David, as a complete innocent, I went looking for Chris Taylor on his Reuters page. The top story was about how underfinanced Olympic athletes were, and how they should immediately hire agents to 'brand' them, plaster themselves with sponsor logos, and go on continuous social-media (like all teenagers) to build a 'following' that they can monetize later and become media stars.
We're talking the Olympics, which started out as an international fellowship of amateur competitors (and which is now dying out, partly because international disciplines now hold their own world championships, and because the thing has become a private cartel doing the Biggest Circus on Earth).
Don't know much more but I'd say Chris has sorted himself into more appropriate circles.
What a wonderful model! This guy really walks his talk.
It would be compatible with a more socialist government. Paying tolls to cross bridges doesn't sit well with me. Couldn't the government cover these costs or pay some of the costs of the social business that's building the bridges?
And how is the public transit system in Bangladesh? If it's not already amazing, it could be a great project for a social business with the help of a more socialist government.
David, once again you are giving us invaluable and otherwise under-reported content. Uninformed opinion has no place in a journalist’s blog, but your opinions are well informed and the opinions of those you solicit or reprint are equally informed. I myself am biased, but you give us context we would not otherwise have. Thank you for the new Opinions Unleashed.
Mohammed Yunus of Bangladesh writes of "social enterprises" that "exist for the collective benefit of others."
Such enterprises can only prosper in an environment that helps develop the individual's active concern for promoting the common good.
This is presumably the case in Bangladesh, because this resonates with a basic Islamic teaching. This ethical norm is also fundamental to both Christianity and the western natural law tradition, featured in the U.S. Declaration of Independence. As the Rev. John Witherspoon, a signer of the Declaration, taught the college seniors at Princeton (including James Madison) in his obligatory course on moral philosophy, "Love to others, sincere and active, is the sum of our duty." In the general thought of the time, rights come from duties, and unalienable rights come from inescapable duties, and the pathway toward happiness lies in cultivating habitual benevolence.
However, the basic meaning of the Declaration of Independence has been falsified and absurdly attributed to John ("Mr. Slavepower") Locke, who profited from the African slave trade. For the scandalous absurdity of the dominant Lockean reading of the Declaration of Independence, see "The Declaration of Independence without Locke":
Consistent with this imperative of cultural concern for the well-being of others was the "American System of Political Economy" (rooted in the policy initiatives of George Washington and Alexander Hamiltion, embraced by Presidents Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Lincoln, perennially espoused by Senator Henry Clay, and revived by my grandmother's fourth cousin Franklin D. Roosevelt), which can be described as managed capitalism and compared to the policies of Otto von Bismarck in Germany and Charles de Gaulle in France.
The American System firmly and forcefully rejected "free trade." No country has ever industrialized by following a "free trade" policy. The general thrust of Mohammed Yunus's worthy initiatives is to lessen social iniquity in a system that continues to be dominated by exploitive international corporations that seemingly cannot be tamed by governments infused with a healthy society's collective will to promote the general welfare. Mohammed Yunus appears to be safe for the western oligarchy, unlike his recently-overthrown predecessor.
A thoughtful set of ideas, by no means Utopian. Thanks David for circulating it.
In the 20th century, this might be have been called a co-operative, no?
They can work well. I suspect there have to be certain governmental constraints. For example, they have to have some higher state protection from rapacious monopolists going horizontal on the land (Monsanto Corp.?). The non-profit principle and circulating profit has to be rigorously monitored. Many a union retirement fund has morphed into a lending bank, and 'social' be damned.
& somehow, Michele managed to avoid jailtime !
;-(((
Now there IS an idea.....a social business public transit .... that works for me !
I have a friend there who is an American entrepreneur who has also started ground-up businesses in Bangladesh ... I'll mention that!
thanks...and keep reading!!! (btw, if you are able, you should try a paid sub ... and join us for our Friday zoom !)
That is so kind & generous, Greg ! It is certainly what I strive for all the time!!
So, what slays me is folks like Reuters' Chris Taylor 'disabling' me as soon as this piece hit!
;-((
David, as a complete innocent, I went looking for Chris Taylor on his Reuters page. The top story was about how underfinanced Olympic athletes were, and how they should immediately hire agents to 'brand' them, plaster themselves with sponsor logos, and go on continuous social-media (like all teenagers) to build a 'following' that they can monetize later and become media stars.
We're talking the Olympics, which started out as an international fellowship of amateur competitors (and which is now dying out, partly because international disciplines now hold their own world championships, and because the thing has become a private cartel doing the Biggest Circus on Earth).
Don't know much more but I'd say Chris has sorted himself into more appropriate circles.
What a wonderful model! This guy really walks his talk.
It would be compatible with a more socialist government. Paying tolls to cross bridges doesn't sit well with me. Couldn't the government cover these costs or pay some of the costs of the social business that's building the bridges?
And how is the public transit system in Bangladesh? If it's not already amazing, it could be a great project for a social business with the help of a more socialist government.
David, once again you are giving us invaluable and otherwise under-reported content. Uninformed opinion has no place in a journalist’s blog, but your opinions are well informed and the opinions of those you solicit or reprint are equally informed. I myself am biased, but you give us context we would not otherwise have. Thank you for the new Opinions Unleashed.
Mohammed Yunus of Bangladesh writes of "social enterprises" that "exist for the collective benefit of others."
Such enterprises can only prosper in an environment that helps develop the individual's active concern for promoting the common good.
This is presumably the case in Bangladesh, because this resonates with a basic Islamic teaching. This ethical norm is also fundamental to both Christianity and the western natural law tradition, featured in the U.S. Declaration of Independence. As the Rev. John Witherspoon, a signer of the Declaration, taught the college seniors at Princeton (including James Madison) in his obligatory course on moral philosophy, "Love to others, sincere and active, is the sum of our duty." In the general thought of the time, rights come from duties, and unalienable rights come from inescapable duties, and the pathway toward happiness lies in cultivating habitual benevolence.
However, the basic meaning of the Declaration of Independence has been falsified and absurdly attributed to John ("Mr. Slavepower") Locke, who profited from the African slave trade. For the scandalous absurdity of the dominant Lockean reading of the Declaration of Independence, see "The Declaration of Independence without Locke":
https://www.academia.edu/29164747/The_Declaration_of_Independence_without_Locke_A_Rebuttal_of_Michael_Zuckerts_Natural_Rights_Republic_
Consistent with this imperative of cultural concern for the well-being of others was the "American System of Political Economy" (rooted in the policy initiatives of George Washington and Alexander Hamiltion, embraced by Presidents Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Lincoln, perennially espoused by Senator Henry Clay, and revived by my grandmother's fourth cousin Franklin D. Roosevelt), which can be described as managed capitalism and compared to the policies of Otto von Bismarck in Germany and Charles de Gaulle in France.
The American System firmly and forcefully rejected "free trade." No country has ever industrialized by following a "free trade" policy. The general thrust of Mohammed Yunus's worthy initiatives is to lessen social iniquity in a system that continues to be dominated by exploitive international corporations that seemingly cannot be tamed by governments infused with a healthy society's collective will to promote the general welfare. Mohammed Yunus appears to be safe for the western oligarchy, unlike his recently-overthrown predecessor.
Feeling nostalgic for WPJ and WPI. Those were the days!
A thoughtful set of ideas, by no means Utopian. Thanks David for circulating it.
In the 20th century, this might be have been called a co-operative, no?
They can work well. I suspect there have to be certain governmental constraints. For example, they have to have some higher state protection from rapacious monopolists going horizontal on the land (Monsanto Corp.?). The non-profit principle and circulating profit has to be rigorously monitored. Many a union retirement fund has morphed into a lending bank, and 'social' be damned.