Approaching Justice

As you may have noticed, it has been a slower than normal month around Approaching Justice. I took my doctoral comprehensive exams a couple weeks ago. Since then I have had to campus interviews at community colleges (one in Rochester, NY and one in Frisco, TX). I have also had a phone interview for a visiting position at a research institution.

Things will likely stay slow until the end of the current term (until April 8th) at my present institution.

I have a job interview near Dallas on March 27. The school is only covering a portion of my travel expenses. So…..I am looking for a place to stay that night. Help.

The following is part of Muhammad Yunus’ Nobel Prize Lecture. This section is titled “Free Market Economy.”

Free Market Economy

Capitalism centers on the free market. It is claimed that the freer the market, the better is the result of capitalism in solving the questions of what, how, and for whom. It is also claimed that the individual search for personal gains brings collective optimal result.

I am in favor of strengthening the freedom of the market. At the same time, I am very unhappy about the conceptual restrictions imposed on the players in the market. This originates from the assumption that entrepreneurs are one-dimensional human beings, who are dedicated to one mission in their business lives − to maximize profit. This interpretation of capitalism insulates the entrepreneurs from all political, emotional, social, spiritual, environmental dimensions of their lives. This was done perhaps as a reasonable simplification, but it stripped away the very essentials of human life.

Human beings are a wonderful creation embodied with limitless human qualities and capabilities. Our theoretical constructs should make room for the blossoming of those qualities, not assume them away.

Many of the world’s problems exist because of this restriction on the players of free-market. The world has not resolved the problem of crushing poverty that half of its population suffers. Healthcare remains out of the reach of the majority of the world population. The country with the richest and freest market fails to provide healthcare for one-fifth of its population.

We have remained so impressed by the success of the free-market that we never dared to express any doubt about our basic assumption. To make it worse, we worked extra hard to transform ourselves, as closely as possible, into the one-dimensional human beings as conceptualized in the theory, to allow smooth functioning of free market mechanism.

By defining “entrepreneur” in a broader way we can change the character of capitalism radically, and solve many of the unresolved social and economic problems within the scope of the free market. Let us suppose an entrepreneur, instead of having a single source of motivation (such as, maximizing profit), now has two sources of motivation, which are mutually exclusive, but equally compelling − a) maximization of profit and b) doing good to people and the world.

Each type of motivation will lead to a separate kind of business. Let us call the first type of business a profit-maximizing business, and the second type of business as social business.

Social business will be a new kind of business introduced in the market place with the objective of making a difference in the world. Investors in the social business could get back their investment, but will not take any dividend from the company. Profit would be ploughed back into the company to expand its outreach and improve the quality of its product or service. A social business will be a non-loss, non-dividend company.

Once social business is recognized in law, many existing companies will come forward to create social businesses in addition to their foundation activities. Many activists from the non-profit sector will also find this an attractive option. Unlike the non-profit sector where one needs to collect donations to keep activities going, a social business will be self-sustaining and create surplus for expansion since it is a non-loss enterprise. Social business will go into a new type of capital market of its own, to raise capital.

Young people all around the world, particularly in rich countries, will find the concept of social business very appealing since it will give them a challenge to make a difference by using their creative talent. Many young people today feel frustrated because they cannot see any worthy challenge, which excites them, within the present capitalist world. Socialism gave them a dream to fight for. Young people dream about creating a perfect world of their own.

Almost all social and economic problems of the world will be addressed through social businesses. The challenge is to innovate business models and apply them to produce desired social results cost-effectively and efficiently. Healthcare for the poor, financial services for the poor, information technology for the poor, education and training for the poor, marketing for the poor, renewable energy − these are all exciting areas for social businesses.

Social business is important because it addresses very vital concerns of mankind. It can change the lives of the bottom 60 per cent of world population and help them to get out of poverty.

His focus on human needs, and not on the profit potential of markets, makes this type of capitalism one which would be quite alien to most Americans. I actually think that this is more in line with the original intent of Adam Smith who viewed free markets as increasing overall utility and happiness. Of course, Smith’s vision of a moral capitalism is abandoned in the industrial revolution. American and global capitalism of today is much more Social Darwinism than Adam Smith. As a result, capitalism is no longer morally defensible (though the proto-Utilitarianism of Smith is also morally problematic).

In today’s Washington Post, conservative Charles Krauthammer states the following:

“Just as the Depression created the political and psychological conditions for Franklin Roosevelt’s transformation of America from laissez-faireism to the beginnings of the welfare state, the current crisis gives Obama the political space to move the still (relatively) modest American welfare state toward European-style social democracy.”

While Krauthammer is a bit skeptical about this development, I am excited.

For some, and I do not think that Krauthammer fall is this camp, the Europeanization of the American economy is a sign of the end of the world. For me, this is the change that I believe in.

Unfortunately, I am not sure if my dream will actually ever be realized. But today, I will celebrate the possibilities.

Muhammad Yunus delivering his Nobel Lecture at the Oslo City Hall, 10 December 2006.

I have posted a little something about Muhammad Yunus, who gets a nod from Elder Ballard in the March Ensign, over at FPR (click here).