the goods pursued by those in another.
 * 1) re-distributive thesis
 * 2) downward redistribution
 * 3) "The expectation that democracies will redistribute downward is often motivated by the observation of poverty amid opulence. It seems reasonable to anticipate that the greater the manifest opulence of the few, the stronger will be the redistributive pressure from below. Paradoxically, however, something closer to the opposite may often be the case."
 * 1) Why this discrepancy? An important part of the answer, I think, lies in exposing a number of dubious assumptions about human psychology. Those who adhere to the redistributive thesis, be they Marxist, liberal, or conservative, usually assume that people in general keep themselves well informed about their place in the distribution of income and wealth, that the poor and middle classes compare themselves to the wealthy when thinking about what is feasible or just, and that those toward the bottom of the income distribution are like coiled springs--were it not for various external forces that are pressing them down, they would leap into action and demand a greater share of the economic pie.

1 question: How does Shapiro's analysis of a capitalistic flaw play into contemporary times?

Vocab: downward redistribution, regressive redistribution, Anecdotal distractions

= = Summary: "'Karl Marx--a powerful mind, a very learned man, and a good German writer--died 119 years ago [in 1883]. He lived in the age of steam; never in his life did he see a car, a telephone, or an electric light, to say nothing of later technological devices. His admirers and followers used to say and some keep saying: it doesn't matter, his teaching is still perfectly relevant to our time because the system he analyzed and attacked--capitalism--is still here. That Marx is worth reading is certain. The question is, however: Does his theory truly explain anything in our world and does it provide a ground for any predictions? The answer is, No. Another question is whether or not his theories were useful at one time. The answer is, obviously, Yes: they operated successfully as a set of slogans that were supposed to justify and glorify communism and the slavery that inevitably goes along with it.' (**//First Things//**) This examination of Marx's theory of socialism highlights his important tenets, his contribution to the appearance of totalitarianism, the concept of social justice and socialism's contemporary applications."
 * Search Term :** socialism + karl marx
 * Title:** [|What Is Left of Socialism]
 * Source:** First Things
 * Author:** Leszek Kolakowski
 * Publication Date:** Oct. 2002
 * Page Number:** 42-46
 * Database:** SIRS Renaissance
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source <[|http://www.sirs.com]>

Subject heading: [|What Is Left of Socialism], [|Marx, Karl (1818-1883)], [|Social justice], [|Socialism], [|Totalitarianism]

3 "Neo-Marxists deplore what is called "consumerism," or "consumerist society." In our civilization there are indeed many alarming and deplorable phenomena associated with the growth of consumption. The point is, however, that what we know as the alternative to this civilization is incomparably worse. In all Communist societies, economic reforms (to the extent that they yielded any results at all) led invariably in the same direction: the partial restoration of the market, that is to say, of "capitalism."" " As for the so-called materialist interpretation of history, it has provided us with a number of interesting insights and suggestions, but it has no explanatory value. In its strong, rigid version, for which one may find considerable support in many classical texts, it implies that social development depends entirely on the class struggle that ultimately, through the intermediary of changing "modes of production," is determined by the technological level of the society in question. It implies, moreover, that law, religion, philosophy, and other elements of culture have no history of their own, since their history is the history of the relations of production. This is an absurd claim, completely lacking in historical support." "Capitalism developed spontaneously and organically from the spread of commerce. Nobody planned it and it did not need an all-embracing ideology, whereas socialism was an ideological construction. Ultimately, capitalism is human nature at work--that is, man's greediness allowed to follow its course--whereas socialism is an attempt to institutionalize and enforce fraternity. It seems obvious by now that a society in which greed is the main motivation of human acts, for all of its repugnant and deplorable aspects, is incomparably better than a society based on compulsory brotherhood, whether in national or international socialism."

2"Yes: they[Marxist] operated successfully as a set of slogans that were supposed to justify and glorify communism and the slavery that inevitably goes along with it." " All of Marx's important prophecies, however, have turned out to be false. First, he predicted growing class polarization and the disappearance of the middle class in societies based on a market economy. Karl Kautsky rightly stressed that if this prediction were wrong, the entire Marxist theory would be in ruins. It is clear that this prediction has proved to be wrong; rather, the opposite is the case. The middle classes are growing, whereas the working class in the sense Marx meant it has been dwindling in capitalist societies in the midst of technological progress." "Second, he predicted not only the relative but also the absolute impoverishment of the working class. This prediction was already wrong in his lifetime."

1 How can Kolakowski's claim that Marx's theory has been refuted be substantiated? This essay seems to be angry ranting backed by little to no evidence, nevertheless it makes for a interesting argument on communism.

vocab: proletariat, consumerism, Neo-Marxists, crises [economic sense]

"Another component of Marx's theory that lacks explanatory power is his labor theory. Marx made two important additions to the theories of **Adam Smith**"-see, his name comes up again - who is he???? Put his name as a search term (run a serach for him) and under your vocabulary list. I think this article is too difficult and wordy - although at the end, did you see the related articles from the Hutchinson Dictionary of Ideas? Those entries will give some goode definitions that you can use for yourvocaulbalry/glosssary section.

Title:** [|Towards Life After Capitalism: An Introduction to Participatory...]
 * Search term: parecon
 * Source:** Briarpatch (Regina, Canada) Vol. 34, No. 6
 * Author:** Michael Albert
 * Publication Date:** Sept./Oct. 2005
 * Page Number:** 14-19
 * Database:** SIRS Researcher
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source <[|http://www.sirs.com]>


 * Summary:** "In October 2004 at the Conference of the Pio Manzu Institute, Michael Albert was awarded the Medal of the President of the Italian Republic for developing and popularising what the citation described as 'a radical economic model known as Participatory Economics, a bold, innovative economic theory aimed at replacing self-serving competition in the economic field with egalitarian co-operation.' Albert's address to the conference makes a compelling case for, first of all, the need to talk about what a co-operative economy might look like--and then to work like mad to make it a reality. We address the question of an alternative economic vision because, in the words of the great economist John Maynard Keynes, '[Capitalism] is not a success. It is not intelligent, it is not beautiful, it is not just, it is not virtuous--and it doesn't deliver the goods. In short, we dislike it, and we are beginning to despise it. But when we wonder what to put in its place, we are extremely perplexed.' We address the question of economic vision to undo that perplexity." //**(Briarpatch)**//
 * Descriptors:** [|Capitalism], [|Comparative economics], [|Economics], [|Economics, Sociological aspects], [|Cooperative societies]

On the upper West Side of New York City, barely a mile apart, exist neighbourhoods in which the average disposable income is, on the poorer side, about $5,000 per year and, on the richer side, about $500,000 per year. This gap is not due to a difference in industriousness or talent. It is due to social relations that force the many to enrich the few. Starvation the world over has the same root cause: feeding the poor is not as profitable as overfeeding the rich. What health we attain, what food we eat, what housing we inhabit, comes to us because someone was seeking--not health, sustenance, or shelter for all--but profit for themselves. Economic logic seeks profit, rather than social well-being. Benefits for the weak arise (when they arise at all) only as a by-product, not an intention. As Keynes put it, "Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone."
 * 3 learned things**
 * Capitalism is theft.** The harsh and subservient labours of most citizens enrich a few others who don't have to labour at all. In general, those who work longer and harder get less. Those who work less long and less hard get more.
 * Capitalism is alienation and anti-sociality.** Under capitalism, the motives guiding decisions are pecuniary, not personal, selfish, not social. We each seek individual advance at the expense of others. The result, unsurprisingly, is an anti-social environment in which nice folks finish last.
 * Capitalism is authoritarian.** Within capitalism's workplaces, those who labour at rote and tedious jobs have nearly zero say over the conditions, output, and purpose of their efforts. Those who own or who monopolize empowering positions have near total say. Not even Stalin controlled when people could rest, eat, or go to the bathroom, but corporate owners routinely exercise such power. Corporations annihilate democracy.

"As John Stuart Mill put it, 'I confess that I am not charmed with the ideal of life held out by those who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on; that the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other's heels, which form the existing type of social life, are the most desirable lot of human beings.'" 1 question: If in the future we needed an alternative form of economy, would parecon be a good candidate? What are some problems with this system?
 * 2 interesting things**

vocab: //Participatory Economics,// corporate entities, corporation, //egalitarian//

Search term: Redistribution + medicaid
 * Title:** [|The Immorality of Redistribution]
 * Source:** Freeman Vol. 56, No. 2
 * Author:** Harold B. Jones, Jr.
 * Publication Date:** March 2006
 * Page Number:** 28-32
 * Database:** SIRS Researcher
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source <[|http://www.sirs.com]>

Summary: "'It has been proposed that government assistance programs like prescription drugs should be provided only to those who earn less than a certain income. The fate of such a policy can be predicted from what has happened to Medicaid. Intended to provide medical care for the poor, Medicaid has become 'inheritance protection for the children of well-off seniors.' No retirement plan is complete without a scheme for hiding assets and income in order to qualify for Medicaid. A means test for other benefits will lead to a vast expansion of the 'elderlaw' industry and to ever-more isngenious schemes for concealing wealth.' //**(Freeman)**// This article re-analyzes Immanuel Kant's theory regarding the morality of wealth redistribution.

subject heading: [|Capitalism], [|Economics], [|Ethics], [|Kant, Immanuel (1724-1804)], [|Wealth], [|Welfare state]

3 2 interesting things: "It has been proposed that government assistance programs like prescription drugs should be provided only to those who earn less than a certain income. The fate of such a policy can be predicted from what has happened to Medicaid. Intended to provide medical care for the poor, Medicaid has become "inheritance protection for the children of well-off seniors."1 No retirement plan is complete without a scheme for hiding assets and income in order to qualify for Medicaid. A means test for other benefits will lead to a vast expansion of the "elderlaw" industry and to ever-more ingenious schemes for concealing wealth." "'Are we prepared to urge on ourselves or our fellows that any person whose wealth exceeds the average of all persons in the world should immediately dispose of the excess by distributing it equally to all the rest of the world's inhabitants?...[A] universal 'potlatch' would make a civilized world impossible.'2 "He received his doctorate in 1755 and was allowed to lecture as "private teacher" (//Privatdozent//), which meant he had no official position but could earn as much as his students were willing to pay. Adam Smith, who had some familiarity with the universities of the time, said that professors who could rely on a salary showed little concern for the quality of their lectures. The only ones who ever became good instructors were those who were entirely dependent on the fees paid by their students.7 Kant fell into the latter category, mastered the art of teaching, and found his classes full.8"

1 If we were to follow Jones views what would the abolishing of the welfare system hold for today's population?

vocab: entrepreneur, Immanuel Kant


 * search term:** communism
 * title:** communism
 * citation:Title:** [|communism]
 * Source:** The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ideas
 * Author:**
 * Publication Date:** 2004
 * Page Number:**
 * Database:** SIRS Renaissance
 * Summary:** "' An employee of the Eastern European broadcasting station Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty offers a behind-the-scenes look at its various radio outlets and the politics and events that they covered during the latter part of the 20th century. "[F]ar from being hack radio stations that droned on about the evils of communism, RFE/RL was regarded by many people in Eastern Europe--including Vaclav Havel, Adam Michnik, and other leading dissidents--as invaluable, because they were a reliable source of news....In many respects RFE/RL was a highbrow station--more like National Public Radio [in the U.S.] than a commercial broadcasting station. It often had roundtable discussions about cultural and political questions....RFE/RL also housed a widely admired research institute....In short, RFE/RL was a lively place because RFE/RL staffers were novelists, poets, journalists, academics, and former military officers. Many had life stories that would make a riveting memoir or movie.' (//**Partisan Review**//)


 * subject heading:** [|Communism]

3 "Revolutionary socialism based on the theories of the political philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, emphasizing common ownership of the means of production and a planned, or command economy." " Marx and Engels in the //Communist Manifesto// 1848 put forward the theory that human society, having passed through successive stages of slavery, feudalism, and capitalism, must advance to ."
 * [[image:http://sks.sirs.com/icons/larrow.gif link="http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SINFOTECHH-0-753&artno=0000198476&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=communism&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=Y&ic=N#A1"]][|"][[image:http://sks.sirs.com/icons/rarrow.gif link="http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SINFOTECHH-0-753&artno=0000198476&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=communism&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=Y&ic=N#A3"]]** as the ideology of a nation state survives in only a few countries in the 21st century, notably China, Cuba, North Korea, Laos, and Vietnam, where market forces are being encouraged in the economic sphere."

1 vocab:** Engel, //Communist Manifesto,// **dialectical materialism**
 * 2

= = = = = = = = = =
 * search term**: communism
 * title:** The Godlessness That Failed
 * citation**:**Title:** [|The Godlessness That Failed]
 * Source:** First Things
 * Author:** Michael Novak
 * Publication Date:** June/July 2000
 * Page Number:** 35-39
 * Database:** SIRS Renaissance
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source 


 * summary** " 'The collapse of communism in 1989 was one of the greatest events of human history--one of the most sudden, unexpected, dramatic, and utterly transformative. We are too close to it to be certain how to read it. Yet one characteristic of communism proved to be decisive--its particular form of atheism, and the effect of this atheism upon the morale of the people and upon their economic performance. For seventy-two years, communism in Russia waged a silent war against the human soul. Sometimes screams were heard from torture chambers deep in prisons and in detention centers, but mostly the war was fought with ideas and incessant public propaganda. Below the surface, it eroded foundations. Out of sight, it taught people to have a low opinion of themselves, as if they were incapable of nobility of soul. It ridiculed the soul's capacity for discernment and for truth. Year after year, the silent artillery of communism leveled the inner landscapes of the soul.' (FIRST THINGS) The effects of communism on theology and individual spirituality are examined."

3 2 1
 * subject heading:** [|Atheism], [|Communism and religion], [|Property and socialism], [|Russia (Federation), Social conditions], [|Communism and culture], [|Soviet Union, Social conditions]
 * vocab**:

subj head: [|Corporate culture], [|Corporations], [|Corporations, Corrupt practices], [|Executives], [|General Electric Co.], [|International business enterprises], [|Social responsibility of business], [|Stockholders]
 * search term:** The Corporation > Magazines
 * title**: The Corporation
 * citation**:**Title:** [|The Corporation]
 * Source:** Ecologist (London, England) Vol. No.
 * Author:** Joel Bakan
 * Publication Date:** Nov. 2004
 * Page Number:** 51+
 * Database:** SIRS Researcher
 * Service:** SIRS Knowledge Source 


 * summary** "'Over the course of the Twentieth Century the world stumbled, haltingly and unevenly, toward greater democracy and humanity. New nations embraced democratic ideals, and governments in extant democracies expanded their domain over society and the economy. Social programmes and economic regulations were created as part of a broad midcentury movement by Western governments to protect their citizens from neglect by the market and from exploitation by corporations. Beginning in the latter part of the century, however, governments began to retreat. Under pressure from corporate lobbies and economic globalisation, they embraced policies informed by neoliberalism. Deregulation freed corporations from legal constraints, and privatisation empowered them to govern areas of society from which they had previously been excluded. By the end of the century, the corporation had become the world's dominant institution.' **//(Ecologist)//** The author exposes the underbelly of multinational corporations only to discover a world of corruption and greed. "

"Social programmes and economic regulations were created as part of a broad mid-century movement by Western governments to protect their citizens from neglect by the market and from exploitation by corporations. Beginning in the latter part of the century, however, governments began to retreat. Under pressure from corporate lobbies and economic globalisation, they embraced policies informed by neoliberalism. Deregulation freed corporations from legal constraints, and privatisation empowered them to govern areas of society from which they had previously been excluded. By the end of the century, had become the world's dominant institution." "A corporation is the property of its stockholders,' he told me. 'Its interests are the interests of its stockholders. Now, beyond that should it spend the stockholders' money for purposes which it regards as socially responsible but which it cannot connect to its bottom line? The answer I would say is no.' There is but one 'social responsibility' for corporate executives, Friedman believes: they must make as much money as possible for their shareholders. This is a moral imperative. Executives who choose social and environmental goals over profits--who try to act morally--are, in fact, immoral." "Corporations and the culture they create do more than just stifle good deeds. They nurture, and often demand, bad ones. Marc Barry knows this all too well, and he is not bothered by it. Barry, is a competitive intelligence expert ('Essentially I'm a spy,' he says), and likes to think of himself as a good date. 'I like to be able to go out and have a nice dinner with someone,' he says. 'There's so much trickery and deception in my job that I don't really want it in my private life.' At work, Barry says, he is a predator engaged in morally dubious tasks. Corporations hire him to get information from other corporations: trade secrets, marketing plans, or whatever else might be useful to them. He has set up a phony recruiting firm, he says, complete with pictures of his phony family on the desk, and called executives from a competitor's firm to offer them better jobs. 'When the executive shows up,' he boasts, 'he doesn't realise...I'm actually debriefing him on behalf of a competitor...it's all just a big elaborate ruse to glean competitive information from him.' For Barry, a regular day at the office is filled with venal actions and moral turpitude."
 * 3**

"As images of disgraced and handcuffed corporate executives parade across our television screens, pundits, politicians, and business leaders are quick to assure us that greedy and corrupt individuals, not the system as a whole, are to blame. Despite such assurances, citizens today--and many business leaders too--are concerned that the faults within the corporate system run much deeper than a few tremors on Wall Street would indicate." "According to William Ford, Jr, chairman of the Ford Motor Company and great-grandson of corporate social responsibility pioneer Henry Ford, 'corporations could be and should be a major force for resolving environmental and social concerns in the twenty-first century.'" what are the arguments against Bakan?
 * 2**
 * 1**

vocab: neoliberalism, corporate social responsibility, corporate psychopathy, externalities, cost-benefit analysis,