The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power - Movie Review Example

The Corporation: Corporations as Psychopaths Introduction This essay will argue that corporations are psychopathic persons rather than upright persons. The essay will examine The Corporation documentary film by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott and use it to discuss the above issue. The documentary is based on the works of Joel Bakan, “The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power”. This essay will present the views of authors (Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott) on the above topic that are presented in their movie entitled The Corporation. In addition, the essay will critically discuss the views of the authors. Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott engage corporate executives in live interviews unabashedly admitting to policies and practices that put the profits ahead of any other goal, regardless of the harm they might do to other people. The first section of the essay outlines six traits that are displayed by the corporation. This section will specifically examine and discuss two traits – the corporations are unconcerned about the feelings of others and that they recklessly disregard the safety of others. This essay supports the authors’ argument that corporations exhibit the traits of a psychopathic person. It further argues that corporations fail to recognize and act upon moral reasons of not harming others. The essay also supports the authors’ argument that the legal makeup of the corporation does not discourage it from hurting the feelings and safety of others. The corporation utmost goal is to make as much profit as possible regardless of the harms it causes to others. It is important to discuss the issues highlighted by the authors because they explore some of the broad negative issues that corporations engage in and propose ways that the government and courts can use to mitigate these issues. Schneeman (2009) defined the corporation as an artificial person who is invisible, intangible, and is a creation of law. This definition has been extensively used in many fields that examine the corporation. Discussion The documentary affirms that the firm displays several traits evident in people that Clinicians term as psychopaths. The documentary has six major arguments concerning corporations. The documentary bases its arguments on the WHO’s personality diagnostic checklist. First, the documentary argues that corporations are unconcerned about the feelings of others. Secondly, corporations are incapable of maintaining enduring relationships. Thirdly, corporations recklessly disregard the safety of others. Fourthly, corporations are deceitful, and they use repeated lies to con others for their profit. Firth, corporations are incapable of experiencing guilt. Finally, corporations do not conform to the social norm. a. Argument 1: Corporations are unconcerned about the feelings of others According to the documentary, these behaviours are symptoms that arise from many pathologies including disregarding the well-being of others, lack of ability to form lasting relationships, and deceitfulness. This documentary scarily describes a corporation as a person possessing “all the characteristics of a prototypical psychopath” (The Corporation, 2004). The documentary argues that the loophole was brought by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that made an amendment to the constitution. The ruling gave corporations the rights of individuals. The opening part of the movie features Robert Hare, who is a consultant helping the FBI profile its suspects. In this case, the suspects are Monsanto, WorldCom, and Enron. The law views these companies as people, but the question posed is; what kind of people are they? In his diagnosis, Hare defines these corporations as ones that exhibit a personality disorder and categorises them as psychopathic (The Corporation, 2004). At the 40-minute mark of the documentary, the major conclusion that is that, the corporation is a psychopath. However, in the documentary, Milton Friedman disagrees with other people in the documentary arguing that corporations should not be labelled or treated as psychopathic in nature. b. Evidence In the documentary, the film-makers cleverly analyse what kind of a person is the corporation. They determine that the modern day corporate person is a psychologically disturbed individual or a psychopath. Friedman counters others’ arguments and argues that people engaged in a corporation such as shareholders, executives, and employees are the ones who hold a moral responsibility and not the corporation. In the documentary, Noah Chomsky provides an analogy that executives might be caring individuals but end up being unethical because they are bound by an institution that is designed to be unethical (The Corporation, 2004). According to the documentary, the profit motive makes organisations be unconcerned with the feeling of others and disregard their safety. In the documentary, Ray Anderson, who is the CEO of a rug making company who works hard to make his company environmentally sustainable. Ray disregards the how his company disregards its factory employees. The corporation’s “personality” depicted in the film is that of self-interest. c. Critique Stibbe (2013) argues that in involving oneself in such pressing social issues, the authors usually have their interests and agenda. In his support, the author airs his concerns about the abuse of corporate power by the executives at the time when many corporations are being exposed as acting against the interests of people and environment. These corporations are acting illegally, with little accountability and without any regard for the feelings of people. Stibbe’s (2013) aim is to promote the discourses of The Corporation which call for alternative ways of conceptualising corporations place in the society. According to Martin (2006; cited in Stibbe, 2013) such audio or visual materials are meant to expose oppressive discourses, to explore and promote alternative discourses. His study continues to argue that such authors promote a particular discourse as making a positive contribution to society. Stibble’s arguments are valid and they need to be taken into consideration. In support of such arguments, this study takes a similar stand of promoting an alternative discourse. According to DSM-IV, to be diagnosed with a psychopathic disorder, a person lacks any feelings even after hurting, stealing, and mistreating other people (Wellons, 2012). Psychopathic behaviour is more prevalent in corporations than in general population. For example, in their study of 203 corporations, Babiak et al. (2010) found out that 3.9 percent of the corporations studied indicated psychopathy. This level was much higher than the 1 percent that is estimated to occur in the general population. This evidence shows that, corporations as persons rank higher than human beings in psychopath ladder. Such charisma, manipulation techniques, and the ability to make rational, emotionless decisions that were exhibited by executives appeared to benefit the companies. This paper supports Babiak et al.’s arguments because, over the years, corporation have been engaging in actions that have even caused death of many people. Disregardful profit announcements are accompanied by huge executive pay rises while subordinate employees continue to receive low salaries. The ill-defined feeling that the corporations are out of control is shared by broad sections of society. Nevertheless, corporations do not seem to care about these feelings. This paper supports the above findings because the authors have argued logically through the use of existing corporations. In their study, Batory et al. (2005) associated ethical practices with corporations’ managements. They argued that ethical practices in any organisation are a positive function of top management and added that the presence of managers without ethics translates to corporations becoming psychopathic. Therefore, these authors seemed to argue that the top management is the brain of the corporation. In his exploration of the developmental origins of psychopaths, Hare (1994) argued that it is not clear whether the psychopathy syndrome originated from biological or environmental factors or the interplay of both. However, various researchers have strongly associated psychopathy syndrome with functional anomalies in the brain circuitry (Kiehl et al. 2001). Even if the brain is the culprit in psychopathic syndrome, the whole body exhibits psychopathic actions and behaviours. These authors and researchers do not consider the brain to be a person, the whole body is. In the same way, the top management is the brain of a corporation; when the top management suffers an abnormality, the whole organisation exhibit abnormal characteristics. Batory et al. (2005) arguments offer enough logic and these arguments appear to be the backbone of this paper because this paper goes against the separation of the corporation and its management. In addition, Kiehl et al. (2001) research findings prove beyond doubt that psychopathy is as a result of brain abnormalities. All the above findings are very logical. Harris et al. (2007) argued that psychopaths and non-pschopaths are different in various ways but the most common is the persuasive ability of psychopaths to con and manipulate others. Harris et al. argument is logical because corporations as psychopaths have succeeded in conning and manipulating their employees with utter disregard of their feelings. This makes corporations to fall in the category of psychopaths. d. Personal views The arguments of the above authors need to be accepted because they offer great insight to the topic. In addition, they provide logic arguments using real corporations and people. This paper labels corporations as non-criminal psychopaths. Majority of authors have proved that most corporations have been displaying many psychopathic traits, and they have disrupted the business world with their behaviours. Most psychopaths are associated with criminal activities such as serial killing, gang leadership, conning and other criminal activities. The cited authors have associated corporations with the behaviour of psychopaths. These psychopathic corporations function undetected within the society, they move from one place to the other covertly spreading suffering to their employees and partners wherever they go. They also cause problems to their employees and partners and fail to show any care to their feelings. The documentary proposes a fundamental transformation in corporations’ goals. Such a change can only be realised through changes in the law that governs corporations. This balance would make the dream of Achbar, Abbott, and Bakan very likely. a. Argument 2: Corporations recklessly disregard the safety of others In addition to being unconcerned with the feelings of others, the documentary highlights the cases of disregarding the safety of others. For examples, the film introduces viewers to Akre and Wilson, who were fired by a Florida affiliate of the Fox News Network after they declined to rewrite and dilute a story of RBGH. RBGH was a synthetic hormone manufactured by Monsanto in the U.S. The synthetic hormone had been banned in Canada and Europe. RBGH enhanced cows’ metabolism and increased milk production. As a result of producing increased milk, the cows suffered developed mastitis, a painful udder infection (The Corporation, 2004). The cows were injected with antibiotics to heal the infection. The antibiotics ended up in milk. After consumption, consumers developed immunity to antibiotics. Eventually, consumers suffered from antibiotic-resistant diseases. The resultant effect created a path for the formation of other corporations such as drug manufacturers who manufactured additional drugs to combat this resistance. These corporations created increased profits in utter disregard of consumers’ safety. b. Evidence The Corporation succeeds as a documentary because it refuses to become dismal. Instead, it concludes on an optimistic note, showing how environmental activists, farmers’ groups, and consumers’ associations have forced corporations to behave in a more socially responsible way. The Corporation reveals how corporations recklessly disregard the safety of others. Others, in this case, refer to employees, consumers, and the entire society. The documentary illustrates this point well through the case of Kathy Gifford’s sweatshop apparel manufacturing practices and BP pollution. Other cases include Coca-Cola’s water privatisation, use of paramilitaries against labour unionists and other abuses. These examples includes harm to workers (sweatshops, child labour), harm to human health (harmful products, lying about adverse data), harm to animals (factory farming, artificial hormones), and harm to biosphere (CO2 emissions, pollution) (The Corporation, 2004). The corporation reveals how Fox News squelched its investigation about genetically modified milk. A United Nations personality checklist recurs throughout the documentary, demonstrating that if corporations’ disregard for other people’s safety to maximise profit was displayed by an individual, he/she would be considered psychopathic. c. Critique The issues concerning sustainability and sustainable development have become prominent over the past few decades, and The Corporation is one of the films that have exemplified this theme (Cobert, 2009). Through The Corporation, the authors seemed to propose that there be new ways and new approaches to organising entities. Roelvink (2009) observes that The Corporation captures and makes real certain concerns such as an alternative economic discourse. Another review of the documentary, the author argues that the world should be troubled due to the behaviour of the corporation as amplified in the documentary (Yamey, 2004). He supports the authors of The Corporation by arguing that if unregulated, corporations will continue to be pose danger to human beings, as well as the environment. He further observes that the documentary has laid out comprehensive and compelling evidence. To exemplify his argument, he observes that the Economist termed the documentary as “a surprisingly rational and a coherent attack on capitalism’s most important institution” (Yamey, 2004). This paper joins Yamey in supporting the documentary’s proposations and arguments. Yamey argues logically that the evidence provided in The Corporation is both comprehensive and compelling. Other studies have suggested that non-criminal psychopaths can have more self-control and are able to control their actions and behaviours more than criminal psychopaths (McCormick and Burch, 2005). Hofmann and Hasebrook (2004) argue that even if they are not psychotic, corporate psychopaths are ruthless and dangerous. The arguments of McCormick and Burch (2005) and Hofmann and Hasebrook (2004) are logical in the sense that their arguments are supporting The Corporation’s proposations. In addition, this paper has established that corporations fail to control their actions and behaviours. In his experiment conducted by Nadis (1995) displayed two pictures to psychopaths and observed their reactions. The psychopaths were found to pay much attention to a picture that displayed a woman who had been run over by a car than the picture of the one who was just riding a bicycle in front of cars. In addition, these psychopaths did not show any feelings for the woman who had been run over. While non-psychopaths remember with emotions about a picture of a bleeding person than they do with a neutral picture, the psychopaths treat both pictures in the same rational, unworried way. The above argument is logical and it is representative of corporations because they cause harm and injuries to people and still continue to operate as if nothing has happened. The above study is also supported by the following studies. In another study, 75 percent of the survey respondents graded corporations as either not good or terrible in terms of product reliability (Alsop, 2004). Another study found out that, 72% of American citizens believe that corporations have too much power over them (Mohr and Webb, 2005). It is not right for corporations to record huge profits and announce this in their financial reports. Most of the times, these companies seem unconcerned that consumers are likely to be harmed by their products while they enjoy record profits. These disregardful profit announcements are becoming common around the world. There are two persons in the act; one well-liked socially and the other responsible for atrocious acts. In response to this, The Corporation interviews Robert Hare, consultant to the FBI on psychopaths. Because a corporation is considered a legal person, Hare is asked to assess, using personality scales, the question to whether a corporation has a personality. Using the WHO and DSM-IV criteria, Hare concludes that a corporation is an example of a prototypical psychopath (The Corporation, 2004). Hare’s conclusion raises a number of significant questions about the role the corporation plays in the society as a person. This paper concludes that the role a corporation plays is the one played by a psychopathic person. The role of doing things in a way that hurt the feelings of other persons while at the same time disregards their safety and health. Therefore, Hare’s arguments are logical and acceptable. Personal Views The arguments of the authors need to be accepted because the actions of today’s corporations are harmful to people, animals, and the environment. Today’s corporations are doing little or nothing to mitigate the harm they cause to human beings and the environment. They do not feel pain or remorse because they are not human descendants. The crucial argument that this essay makes in support of the authors is that corporations do not fit into the social and moral world, a world whose other members are multifaceted humans. Corporations resemble con men, murderers, and thieves than upright persons. They are psychopathic in nature. There is a need for reconsideration in law that equates corporations to human persons. The authors sought to answer the question, “exactly who is responsible?” This essay argues that a punishment on the corporation would be a punishment to the shareholders whereas the shareholders may not even be aware of the misdeeds in the corporation. On the other hand, corporation’ executives do not act in their own names. Rather, they act in the name of the corporation. This makes the law that created “corporations as persons” ambiguous. Workers’ cooperatives Workers’ cooperatives maintain a balance between individual and community interest. In the United States, corporations fear worker cooperatives because they have used their power to bring them down (Curl, 2010). In order to reduce the atrocities that are vented on people by the corporation, the government needs to rethink about workers’ cooperatives. The goal to promoting workers’ cooperatives on a national scale should be a core government policy. There is no need to favour corporations. The government should avail loans to groups of unemployed persons and underemployed ones so that they can start worker-owned cooperative businesses. Curl (2010) argues that cooperative movements operate in spaces that cannot be filled by the corporate system. He argues that workers’ cooperatives are the only organisations that can provide dignified living to people who would otherwise be exploited in corporations. Wright (2014) argues that workers’ cooperatives offer a peaceable way in which people can achieve democratic balance regarding the means of production as well as distribution. Imbroscio (2010) discusses workers’ cooperatives as an alternative way of business governance and policy. Wright (2014) further argues that cooperatives should replace corporations in order to eliminate the difficulties of democratic governance. In workers’ cooperatives, there are few or no cases of unconcern of other people feeling and unconcern for other people’s safety (Fortright, 2002). Conclusion In conclusion, the paper was seeking to establish whether corporations are psychopathic rather than upright. The paper has examined the movie documentary, The Corporation and has attempted to establish whether the arguments posed in the documentary are valid. This paper concludes that corporations exhibit psychopathic behaviours hence, the arguments posed by the documentary are valid. The authors have engaged prominent corporate executives to prove their point. These executives have exposed some ills that are vented on people by corporations. Specifically, the paper has critically analysed two important behaviours of psychopathic persons and proved that they are also common among corporations. Based on the WHO’s personality diagnostic checklist for psychopathy, the paper has established that corporations are unconcerned about the feelings of others. In addition, corporations also disregard the safety of others in their day-to-day operations. Therefore, corporations should not be regarded as normal persons; rather, they should be grouped with psychopathic persons. Several other authors who have been reviewed have proved that, indeed, corporations are psychopathic. The arguments of these authors are valid. As the paper has observed, corporations perpetuate harm through both corporations and the courts. As in slavery, corporations maintain an invisible masque of injustice through the horrific social persecution of other people, even to death. A need emanates for an amendment in the law. The major driving force of any country’s economy is the profit motive. Therefore, the government should regulate self-interests and profit motives of corporations in order to protect both the society and the environment. This essay argues that it would be inappropriate to consider corporations to be persons because they are members who have a personality but no face; have intentions without feelings; form relationships but have no friends or family; have responsibilities, but no conscience; and finally, have susceptibility to punishment but cannot feel pain. References Alsop, R. 2004. Corporate scandals hit home; Reputations of big com-panies tumble in consumer survey; Money can rob the goodness. The Wall Street Journal, B1. Babiak, P. et al. 2010. Corporate Psychopathy: Talking the Walk. Behavioural Sciences & The Law. 28(2), pp. 174-193. Batory, S. et al. 2005. Ethical Marketing Practices: An Investigation of Antecedents, Innovativeness and Business Performance. The Journal of American Academy of Business. 2, pp. 135-142. Corbett, L. 2009. Sustainable Operations Management: A typological Approach. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management. 2(1), pp. 10-30. Curl, J. 2009. For All the People: Uncovering the Hidden History of Cooperation, Cooperative Movements, and Communalism in America. Oakland: PM Press. Curl, J. 2010. The Cooperative Movement in Century 21. A Journal of Radical Theory, Culture, and Action. 4(1), pp. 12-29. Fortright, J. 2002. The Economic Importance of Being Different: Regional Variations in Tastes, Increasing Returns, and the Dynamics of Development. Economic Development Quarterly. 16(1), pp. 3-16. Hare, R. 1994. Predators: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths among Us. Psychology Today. 27(1), pp. 54-61. Harris, G., Rice, M., Hilton, N., Lalumiere, M. and Quinsey, V. 2007. Coercive and precocious sexuality as a fundamental aspect of psychopathy. Journal of Persons with Disorders, 21, pp. 1–2710. Hofmann, S. and Hasebrook, J. 2004. Symposium: Psychopathology of Organisations: Summary and Conclusion with an Evolutionary Spin, Symposium: Psychopathology of Organisations Euroscience Open Forum 2004, University of Lubeck. Imbroscio, D. 2010. Urban America Reconsidered: Alternatives for Governance and Policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Kiehl, K. et al. 2001. Limbic Abnormalities in Affective Processing by Criminal Psychopaths as Revealed by Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Biological Psychiatry. 50, pp. 677-684. Martin, J. 2006. Positive discourse analysis: Power, solidarity and change. Journal of English Studies. 4 (14), pp. 21-35 McCormick, I. and Burch, G. 2005. Corporate Behaviour: Snakes in Suits – Fear and Loathing in Corporate Clothing: They’re Glib, Charming, Deceitful and Ruthless; They’ve Been Described as “Snakes in Suits” – and They’re in an Office Near You. New Zealand Management Journal. p. 34. Mohr, A. and Webb, D. (2005). The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. The Journal of Consumer Affairs. 39, pp. 121–147. Nadis, S. 1995. Utter Amorality: Can Psychopaths Feel Emotions? Omni. 17, p. 12. Roelvink, G. 2009. Broadening the Horizons of Economy. Journal of Cultural Economy. Schneeman, A. 2010. Law of Corporations and Other Business Organization. New York: Cengage Learning Stibbe, A. 2013. The Corporation as Person and Psychopath: Multimodal Metaphor, Rhetoric and Resistance. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines. 6(2), pp. 114-136. The Corporation. Dir. Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott. DVD. Zeitgeist Films, 2004. Wellons, S. 2012. The Devil in the Boardroom: Corporate Psychopaths and Their Impact on Business. Pure Insights. 1(1), pp. 42-45. Wright, C. 2014. Worker Cooperatives and Revolution: History and Possibilities in the United States. Florida: BookLocker Yamey, G. 2004. The Corporation. The British Medical Journal. 329(7457), pp. 117 Read More