Search results

This chapter investigates Marx’s Capital as a theoretical resource for analyzing both the form and content of the modern corporation. We assess two recent contributions critiquing the corporation. The chapter argues that Marx advanced from his initial ambivalent comments on the form of the joint stock company and the credit system to a more categorical critique. We assess Marx’s concepts of the concentration and centralization of capital, fictitious capital and rent in analyzing the corporation. Next, we note Engels important contribution filling in from the early limited liability company to monopoly capital and modern imperialism. The chapter ends with two examples of how these concepts apply in concrete analysis. The work is highly preliminary and is intended to open a more theoretically informed approach to analysis and critique of the multinational corporation.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the view that America is “the land of the future”. It argues that, owing to its sponsorship of a model of development that is exploitive and unsustainable, this is no longer the case and that US futurists, in particular, need to consciously re‐evaluate their roles and work.

The paper advances a cultural critique of US hegemony. It considers background myths and their role in creating “American exceptionalism” in various fields, including futures studies. It also critiques free market ideology, the role of corporations, market failures and the economics of exploitation. This leads to issues of truth and power and the view that a continuation of an ideology of “free enterprise” leads to the collapse of the global system.

The paper suggests a number of strategies for futurists to consider as ways of opening out their vision beyond current limitations.

A rationale is outlined that can support shifts in more progressive directions and moves toward more fruitful work.

The American futures enterprise is currently at risk from its uncritical association with dysfunctions in US society, culture and economy. The paper draws attention to some of these and indicates possible ways forward.

The author argues that the familiar distinction between interpretive and non-interpretive theories of constitutional interpretation obscures another important distinction: that between hermeneutically open and hermeneutically closed theories. Closed theories seek resolution to constitutional conflict by employing methods of interpretation that are intuitively persuasive. Open theories deny that such methods are always available, and seek resolution of conflict through a combination of legal, political, and social means. The author argues that closed theories have failed to live up to their implicit promise of self-justification, and examines the practice of constitutional interpretation in Canada and Australia to support this view.

This paper aims to explore how and why the emerging literature in clinical psychology on the “successful psychopath” precedes the escalating middle class framing of the contemporary corporation as a monster and points towards an increasingly credible version of systemic psychopathy.

Discourse analysis is used to isolate three distinct but interrelated argument forms in which the basic assertion is that “the corporation is a psychopath”. All three argument forms insist that the corporation lacks a conscience and point to a toxic schism on the boundary between the organization and its stakeholders or publics.

In Argument Form I, successful psychopaths enter and rise to prominence in the flexible, hypercompetitive context of the contemporary corporation. Once ensconced within the corporation, in Argument Form II, the psychopath creates the conditions for a scam which, when detected, gives rise to a flurry of breathless and very public corporate scandals. Argument Form III follows from II. In it the rogues and scoundrels – those increasingly caught in the high beams of a corporate scandal – once in positions of power and authority seek out allies, stifle those who would oppose them and begin to legitimize their scams as “business as usual.” Systemic psychopathy emerges when the appeal to “business as usual” conceals scams and supports conscienceless behavior.

This paper explains why increasingly, members of the middle class, those who in the past stood behind the corporation, are less than shocked to hear it characterized as a psychopath. The paper concludes with the implications of the intensifying portrayal of the dark side of the corporation for researchers studying the changing relationship between society and business.

Following critiques of shareholder capitalism and calls for reform of the corporation, employee-owned firms have attracted public and government attention in the UK and elsewhere, based on the view that these alternative organizations serve a broader public purpose. However, despite attempts to broaden the measures for evaluating organizations and take seriously the social effects of business decisions, we lack a holistic framework for evaluating this public purpose that addresses aspirations like participation, democracy, equality, solidarity, and strong community relations alongside financial resilience and profitability. This study proposes that a solution can be found in Selznick’s concept of “moral community.” Selznick argued that community, conceived as a response to the perceived unravelling of the social fabric, plays a vital role in countering the excesses of capitalism. Using this as a yardstick to evaluate employee ownership (EO) in the UK, the author argues that the EO organizational field is indeed an embodiment of a moral community. It successfully infuses a broad range of social values into economic pursuits, nurtures an inclusive sense of the “common good,” and mitigates the alienation resulting from an increasingly marketized society. At the same time, the EO moral community does not reject capitalism as such, aspiring to connect with and reform existing political, financial, and legal structures as opposed to positioning its own institutions as an alternative to them. There are, therefore, limits to the challenge that the EO community levels against the current socioeconomic order.

This paper aims to raise awareness and the level of debate on a significant new development in international law.

The paper takes a historical overview in considering current approaches to the phenomenon of private military corporations (PMCs) and uses case examples to discuss the issues raised.

The paper concludes that the phenomenon raises many issues that need further analysis, such as the outcome of this phenomenon on the future of democracy in sovereign states.

The topic allows for much further research into such matters as definitional, jurisdictional and enforceability issues with regard to corporate entities known as PMCs.

For peace and human rights to prevail in democracies in which the state maintains the monopoly on the use of force, the paper argues that PMCs should be prohibited rather than subjected to mere regulation.

The paper is the first to use the term “preyfits” in describing the actions of transnational corporations. While most scholars argue for regulation of PMCs, this paper argues for their total prohibition.