Tag: ethics-and-morality

Will Prince Andrew Leave his Official Residence?

On By southwerkIn business ethics

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/king-charles-reportedly-ultimatum-prince-165723091.html

Difficult people present themselves throughout our lives. A badly designed political system makes more difficult people than a functioning government like a republic or a democracy. One of the most, if not the most horrible forms of government is a hereditary monarchy. These are based on the idea that breeding is blessed by God to produce Heaven’s choice for a government. All of that, and in particular, the blessing of God, is complete and total nonsense.

History has demonstrated constantly and repetitively, over and over again, that giving people power, money and influence purely based on the circumstances of their birth is a formula for disaster.

For an example of a royal gone badly wrong, we only have to point to Prince Andrew. I believe that currently he is the worst of the Royal family. You may disagree and I freely admit in a world where royal descendants are common and their crimes and behavioral nonsense often well known, that maybe to you he doesn’t stand out. But I believe he is the worst.

Now the headline at the top of the page says that the King of England, (Scotland and Wales), wants him to move out of the official residence. Apparently because of all the bad press. And he does not want to go. Did I mention that besides being odious, that Andrew is also greedy and entitled? Please add that in.

There may be someone out that who does not know what Andrew is about. The “Prince” has labored all of his life to get more money in addition to the large sums from the British tax payer and he has had a laser like focus on young women, so much so that Jeffrey Epstein was a close personal friend.

There are books, magazine articles and pod casts about this person. I recommend you take my word for his awfulness not because I’m lacking in evidence but because it is so vile and disgusting. I’ve read about him at some length and as an American, I can’t help but think that with his position, all that money and power, that he could have made something of himself and been a bright and shining light with the example of his life. And that would have been a rebuke to me and my contempt for aristocratic government. But there was no danger of me being rebuked by a Royal’s good behavior. When presented with incredible opportunity, the prince chose the path of greed and sexual gratification.

And now, kind reader, you are probably wondering why I, who hold myself out as an expert on business ethics, am writing about an errant and foolish prince?

It is very simple. We still have the problem of those favored solely by birth, the boss’ son, so to speak. Nepotism and other forms of evil are still with us. Andrew is just an outstanding example of a problem that is never totally going away.

Okay, so what is the great truth here? In the United States, we should promote and reward based purely on merit. That should be our guide when choosing our leadership and much else. It is the right thing to do, the morally correct thing to do.

And every single time that Prince Andrew wiggles out of another predicament, gets forgiven for awful behavior and continues to act entitled and outside the conduct of a gentleman, he is an example to others of how goodness, mercy and kindness as well as all of morality and the law can be ignored in the race for money, sex and influence.

People like him make life harder for the people who follow the rules, work hard and depend on others realizing their merit.

It is with deep regret that I must confess that even Andrew is thrown out of his official resident, I am sure he will continue to misbehave and I may reluctantly, regretfully and painfully have to return to this topic. He and his ilk are just generally not fixable.

James Alan Pilant

Faithful Slaves?

On By southwerkIn business ethics

The American Civil War was fought over the evil that was slavery. The assassination of Lincoln prevented the necessary prosecution of the Confederate leadership and the old guard, the former slave owners, rose up in power to continue the oppression and pain inflicted on the poor Whites and Blacks. They tried to rewrite history with “The Lost Cause” nonsense and during the Jim Crow era put up statues as signposts that clearly indicating that minority rights did not exist in the South. More crudely put, these monuments were a direct threat of murder and pain to those who stepped across the color line.

Tyrell County has one of these “monuments.” Erected in 1902, its connection to the Civil War is barely arguable but its public demonstration of the power of the white aristocracy and their willingness to murder and punish is plain for all to see. It is dedicated to faithful slaves, a calculated insult.

History is important. But history shorn of its truth is an abomination. These monuments to Jim Crow are an attempt which for many years was successful to intimidate Blacks and rewrite history. It has failed. And these nonsensical pieces of stone should be consigned to the scrap heap. It doesn’t take a deep grasp of morality or ethics to see that preserving the Southern way of life, an idea the included the practice of slavery and many other discriminations, was not a worthy goal but in fact an abomination. Societies based on slavery had long passed in large part into the failed systems of history.

At the end of the Civil War, there were more Black soldiers in the Union Army than the entire strength of the Confederates. I don’t see any monuments to the fact that freed Black men were willing to risk their lives to end the barbarous practice of slavery. That would be real history.

Why don’t we build some real monuments to celebrate the heroism and sacrifice of Americans who fought for the right?

James Alan Pilant

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/23/us/nc-confederate-slaves-monument-lawsuit-reaj/index.html

This needs to go.

Ethics Roundup, the Week Ending May 4th

On By southwerkIn business ethics

I have been exploring the concept of social capital recently and find it fascinating. During the dark days of the candidacy of Trump, the ties that bind together as the American people are becoming increasingly frayed.

Jamie Raskin Names And Shames The ‘Evil Fairy’ Secretly Setting ‘The Country Back’ (msn.com)

Rasking is talking about the oil and gas industry. They were aware of the dangers of global warming for decades and not only concealed this knowledge but made it difficult for the general public to understand the issue and actively prevented action to remedy the situation. He is, of course, right. We owe the oil and gas industry a lot for their use of lead, their propaganda to encourage our use of natural gas, and their willingness to cut corners and costs while letting the public bear the burdens of these decisions.

Moral Metrics: Half of Americans Ready To Risk Their Careers By Whistleblowing, Reveals Research. (msn.com)

A quote from the article linked to above:

“Whistleblowing allows people to align their actions with their moral compass by exposing wrongdoing”, says Nick Oberheiden from Federal-Lawyer.com. “It fosters transparency and accountability, potentially leading to organizational reforms and societal protection against corrupt practices. Whistleblowers can take solace in knowing there are laws designed to shield them from retaliation and, in some cases, they may even be rewarded for their courage.”

They polled a thousand individuals and found that slightly more than half would become whistleblowers if the circumstances merited it. I am delighted with those numbers. It is good to see so many Americans with an ethical backbone in this time of political turmoil.

Joseph Stiglitz Makes the Case for Moving Past Neoliberalism (msn.com)

Stiglitz explains why we should be using a broader definition of freedom rather than the commonly stated simplistic ideas around individual freedom.

From the article:

Freedom is about what you can do. It’s freedom to do and freedom from harm by others including government, but also corporations or anybody. It’s about freedom from fear—the very idea that children in kindergarten have to be prepared for gunmen coming in and shooting them, they totally lost their freedom from fear. We need a broader conceptual framework for freedom. When we think about taxes a lot of people at the top say, “you’re taking away my freedom.” But they wouldn’t have that income without the government having made the investments in basic R&D, technology, infrastructure, an educated labor force, and the rule of law. If they were born in some poor, disorganized country with a civil war, they wouldn’t have that money. In the U.S., 20% of our children grow up in poverty. We’re taking away those kids’ freedom to live up to their potential and it’s hurting us as a society.

I think that this is a better, deeper and more compelling definition of freedom. I intend to return to it in later writing.

Kids should be banned from smartphones until 13 and social media until 18, a major French study says (msn.com)

I think these recommendations are probably wise but whether they can be enacted or enforced is another matter. I know that many parents believe that having ready contact with their children at all times is very important. And the individual harm to the psychology of young people may be that evident to their guardians but still we should probably as a society try to give our children an opportunity to have an actual “childhood” rather than a debased form of adult conflict.

From the article referenced above:

The report, “Children and Screens: In Search of Lost Time,” said that children should not be allowed to have cellphones before the age of 11, should be barred from social media before they turn 13, and that between 15 and 18, social media access should be “limited” to those with “ethical thinking.” As for toddlers, it recommended against exposing those under 3 and advised to move toward moderate, controlled exposure only after age 6.

Freedom Under Capitalism Isn’t All It’s Cracked Up to Be (msn.com)

It is odd that in this very same week there were two online news pieces about what is meant by freedom. I have quoted Alfred Stiglitz above and here we have another discussion about freedom and capitalism.

From the article above:

Capitalism is a system under which the means of production can be bought and sold by private individuals, and anyone who can’t afford to start a business of their own has to submit themselves to the domination of those who can if they want to make a living. Workers spend eight out of every sixteen waking hours most days of the week in workplaces that are run like totalitarian dictatorships — and it’s only eight hours, and only most days of the week, because of victories won over generations of workers’ struggles. If the comparison to totalitarian dictatorships seems hyperbolic, it shouldn’t. In fact, capitalists often regulate far more intimate aspects of workers’ behavior — especially for relatively “unskilled” workers without much bargaining power — than do the laws of a typical totalitarian dictatorship. Employers frequently tell workers, for example, when they have to smile, when they’re allowed to talk to each other, and when they’re allowed to go to the bathroom.

We need to start having a real discussion about our right to dignity and autonomy. We discovered that working from home was efficient and successful yet businesses are truly desperate to end the practice. Why? I think they fear the loss of social control. What is the point of being the big boss if you can’t strut around at work as a sort of martinet demi-god? I have had some wonderful bosses and some of them were little more than well paid crooks. One the great tragedies of American life is how minimum wage workers are treated. Long ago before law school and college, I worked in a factory. They treated the cockroaches on the floor better than we workers.

Fears of fascism, extremism grow in US (msn.com)

As a writer who takes as his main topics, morality and ethics, it would be wrong and cowardly of me to dodge the great moral issue of the coming election. Fascism in on the march in American and the polling numbers referenced in the article show that the great mass is gradually awakening to the danger. With this election we could very well seen the end of the last vestiges of American democracy.

From the article:

An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist National poll released Wednesday found that 31 percent of surveyed Americans, when asked about their greatest fears for the country’s future, mention a rise of fascism and extremism. There is also a notable partisan split in the findings, with almost half of surveyed Democrats, 47 percent, reporting that a rise of fascism and extremism was their biggest concern. Republicans in the survey, comparatively, were far less concerned. Only 15 percent of Republicans said they were worried about growing fascism. For surveyed GOP voters, the No. 1 concern was a lack of values at 36 percent and the U.S. becoming a “weak” country at 30 percent.