The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism: Contributions of World Religions and Spiritualities (Ethical Economy, 63) 3031102037, 9783031102035

Citation preview

Ethical Economy. Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy

Michel Dion Moses Pava   Editors

The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism Contributions of World Religions and Spiritualities

Ethical Economy Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy Volume 63

Series Editors Alexander Brink, Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik, University of Bayreuth Bayreuth, Germany Jacob Dahl Rendtorff, Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark Editorial Board Members John Boatright, Loyola University, Chicago, IL, USA George Brenkert, Business Ethics Inst, Maguire Hall 209B, Georgetown Univ, Georgetown, Washington, DC, USA Allan K. K. Chan, Lee Shau Kee School of Business & Admi, The Open University of Hong Kong, Homantin, Hong Kong Christopher Cowton, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK Richard T. de George, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA Jon Elster, Columbia University, New York, USA Amitai Etzioni, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA Ingo Pies, Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftsethik, Martin-Luther-Univ Halle-Wittenberg Halle (Saale), Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany Michaela Haase, Marketing, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany Carlos Hoevel, Facultad de Ciencias Economicas, Universidad Catolica Argentina Buenos Aires, Argentina Yuichi Shionoya, Hitotsubashi University, Kunitachi, Tokyo, Japan Philippe Van Parijs, Chaire Hoover d’Ethique Economique, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium Gedeon J. Rossouw, Hadefields Office Park, Ethics Institute of Africa Hatfield, Pretoria, South Africa Josef Wieland, LEIZ, Zeppelin Universität, Friedrichshafen,  Baden-Württemberg, Germany

Ethical Economy describes the theory of the ethical preconditions of the economy and of business as well as the theory of the ethical foundations of economic systems. It analyzes the impact of rules, virtues, and goods or values on economic action and management. Ethical Economy understands ethics as a means to increase trust and to reduce transaction costs. It forms a foundational theory for business ethics and business culture. The Series Ethical Economy. Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy is devoted to the investigation of interdisciplinary issues concerning economics, management, ethics, and philosophy. These issues fall in the categories of economic ethics, business ethics, management theory, economic culture, and economic philosophy, the latter including the epistemology and ontology of economics. Economic culture comprises cultural and hermeneutic studies of the economy. One goal of the series is to extend the discussion of the philosophical, ethical, and cultural foundations of economics and economic systems. The series is intended to serve as an international forum for scholarly publications, such as monographs, conference proceedings, and collections of essays. Primary emphasis is placed on originality, clarity, and interdisciplinary synthesis of elements from economics, management theory, ethics, and philosophy. The book series has been accepted into SCOPUS (March 2019) and will be visible on the Scopus website within a few months.

Michel Dion  •  Moses Pava Editors

The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism Contributions of World Religions and Spiritualities

Editors Michel Dion École de gestion Université de Sherbrooke Sherbrooke, QC, Canada

Moses Pava Professor of Business Ethics Yeshiva University New York, NY, USA

ISSN 2211-2707     ISSN 2211-2723 (electronic) Ethical Economy ISBN 978-3-031-10203-5    ISBN 978-3-031-10204-2 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022, corrected publication 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Foreword

Going onto 20 years ago, I sat with a group of about 15 people at John Mackey’s ranch outside of Austin, Texas, to brainstorm the launching of Conscious Capitalism. Frankly, I did not contribute anything particularly meaningful to the event – the others present were way ahead of me – but to me, there was an acute recognition of the spiritual aspects of what has become a very influential movement in today’s business world. At the time, I had been devoting a significant portion of my writing to issues pertaining to world religions and contemporary spirituality, and what I resonated with the most were the implicit and explicit spiritual dimensions and claims in Conscious Capitalism’s approach and the methodology that undergirded it. It is therefore gratifying to see this volume taking these connections head-on. To be sure, this volume is not one in which the authors – rooted in a variety of religious traditions  – simply note the similarities between Conscious Capitalism and their history-laden belief systems. Whether with respect to a business philosophy or to a scientific discovery, there is often a temptation for religious scholars to frame their tradition in a way that claims that they are saying the same thing – or something similar – to a secular approach that has achieved some level of popularity. That is not the case here. Neither it is the case that the authors dig in their heels to do battle. It can be challenging to have a constructive engagement between spokespeople for spiritual traditions and business theory. For example, when I was a doctoral student, splitting time between a business school and a seminary (to get the closest thing I could do a PhD in business ethics), I presented something similar to Conscious Capitalism at the seminary. After listening very respectfully, my professor could take no more. “But capitalism is the work of the devil!” he thundered, slamming his fist on the table. I respected his professionalism in first listening to my presentation, but it was difficult to know what to say next. Similarly, around the time of the aforementioned meeting in Texas, I was convening a conference on religion, business, and peace. I ran into difficulties recruiting participants because whether from religion or business, the person said “they” are the ones who cause war; how can we talk to them.

v

vi

Foreword

While social media has produced many unfortunate results, one positive thing it has done is to make it easier to shed light on corporate misconduct. At least in my career, I can pinpoint when my course in business ethics became something students really wanted to take: It was when smartphones became popular. (I wish I could say my course became popular because of my teaching or even because I sing to my students, but alas, larger technological forces were at work.) Students recognized that corporate reputation might matter in a way it had not outside of small-town shops and neighborhoods. In this regard, this volume’s dialogue provides a welcome opportunity for a business framework responsive to the needs of reputation to be critiqued by representatives of the historical producers of ethical and spiritual wisdom. The authors in this volume remain highly skeptical of capitalism and of the optimism of Conscious Capitalism’s higher purposes. Yet, they constructively and critically engage. They identify common ethical values, emotions, and societal objectives. Indeed, this is a critical analysis of Conscious Capitalism from the standpoint of these various traditions, challenging claims, accepting insights, and laying a foundation for further dialogue. Perhaps as importantly, Conscious Capitalism causes authors in this volume to reflect on their own traditions as to what those traditions have to say about capitalism and about responsible business conduct. This is the kind of work that is badly needed not only in scholarly musings but also in society as a whole. It is to the credit of the editors of this volume and to the authors that they have produced this constructive inquiry. Eveleigh Professor of Business Ethics Kelley School of Business Indiana University Bloomington, IN, USA

Timothy L. Fort

Contents

1

Introduction����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Michel Dion and Moses Pava

Part I Religion and Capitalism: An Overview 2

Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention, and Persuasive Technologies����������������������������   17 Michael J. Thate

3

Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion in Modern Societies������������������   31 Christian Danz

4

The Responsible Leader��������������������������������������������������������������������������   45 David W. Miller and Michael J. Thate

Part II Theistic Religions and Conscious Capitalism 5

The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception of Jewish Business Ethics ����������������������   59 Moses Pava

6

Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions to the Search for a Moral Economic Vision ������������������������������������������   85 Nadav S. Berman

7

Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous Consumption����������������������������������������  109 Daniel Ross Goodman

8

 The Sabbatical Paradigm Shift��������������������������������������������������������������  133 Jeremy Benstein

vii

viii

9

Contents

 Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens��������������������  143 Gary E. Roberts

10 Wealth  as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit of Conscious Capitalism ������������������������������  167 Eva Witesman, Bradley R. Agle, and Brad Oates 11 Christianity  and Conscious Capitalism ������������������������������������������������  193 Maggie Arevalo Eusebio 12 The  Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism��������������������������  217 Carlos Hoevel 13 Conscious  Capitalism and Orthodoxy ��������������������������������������������������  239 Maria Krambia-Kapardis 14 Conscious  Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence������������������������������������������������������������������  253 Mohammad Omar Farooq and Abu Umar Faruq Ahmad 15 Islam  and Conscious Capitalism������������������������������������������������������������  273 Omar Hemissi and Khaldoun Dia-Eddine 16 Unpacking  Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective������������������  293 Sofiane Baba and Shoeb Mohammad 17 A  Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual, Organizational, and Systemic Transformation ����������������������������������������������������������������  313 David A. Palmer and Joseph F. McCormick PART III Non-theistic Spiritualities, Indigenous Spiritualities, and Conscious Capitalism 18 Buddhist Economics: The Global View��������������������������������������������������  339 Robert Elliott Allinson 19 Buddhist  Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring Market Economy��������������������������������������������������  361 Clair Brown 20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism����������������������������������������  379 Kiri Dell, Carla Houkamau, Jason Mika, and Jamie Newth 21 The  Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration, Neutralism, and Resistance����������  399 Miguel Astor-Aguilera 22 A  Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual Intelligence for Conscious Capitalism ��������������  423 Gianni Zappalà

Contents

ix

Part IV Further Thoughts 23 The  Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion in the Organizational Life: A Different Outlook on Conscious Capitalism��������������������������������������  453 Michel Dion 24 A  Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business������������������������������  483 Moses Pava Correction to: Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   C1 Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  501

Chapter 1

Introduction Michel Dion and Moses Pava

And while such matters were once seen as being far removed from the worldly concerns of business, today it’s not uncommon for leaders to speak openly about their pursuit of spiritual paths and practices…” Mackey et al. (2020)

According to Max Weber, in his well-known theory on the relationship between religion and capitalism, it was the yearning among Calvinists for external signs to indicate whether one was among the elect that gradually led believers to attach religious significance and value to practical virtues, like industriousness, thrift, and commercial success, many of the same values that we now associate with the “spirit” of capitalism. More recently Harvard University’s economic historian Benjamin Friedman has argued that Adam Smith, the inventor of modern capitalism, among others, despite his own religious doubts and misgivings, was deeply influenced by the religious and theological debates of his time. According to Friedman, the influence of religion on the development and growth of capitalism was profound, yet it was not something that Smith, or anyone else for that matter, had explicitly intended. But rather “the theological debates of their time fundamentally altered how they thought about human nature and the underpinnings of everyday human interaction…” (2021, p. xii).

M. Dion (*) École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada e-mail: [email protected] M. Pava Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University, New York, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_1

1

2

M. Dion and M. Pava

Both Max Weber and Benjamin Friedman, despite their many differences, describe a certain kind of cause-and-effect relationship between religion and the rise of traditional capitalism. Yet, according to both theories, religion operated and did its most important work at an unconscious and stealth level and not in a direct and open way, where thinkers and writers were consciously combining religious and economic values together. Today, there are many signs that capitalism may be evolving into something new. One version of Next Stage Capitalism has been called Conscious Capitalism. John Mackey and Raj Sisodia (2013) have defined Conscious Capitalism as follows: “Conscious Capitalism” is a way of thinking about capitalism and business that better reflects where we are in the human journey, the state of our world today, and the innate potential of business to make a positive impact on the world. Conscious businesses are galvanized by higher purposes that serve, align and integrate the interests of all their major stakeholders. Their higher state of consciousness makes visible to them the interdependencies that exist across all stakeholders, allowing them to discover and harvest synergies from situations that otherwise seem replete with trade-offs. They have conscious leaders who are driven by service to the company’s purpose, to all the people the business touches and to the planet we all share. Conscious businesses have trusting, authentic, innovative and caring cultures that make working there a source of both personal growth and professional fulfillment. They endeavor to create financial, intellectual, social, cultural, emotional, spiritual, physical, and ecological wealth for all their stakeholders.

This description of Conscious Capitalism makes several large and hopeful claims about the potential of business in today’s world. First, businesses can move beyond profit maximization and embrace a variety of higher purposes. Second, these higher purposes can tightly align the interests and interdependencies of the various stakeholders and will thus allow businesses to move beyond the notion of trade-offs. Third, conscious leaders can put aside their own self-interests to serve the company’s unique purposes. And, finally, conscious businesses can create a culture that supports personal growth and professional fulfillment. At its most optimistic, the conscious capitalism movement seeks to push our conception of the economy beyond the narratives and limitations inherent in today’s dominant neo-liberal philosophy. It aspires to an evolutionary growth beyond the status quo but short of any revolutionary demands. And, with its invocation of “higher purposes,” is it purposely making a kind of connection to religion? And, a provocative one, at that? As the editors of this volume, we believe that religious scholars and spiritual practitioners ought to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Next Stage Capitalism in a direct and conscious way and thus help to contribute to the many debates and dialogues centered upon Conscious Capitalism in real time. Among the questions we put forth to each of the contributors to this volume were the following: 1. Are the “higher purposes” discussed by the advocates of conscious capitalism consistent with the depth and scope of sense-making from your religious/spiritual perspective?

1 Introduction

3

2. How can world religions and spiritualties contribute to the existential quest for meaning in the organizational life? Is such a quest for meaning consistent with conscious capitalism or any form of capitalism? 3. Conscious capitalism, at its most extreme, seems to suggest that organizational leaders can move beyond their own self-interest to serve the higher purposes of the organization. Such a move calls for an attitude of kindness and empathy. From your perspective, is it possible to move beyond self-interest? Does the notion of kindness and empathy inherent in conscious capitalism represent the kind of unconditional compassion called for by many world religions and spiritualities? 4. Is the kind of leadership called for by conscious capitalism consistent with more traditional religiously based leadership? 5. How could stakeholder interdependencies contribute to harmonize potentially conflicting interests? 6. Is the call for greater stakeholder interdependencies consistent only with a libertarian worldview? Or, is there a role for government to play in nudging corporations forward towards a more conscious capitalism? 7. Does conscious capitalism envision the possibility of moving beyond the purely commodity-based exchanges that seem to define contemporary neo-liberalism? If so, what might this mean for the future of business in society? 8. Assuming conscious capitalism is consistent with the aspirations and values of religious and/or spiritual worldviews, how practical is it to implement conscious capitalism in today’s world? As organizations grow, will they be able to maintain their identity as conscious corporations? 9. What constructive role can religion and spirituality play in enhancing contemporary organizational practice? 10. From the perspective of social justice, does conscious capitalism go far enough? Does it go too far? We did not expect authors to ask and answer each of these questions, rather the hope was that at least some of these questions would spark an interest in the author or perhaps aid the author to develop his or her own questions concerning the desirability and value of Conscious Capitalism from their own religious and spiritual worldviews. As editors of the volume our central intellectual concern is as follows: If it is true that religion played an important but unintended role in the development of traditional capitalism, as Max Weber and Benjamin Friedman (most recently) have argued, perhaps this time around religion can and will play a more conscious, intelligent and thoughtful role in both the critique and in the development of Next Stage Capitalism. We believe that a careful reading of the following chapters gives us some reasons for optimism.

4

M. Dion and M. Pava

1.1 Structure of the Volume The remainder of this book is divided into four parts. Part I provides an overview of the relationship between religion and capitalism. Part II consists of thirteen chapters on theistic religions and their respective relationships to Conscious Capitalism. Part III consists of five chapters on the relationship between non-Theistic and Indigenous spiritualities and Conscious Capitalism. Finally, Part IV includes two chapters on the significance of compassion and kindness, two values at the heart of Conscious Capitalism.

1.2 Part I – Religion and Capitalism: An Overview In Chap. 2, Michael Thate is somewhat sympathetic to Mackey’s and Sisodia’s Conscious Capitalism, noting the power of their vision and aspiration to live “fully awake and mindful, to see reality more clearly, and to more fully understand all the consequences—short term and long term—of our actions.” However, Thate does question how realistic such a vision is given the all-encompassing nature of capitalism as an ideology – we are like fish swimming in water -- and especially given the rise of Surveillance Capitalism in recent years. “Hence the question of this essay: can any way of thinking or pursuit of higher purposes within the dynamics of capitalism ever be in the service of anything but the logic of capitalism itself?” Good question. Given Mackey and Sisodia’s rather thin understanding of consciousness, according to Thate, not surprisingly then, he is “not uncritical of their project.” Christian Danz, in Chap. 3, echoing Michael Thate’s perspective, points out that a modern economy “functions only in such a way that it follows its own autonomous autonomy, which means nothing other than that it must treat everything as an economic issue.” Having said this, however, Danz does note a strength inherent in Conscious Capitalism as opposed to Paul Tillich’s Religious Socialism in that “Its heroic spirit is not inserted into the economy from another social system like religion or ethics. Rather, it comes from the economic system itself.” Thus, the author concludes on a somewhat positive note “that there is more at play in economic action than was assumed by classical rational choice models.” That is the good news. Nevertheless, Conscious Capitalism is by no means a panacea. It remains economic through and through. “For it too operates in a free market, and thus under the conditions of competition…To expect from it a redemption of the world or an integration of the fragmented modern society would be a fatal ideology that ignores the complexity of modern societies.” Religion will not offer much help here as it is merely a sign system. “It refers exclusively to itself by creating its own image of the world…” While few of even the most ardent advocates of Conscious Capitalism believe that it will prove “redemptive,” Danz’s realistic pessimism is not a bad way to begin the conversation on the interface between religion and capitalism. Perhaps the onus of proof does appropriately fall upon the (overly?) optimistic

1 Introduction

5

backers of Conscious Capitalism. What kind of “consciousness” are we really talking about? In Chap. 4, David Miller and Michael Thate, suggest that the concept of Conscious Leadership, a cornerstone of Conscious Capitalism, can be enlarged by focusing on the trope of responsibility. The notion of “The Responsible Leader,” we propose, adds a critical dimension to Mackey’s and Sisodia’s noble effort and important articulation of acting well within the complex realities of a market economy.” They explore this proposition “through the thought-world of twentieth-­ century martyr, ethicist, and Lutheran theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906–1945).” The authors conclude the chapter by noting hopefully that, “Perhaps Bonhoeffer might inspire a new generation of Responsible Leaders as they seek wisdom and integrity in their respective callings to enable their personal ethics and corporate ethics to flourish side by side.” Of the three papers that constitute Part I of this volume, Chap. 3 offers the first real seeds for an optimistic case for the future of Conscious Capitalism from a religious or spiritual perspective.

1.3 Part II – Theistic Religions and Conscious Capitalism While all the papers in the volume struggle to some extent to clarify the appropriate relationship between idealism and realism, all four of the chapters on Judaism focus to some extent on this topic. This is particularly true for Chaps. 5 and 6. The purpose of Chap. 5, according to its author Moses Pava, is “to explore the potential contributions of a broadly expanded conception of Jewish business ethics to the task of contributing to the continued emergence of a new kind of more self-­ conscious capitalism.” Pava suggests the use of several Jewish concepts including the idea of covenant, hesed (translated as kindness), and Sabbath Consciousness as potential contributors to the elaboration of a deeper conception of capitalism. “As long as one continues to remember that business covenants are only like religious ones, that kindness in business is not precisely what Jewish kindness expects in purely religious contexts, and as long as one knows that Sabbath Consciousness is a mere reflection of the experience of observing the traditional rules of the Sabbath, purposefully choosing to secularize such concepts and to put them to work in business will not harm them at all and may, in turn, actually deepen one’s religious appreciation for them in the long run.” Chapter 6, authored by Nadav Berman, offers a thorough and theoretical defense of pragmatism as an appropriate way to think about capitalism and Judaism, noting that pragmatism is often distorted by equating it with “mere opportunism.” Berman concludes his scholarly discussion by noting that, advocates of Capitalism (and Conscious Capitalism) should be critical of economic injustices, and to be able to say what are the moral boundaries of markets. Ultimately, money and financial interactions depend on interhuman trust.”

6

M. Dion and M. Pava

Chapters 7 and 8 extend Pava’s earlier introduction to the concept of Sabbath Consciousness and enlarge the concept to include “Sabbatical Consciousness”. In Chap. 7, Daniel Ross Goodman writes: In a society in which the weekend is an integral part of the week, we are accustomed to thinking about necessary leisure times in terms of days; what is radical, if not downright revolutionary, about the institution of the Shemitah [Sabbatical] is its explicit message that necessary leisure must also encompass certain years.

Goodman concludes his chapter by noting that a practical implication of the “Sabbatical Consciousness” is that “the principle that there are days and times in which God not only suggests but mandates rest should act as a regulatory standard for how we should engage with one another as economic agents and for how we should conduct ourselves within capitalist economies more broadly.” Goodman leaves it to the reader to figure out just how to apply this mandate. In Chap. 8, Jeremy Benstein, quite by chance, also wrote about Judaism’s “Sabbatical Paradigm Shift.” He concludes his paper by noting that “Instead of hoarding profits and stocks, businesses can break down some of the barriers and close some of the gaps between capital and labor by sharing profits and stocks with workers. We can create community-based alternatives to consumer culture with forms of collective consumption, such as libraries of things. And we can devise ways in which society can make sure that our poorest members don't fall below subsistence.” All of these suggestions are quite relevant to constructing a new kind of capitalist system, based not only on the workaday utilitarian philosophy but one based on the Jewish conception of the “Sabbatical Consciousness.” Chapters 9 through 13, examine Conscious Capitalism through the lenses of various Christian perspectives including: Catholic Christian social justice  – Gary E. Roberts (Chap. 9), the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS)  – Witesman, Agle, and Oates (Chap. 10), Christianity  – Eusebio (Chap. 11) and Hoevel (Chap.12), and Christian Orthodoxy - Krambia-Kapardis (Chap. 13). Gary E. Roberts in Chap. 9 examines the basic elements of Conscious Capitalism and documents a remarkable overlap between it and a Catholic Christian social justice perspective. He writes: They [CC and Catholicism] are fully consistent with viewing profit as a means to greater and more noble end, promoting values over a profit motivated culture, treating all stakeholders non-instrumentally and as valued ends, rejecting exploitation, striving to lift all aspects of society, leaders are servants first, and organizations should be conscious cultures learning and growing with care and transparency.

In fact, Roberts notes that “The sole diversion is the nature of the ultimate stakeholder as both the environment and society are key stakeholders from a Christian worldview, but the ultimate stakeholder is the individual and aggregate obligation to serve and obey God (See: Colossians 3:23-24). Roberts concludes with perhaps the most effusive judgment of any of the chapters included in this volume writing, “CC organizations are a marked improvement and have promoted concrete progress and concurrently afford hope for a fuller realization of the eternal biblical business standards.” High praise, indeed.

1 Introduction

7

Chapter 10, authored by Eva Witesman, Brad Agle, and Brad Oates, explores and details the comprehensive economic agenda of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-­ day Saints (LDS). For adherents to the Church the single most important question for believers is the stark question of the simple but all-important yes-or-no choice between God or Mammon. The authors write: The scriptural accounts of wealth, trade, and social structure in the LDS canon of scriptures suggest two ideal types for the destiny of society in the presence of wealth. One, the Zion society, expands wealth for the whole of society, increases human potential, and experiences boundless growth due to wise stewardship of resources and an absence of internal conflict. The other, a Babylon society, results in social fractures, class divisions, war, strife, and destruction.

From the authors’ perspective Conscious Capitalism is completely unnecessary for believers but does provide a kind of second-best alternative for non-believers. They write, “while an LDS believer might behave in a certain way because they are working toward the promise of exaltation in a theologically based Zion, others outside the faith might apply the same principles in hopes of being ‘conscious capitalists.’” In Chap. 11, Maggie Eusebio notes that there exists “a parallel between conscious capitalism and Christianity with regard to purpose in the organizational life.” As is the case with LDS, she notes that there may be some benefits to adopting the tenets of Conscious Capitalism. However, Eusebio is not at all optimistic about this. She concludes: Because of the fall, unless one is redeemed through Christ and operates as a regenerated/ spiritual (as opposed to one who is sensory or sensual-delimited) Christian, execution, and implementation of the “higher purposes” of conscious capitalism would be difficult and challenging due to human frailty or concupiscence.

Thus, Eusebio almost entirely eschews a pragmatic approach to life, even in the domain of economic activities. In Chap. 12, Carlos Hoevel sees a positive potential for Conscious Capitalism. He writes that “people who act in them [businesses run under the principles of CC] have an attitude of reflective review of their actions in order to improve them in the direction of moral good.” Further, given Christianity’s discovery of “universal ethical-­economic principles” combined with its “existential and relational dimension,” Christianity can potentially provide “economic agents the strength to live them and embody them in their concrete activities.” Further, in a spirit of tolerance and perhaps even a nod to pluralism, “Christian-inspired business organizations today generally seek to clearly make their objectives explicit, promoting the ethical and religious appeal of their mission in a climate of freedom, solidarity, and service.” Chapter 13, authored by Maria Krambia-Kapardis, focuses on the Christian Orthodox Church. According to the author, several Christian principles including freedom and dignity at work and the special responsibility of the wealthy towards the poor should underpin the economy. “Interestingly, wealth is regarded by Orthodoxy as a necessary evil because, through charity, poverty can be reduced/ eliminated.” Despite the general negative attitude towards wealth and a seeming

8

M. Dion and M. Pava

preference for socialism over capitalism, the author does see several areas of overlap between CC and Orthodoxy. Some of the qualities identified as necessary for conscious leaders within the context of CC are also qualities demonstrated in Orthodoxy. Such qualities include authenticity, empathy and compassion and being available and willing to help other fellow human beings regardless of race, colour, or gender.

Krambia-Kapardis concludes her chapter by noting that there is sufficient evidence that many of the principles Orthodoxy is built upon are found in Conscious Capitalism. Mohammad Omar Farooq and Abu Umar Faruk Ahmad, in Chap. 14, thoughtfully explore the convergence between Conscious Capitalism and an Islamic economic system to see if there is potential for mutual engagement. According to the authors, the four key characteristics of CC represent a key convergence point. “Conscious leadership; stakeholder orientation; conscious value-based culture; higher purpose, beyond pursuit of profit have no conflict with Islam at all.” Nevertheless, the authors do point out that while there is a clear sense of purpose in CC, such purpose is primarily focused on the material values and obviously falls short of a more religious purpose. The authors wonder out loud, in the absence of religious grounding, “why should they [conscious leaders] take on or value such a higher purpose? Is there really any accountability beyond what one sets for oneself and to the laws and regulations within which one functions?” In a nod to pragmatism, the authors conclude their paper by noting some distance between the ideals of Islam and the reality of Islamic business practice, hinting that perhaps CC might even help here. As a comprehensive way of life, Islam’s scope is much wider than any economic system and business philosophy, such as CC…Yet, for a long period Muslims have not been successful in operationalizing their objectives in this world. With the common ground of humanity-orientation to reorient business leadership and enterprises to serve the people and take care of the planet, there is a great need to better understand the mutual perspective and forge areas of productive collaboration and engagement.

In Chap. 15, Omar Hemissi and Khaldoun Dia-Eddine reach a relatively similar conclusion to Farooq and Ahmad above. These authors note that Conscious Capitalism is: an alternative model capable of participating in the moralization of the economic world, which easily converges with the orientations of the Islamic economic system. Thus, the prospects for the development of a conscious economy, based on ethics and morality, inspired by the precepts and values of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, can be a reference in terms of human behavior in solidarity, justice, and efficiency.

The authors are cautiously optimistic here, calling for additional study. “Could this be achieved? In the framework of what steps and on the basis of what initiative and methodology to avoid the current ideological drifts and economic interests? These are questions that will be worth analyzing further and deepening.”

1 Introduction

9

Sofiane Baba and Shoeb Mohammad in Chap. 16 continue the examination of the tenets of Conscious Capitalism from an Islamic perspective. The authors, after an extensive review of the relevant literatures, conclude that: (1) Islam and Conscious Capitalism are not competing views, nor identical views, but complementary views; (2) Islam, and more generally religions, provide a strong rationale for implementing Conscious Capitalism. And, perhaps most interestingly of all, (3) Muslim countries should be fostering conscious capitalism. David A. Palmer and Joseph McCormick, in Chap. 17, summarizes a Bahá’í approach to Conscious Capitalism. They write: A Baháʼí approach…involves redefining the meaning of capital to cover its social and spiritual dimensions and sees the business organization as operating within both a micro-­ environment of individuals and a macro-environment defined by the socio-political system. Thus, building a “conscious capitalist enterprise” involves a dual process of spiritual transformation at the levels of the individual and of the social system. Ultimately, only rebuilding the social order on spiritual foundations will create the conditions for the full flourishing of a spiritually and socially conscious form of capitalism.

One of the unique features of this chapter is the inclusion of a description of two business entrepreneurs who are attempting to bring Bahá’í principles to life in the context of real world businesses.

1.4 Part III – Non-Theistic Spiritualities and Conscious Capitalism Robert Elliott Allinson, in Chap. 18, applauds Conscious Capitalism’s movement away from profit maximization towards a higher purpose and sees much possibility here. He writes that once society jettisons profit maximization, economic behavior must be founded on a new goal. According to Allinson, from a Buddhist perspective, this move necessarily implies that the goal must be to achieve “economic equality.” With a special emphasis on compassion towards all sentient beings to reduce their suffering, the author concludes that “Buddhist economics must follow a conscious, compassionate, ethically driven capitalism. Conscious, compassionate capitalism is a capitalism that is conscious of ethical considerations and implications and places ethical values at the center of the capitalist enterprise.” Clair Brown, in Chap. 19, is optimistic about the possibilities of Conscious Capitalism, emphasizing the need to incorporate Buddhist values like care, compassion, non-violence, generosity, suffering minimization, and want reduction. Those companies that can successfully integrate these values, she writes, can be categorized as “Buddhist enterprises.” This is an interesting and telling phrase as none of the papers grounded in the theistic traditions examined in the earlier chapters claimed the existence of Hindu, Jewish, Christian, or Islamic enterprises.

10

M. Dion and M. Pava

Brown summarizes her conclusions as follows: We see that business needs to play a major role in creating a Buddhist economy with jobs that have living wages and hours, with sustainable supply chain and operations that respect ecological planetary boundaries, and with providing green products and services that people need to live sustainably and comfortably.

Interestingly, Brown is one of the view authors in this volume who directly challenges the “libertarian” philosophy at the heart of John Mackey’s Conscious Capitalism. She explicitly states that “we cannot expect companies to be in charge of transitioning the national economy to a modern, sustainable clean energy economy with livable cities and companies cannot create a just and equitable society with much less income inequality and discrimination. This is the role of the government” (emphasis added). This is an extremely important issue to consider as we attempt to gauge the practicality of CC. Chapter 20, authored by Kiri Dell, Carla Houkamau, Jason Mika, and Jamie Newth, explores Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism. Despite the ongoing impacts of colonisation since the 1800s, Māori have maintained strong cultural values, which manifest in contemporary approaches to business that strive to balance the interests of future and past generations based on a spiritual connection to the natural world. According to the authors, “Conscious Capitalism… describes higher-­ order principles that align with Māori approaches to business, but their limitation is articulating the role of spirituality in entrepreneurial activity.” The chapter extends Mackey and Sisodia’s higher-order tenets drawing on Māori values, primarily, mana (a supernatural force for status in a person, place, or object) and hau (the practice of reciprocal relations) to articulate how spiritual and cultural values shape contemporary Māori business endeavours. To illustrate, the authors offer a case study of a Māori business, led by one of the authors, which is grappling with tensions between cultural and commercial imperatives. The chapter provides an initial exploration of how an emerging Indigenous Māori theory of value might help to develop a sustainable, inclusive, and equitable approach to understanding business. Chapter 21 entitled “The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration, Neutralism and Resistance,” authored by Miguel Astor-Aguilera documents how the Maya have interacted and engaged in trade with their neighbors for centuries. The author concludes: Having a millennia old cosmological tradition that engages their ecology within acts of reciprocation, the Maya feel that they can have a harmonic balance with people and their environment, and this appears to be an Indigenous model reflecting a type of conscious capitalism. The Maya engage in trade extending outward from their village communities and this chapter seeks an approach to better contextualize and comprehend indigeneity articulated enterprising ventures.

In Chap. 22, Gianni Zappalà offers a wholistic framework that will help readers to understand and to communicate Conscious Leadership across all levels of learning. Zappala dubs this framework the Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership (MPMCL). This chapter will be of particular interest to readers who teach CC, regardless of one’s religious background.

1 Introduction

11

1.5 Part IV – Further Thoughts Built into the heart of Conscious Capitalism is an emphasis on care, compassion, and kindness. John Mackey and Raj Sisodia have written “that love, caring, empathy, and compassion are basic values of the more humanistic philosophy at the real basis of ‘conscious capitalism’.” Similarly, many of the authors included in this volume have implicitly or explicitly noted the special significance of these terms both for CC and for their respective religious or spiritual traditions. In Michel Dion’s Chap. 23, the author notes that while there are many assertions of compassion, nowhere in the many explications of the theory of CC are there precise definitions for these terms. Dion fills in this gap by offering a definition of what he calls “encompassing” compassion as “a path of infinite self-improvement.” And, further, he demonstrates how this kind of compassion can “be philosophically justified and spiritually/religiously applied in the organizational setting.” The paper thus serves as a needed theoretical and practical extension of Conscious Capitalism. In the volume’s final chapter, Moses Pava notes that for the advocates of Conscious Capitalism and for many of the authors included in this volume, today’s crisis in confidence is not a structural problem but a much deeper human one. Looking towards the future, and in an attempt to make some of the arguments more concrete and relatable, the thesis of the concluding chapter is the modest one that a fundamental cure for traditional capitalism, from most religious and spiritual traditions, is more kindness in business, be it dutiful, strategic, or simply kindness for the sake of kindness. And, as Pava demonstrates in the chapter, once you start looking for it, kindness is not at all hard to find. In fact, although kindness is rarely spoken about openly, it is everywhere. Just noticing and building upon this simple truism can be a platform on which to build the next stage of capitalism, hopefully a more conscious version this time.

1.6 Conclusion: Keeping What Ought To Be and What Is in Dialogue Each of the authors included in this volume recognize the gap between ideals – what out to be – and reality – what is. From this perspective each of the articles represents a kind of dialogue between these two poles. Each of these dialogues are unique and worthy of further study. Having said this, several common themes do emerge from a close reading of the following chapters. First, every author included here believes that our current capitalist system is broken (more or less) and is, at least in part, to blame for many of the society’s current problems. There is no need to list the maladies here once again. Second, many of the authors are concerned that some of the advocates of CC do not recognize the pervasive power and influence of mainstream capitalism, the kind of capitalism that continues to dominate our behavior and thinking, be it consciously

12

M. Dion and M. Pava

or more likely unconsciously. We are in many ways like the fish swimming in the water who does not realize that he is even in water or what water even is. There exists a healthy dose of optimism among some of the authors about whether or not the current system is even worth building upon. Third, there is a high degree of suspicion among many of the authors included here about the use and meaning of CC’s “higher purposes.” This is true to some extent for all the authors, but it is especially true for those writing out of the theistic traditions. For the theists, there is generally a single Higher Purpose, and this transcendent and eternal purpose is only indirectly related to the way we conduct everyday business transactions. Fourth, almost all the authors see some benefits to CC, especially when compared to more traditional conceptions of capitalism that exclusively focus on profit maximization. Fifth, several common values emerge in many of the papers. These values include responsibility, community, Sabbath and Sabbatical Consciousness, love, care, relationships, cooperation, stewardship, purpose, meaning of work, integrity, accountability, compassion, and kindness. This observation is not surprising because these values are generally those advocated in both the literature on Conscious Capitalism and the literatures on religion and spirituality. Finally, and most importantly for our purposes as editors of this volume, the following chapters provide ample evidence to support the hope that – this time around – religious and spiritual traditions can help to play a more conscious, intelligent, and thoughtful role in both the critique and in the constructive development of Next Stage Capitalism.

References Friedman, Benjamin. 2021. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism. New York: Knopf. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013. ’Conscious Capitalism’ Is Not an Oxymoron. Harvard Business Review. Mackey, John, Steve McIntosh, and Carter Phipps. 2020. Conscious Leadership. Portfolio Publishing. Michel Dion is Full Professor at the École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke (Québec, Canada). He is the Chairholder of the CIBC Research Chair on Financial Integrity. His main fields of research are the following ones: organizational ethics, ethical leadership, and corporate moral discourse; spirituality and management; corporate governance and financial crime. Prof. Dion has numerous books including: Éthique économique et croyances religieuses en Islam (Fides, 2011); Confucianisme et leadership (Fides, 2013); Financial Crime and Existential Philosophy (Springer, 2014); Bouddhisme tibétain et philosophie de l’existence (L’Harmattan, 2018); Worldviews, Ethics and Organizational Life (Springer, 2021). He was editor of La criminalité financière: Prévention, gouvernance et influences culturelles (De Boeck, 2011). He was co-editor of Financial Crimes. Psychological, Technological, and Ethical Issues (with David Weisstub and Jean-­Loup Richet: Springer, 2016) and co-editor of Humanizing Business: What Humanities Can Say to Business (with R. Edward Freeman and Sergiy Dmytriyev: Springer, 2022). His scholarly works have been  

1 Introduction

13

published in Business Ethics: A European Review, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, the International Journal of Organizational Analysis, and the International Journal of Social Economics. Moses Pava is the former Dean of the Sy Syms School of Business, the Alvin Einbender University Professor of Business Ethics, and Professor of Accounting, at Yeshiva University (USA). He has numerous books including: Business Ethics: A Jewish Perspective (Ktav, 1997); The Search for Meaning in Organizations (Praeger, 1999); Leading With Meaning (St. Martin’s Press, 2003); Jewish Ethics as Dialogue (Palgrave, 2009); Jewish Ethics in a Post-Madoff World (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). He serves on the editorial board of Journal of Business Ethics and the Journal of Jewish Ethics.  

Part I

Religion and Capitalism: An Overview

Chapter 2

Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention, and Persuasive Technologies Michael J. Thate

Life does not need to mutilate itself to be pure. Simone Weil (1970, p. 10) We have not been primed, either by nature or habit, to notice, much less struggle against, these new persuasive forces that so deeply shape our attention, our actions, and our lives. James Williams (2018, p. 29)

2.1 What the Hell Is Water? In his 2005 commencement speech delivered at Kenyon College, David Foster Wallace (1962–2008) opened his remarks to the graduating seniors with the following parable. There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says, ‘Morning, boys. How’s the water?’ And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, ‘What the hell is water?’” (Wallace 2009, p. 3).

By his own admission, the parable amounts to little more than “a banal platitude” (Wallace 2009, p.  9) concerning how “the most obvious, important realities are often the ones that are hardest to see and talk about” (Wallace 2009, p. 8). To his credit, he does not align himself with the wise old fish. He instead gestures toward urgent realities that involve everything related to what he refers to as “simple awareness” (Wallace 2009, p. 131). Intriguingly, he links this notion of awareness with what he elsewhere names as the inevitability of worship. Be it money, beauty, power, or whatever, worship is an “insidious thing,” precisely because it is an unconscious

M. J. Thate (*) Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_2

17

18

M. J. Thate

mode—a kind of default setting each of us falls into (Wallace 2009, p. 112). Worship becomes, in effect, whatever you “just gradually slip into, day after day, getting more and more selective about what you see and how you measure value without ever being fully aware that that’s what you’re doing” (Wallace 2009, p. 114). Refer to them as rituals if it makes you feel more thoughtful or sophisticated, but the phenomenon Wallace is naming here is the routinization of desire into habit via the repeated ruts of the everyday. Such practices form the warn trails leading to our respective temples. Rather presciently, Wallace refers to the then present culture of 2005 as harnessing these underlying forces “in ways that have yielded extraordinary wealth and comfort and personal freedom. The freedom to be lords of our tiny skull-sized kingdoms, alone at the center of all creation” (Wallace 2009, p. 117). He is not dismissive of this freedom—only suspicious. His concluding reminder—and polemical intervention, really—that “this is water” is thus a prophetic call to question not only why we are moving in the directions we are moving but why we think we have chosen these directions. The refrain “this is water” is an invitation to take up the unimaginably hard vocation of living consciously and aware of why we are doing the things we are doing. There is, it seems, a riddle at the heart of Wallace’s parable: how does one become aware or conscious of that medium in which and by which we move? The presence of the older fish appears promising yet also portending. We never learn how the fish became aware of water, only that the fish is aware, and, what must be more than coincidence, swimming alone in another direction. The banal platitude that obvious and fundamental realities hide within and as the medium of our perception sheds light on the following critical engagement with Conscious Capitalism (Mackey and Sisodia 2013). Conscious capitalism, as defined by John Mackey and Raj Sisodia, is both a way of thinking as well as a concern of higher purposes that serve, align, and integrate the interests of an organization’s stakeholders. Left unexamined in their formulation, however, is the affective side of capitalism (cf. Konings 2015, 2018; Martin-Juchat 2015); that is to say, the consciousness capitalism produces. Hence the question of this essay: can any way of thinking or pursuit of higher purposes within the dynamics of capitalism ever be in the service of anything but the logic of capitalism itself? As the work of Deleuze, Guattari, and many others have argued, the challenge of capitalism—or any ideology for that matter—is in its inability to account for anything but itself while at the same time (and paradoxically) remaining unaware of itself (e.g., Deleuze and Guattari 1983, 1987). As Marx put it in one of his more elementary definitions of ideology: “They do not know it, but they are doing it” (Marx 1990; cf. Zizek 1989, pp. 28–33). And, we might add, they are desiring it. Before outlining this argument, I will first summarize the project of Conscious Capitalism, and, second, ask if their articulation of capitalism reflects current realities. As they themselves suggest, their conception of conscious capitalism is an “evolving paradigm” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 32). Though not uncritical of their project, my hope is that what follows will contribute toward their noble vision

2  Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention…

19

of an exchange structured by pro-social commitments. James Williams has argued that information “is the water in which we swim” (Williams 2018, p. 12). We relate to this “water” much like the two young fish in Wallace’s parable relate to theirs. Persuasive technologies guide us along, direct our attention, and train our desires. I conclude the essay by turning to a second-century Christian “gnostic” text as a complement to the complexities surrounding conscious capitalism, persuasive forces, and affective consciousness.

2.2 Conscious Capitalism The purpose of Conscious Capitalism is, in the authors’s words, “to inspire the creation of more conscious businesses.” Conscious businesses reflect “higher purposes that serve and align the interests of all their major stakeholders.” They are led by “conscious leaders who exist in service to the company’s purpose, the people it touches, and the planet.” And they also reflect “resilient, caring cultures that make working there a source of great joy and fulfillment” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 9). This is a noble turn within the histories of what has elsewhere been termed, Civilizing Capitalism (Storrs 2000). We see in this articulation, however, a potential slippage. Are Mackey and Sisodia talking about conscious capitalism or conscious businesses? Conscious capitalism, the authors suggest, leads “to a better world for all of us,” loosing, in their words, “the extraordinary power of business and capitalism to create a world in which all people live lives full of purpose, love, and creativity—a world of compassion, freedom, and prosperity” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  9). To foreshadow the next section of this essay, the creation of any business is an inevitable flow from the conscious production of capitalism itself. The creation of businesses within capitalism will only ever be the production of businesses borne from the consciousness of capitalism. And the “values” of those businesses—whatever we name them—are the values bubbling up from the consciousness of capitalism. Working from an understanding of free-enterprise capitalism that is “inherently virtuous” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 273), and a “marvelous system for human cooperation,” the authors suggest the need for “a new narrative and a new ethical foundation” for capitalism that “accurately reflects its intrinsic goodness and virtue” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  11). Businesses are likewise “good” because they create “value”; they are “ethical” because value emerges from “voluntary exchange.” Hence a noble capitalism: one that elevates existence and best reflects the human condition (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  273). Conscious capitalism is thus an attitude toward exchange that seeks to be more conscious of higher purposes, social impacts, and “the relationships it has with its various constituencies and stakeholders” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 83). But how is capitalism conscious? The closest they come to defining consciousness is when they suggest that to be conscious means:

20

M. J. Thate to be fully awake and mindful, to see reality more clearly, and to more fully understand all the consequences—short term and long term—of our actions. It means we have a greater awareness of our inner self, our external reality, and the impacts we have on the world. It also means having a greater commitment to the truth and to acting more responsibly according to what we know to be true (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 29).

Several other elements of Mackey and Sisodia’s conceptualization of conscious capitalism are noteworthy—not least their repeated return throughout the text to the heroic force of capitalism and the heroic role of the entrepreneur within capitalism (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 273). Though inspiring, their discussion of capitalism is idealistic of both human nature and institutions. The point at which this essay attempts to contribute to their evolving paradigm is in their undeveloped discussion of consciousness and a thicker description of contemporary “capitalism” via The Gospel of Truth as a potential source for a consciousness of a different sort.

2.3 The “Harder” Problem of Consciousness Ennobling exchange stands aloft as one of the most urgent needs of our moment. Let us agree to call the field in which exchange happens “capitalism.” But what is capitalism in its current form? Can we really speak of capitalism as an “expanding pie” where everyone’s slice correspondingly increases (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 17)? Capitalism, it is true, has created an explosion of growth (see esp. Neal and Williamson 2014; Kocka 2016). And yet we are living through a period of exchange where a meager 15% of the capital of financial intuitions is invested into productive lending. Moreover, if we consider the growth rate of the world economy since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution until today, we witness a steady increase of 1.6% over three centuries while the rate of return on capital during that same period is somewhere between 4% and 5%. Problems emerge within such growth when we consider the radical inequality in the concentration of the ownership of capital’s returns. These points have been made forcefully elsewhere and need not concern us here (cf. Piketty 2015, 2017, 2020). Nor am I interested in offering ineffectual criticisms of capitalism. There is a profitable industry within the academy of scholars from elite institutions and paid by endowment dollars spewing bromide on such matters. And yet we must confront such realities and not brush them aside as aberrations as capitalist apologists are wont to do. The path taken here is informed by the oft-quoted line from Fredric Jameson that “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism” (Jameson 1994, p. xii). It is this capitalist realism, the view of approaching capitalism as a kind of “pervasive atmosphere” (or as Wallace’s water), that affects cultural production, political economy, and consciousness, that is adopted here but with a slight deviation (Fisher 2009, p. 16). Historically, emancipatory politics have attempted to subvert understandings of capitalism or social practices within capitalism that pose as natural or real. But what is real? Would “alternative” modes of exchange open us to something more real and

2  Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention…

21

natural in the world? Relationships of exchange participate within a field that our perceptions lead us to assume are accurate representations of the world. Evolution, so the argument goes, fine-tunes this alignment as a competitive advantage—weeding out the more illusory varieties of being-in-the-world. The cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman avers (Hoffman 2019). He proposes that it is evolution itself that drives the illusion (cf. Mark et al. 2010). The hard problem of consciousness—how a three-pound blob of grey matter obeying physical laws gives rise to conscious experience—thus becomes a bit more challenging when coupled with the counter-­ intuitive findings of quantum physics (cf. Chalmers 1995). How is first-person experience possible? This is the hard problem of consciousness. How could there be anything but first-person experience? This is quantum physics complication of the problem. Taking these two streams together, Hoffman suggests that we are enmeshed with a complex field of forces—a complex reality—we need not know. We need not see “reality as it is.” We only ever construct the world as we need in the moment. This fitness function of evolution mitigates complexity by guiding adaptive behavior toward species needs. How does this relate to Conscious Capitalism? If, as Mackey and Sisodia contend, “the core of what it means to be conscious” is self-awareness (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 184), we must consider the nature of the self that is aware and the context (field/reality) in which it is being aware. Gleaning again from Hoffman and others, let us frame this as the dialectic of conscious experience: how can first-­ person experience arise out of the physical processes of the brain? How can there be anything but first-person experience? The complicated genealogies of the formation of the self-as-organism have co-evolved within a vast interactive network of conscious agents (cf. Taylor 1989). And such dynamics have operated within and indeed produced a field of their own making. Names and words hide the mixing force of “capitalism” as its own kind of Organismus (Schäffle 1870; Weddigen 1939). That is, “capitalism” evolved from the interactive network of conscious agents even as those conscious agents evolved from and co-evolved with the organism of capitalism. So we may pose the “harder problem of Conscious Capitalism: how can awareness emerge from exchanges within capitalism; and how can there ever be anything but an awareness evolved from capitalism?

2.4 Affective Capitalism The affective side of the conscious capitalism dialectic—viz., that capitalism produces a consciousness—has been given forceful articulation in what Shoshana Zuboff and others have called Surveillance Capitalism (2019). As Zuboff states, surveillance capitalism “unilaterally claims human experience as free raw material for translation into behavioral data.” Much of this began innocuously in attempts to fine-tune product and service improvements. What Zuboff refers to as “a proprietary behavioral surplus,” however, feeds into complex processes of machine intelligence,

22

M. J. Thate

that, in turn, fabricate “prediction products” that anticipate and merchandize behavioral futures. The competitive dynamics of the markets that emerge around such predictive technologies became persuasive—intervening in our online interfaces in order to “nudge, coax, tune, and herd behavior toward profitable outcomes.” Such technologies shape our very voices, personalities, emotions, desires, and behaviors at scale. The result is a market dynamic wherein the self is the subject of automation and the experience of this automation as freedom (Zuboff 2019, p. 8; cf. Crisp 1987). Whereas industrial capitalism continuously intensified and expanded the means of production, “surveillance capitalists and their market players are now locked into the continuous intensification of the means of behavior modification and the gathering might of instrumentarian power” (Zuboff 2019, p. 9 and esp. pp. 376–97). Social dependency is at the heart of the affair, with the perceived needs for an effective life standing in conflict with the inclination to resist such incursions. This conflict, Zuboff maintains, “produces a psychic numbing that inures us to the realities of being tracked, parsed, mined, and modified” (Zuboff 2019, p. 11). The algorithms borne on the currents of this vampirical force are “designed to influence and modify human behavior at scale as the means of production is subordinated to a new and more complex means of behavior modification” (Zuboff 2019, p. 19). These are the Weapons of Math Destruction and manipulation (O’Neil 2016). A significant portion of Zuboff’s magisterial project aims at, in her phrasing, “naming the unprecedented” mutation of capitalism, and “mobilizing new forms of collective action” against its sprawling sovereignty (Zuboff 2019, p.  21; pp. 475–494). Owing to its startling departure from market capitalism, bold ventures to name the unprecedented nature of surveillance capitalism, she suggests, are required “as a necessary prelude to effective contest” (Zuboff 2019, p.  14). Former Google executive turned philosopher, James Williams, has likewise sounded the need to name and frame the “next-generation threat to human freedom” in the form of “systems of intelligent persuasion.” He goes so far as calling such a venture “the defining moral and political task of the Information Age” (Willimas 2018, p. xii). Williams also underscores the unprecedented nature of capitalism’s current form. “We have not been primed,” he argues, “either by nature or by habit, to notice, much less struggle against, these new persuasive forces that so deeply shape our attention, our actions, and our lives” (Williams 2018, p. 29). Williams suggests a need for “a richer and more capacious way of thinking about attention.” What is lacking, in other words, is “a way of thinking about attention as a thing” (Williams 2018, p. 44). Persuasive technologies are nothing short of agents that manipulate the will (Williams 2018, p. 88), effecting, in Williams’s estimation, worldview instillation, habituations of practices, values, and desires. They appeal to tribalistic impulses, luring reason and the will along curated paths by forces in which one trusts without verification. The effective force, in Williams’s startling estimation, is nothing short of a “religion” and the consciousness it produces (Williams 2018, pp. 88–89).

2  Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention…

23

2.5 Capitalism as a Religion? I leave it to better historians of capitalism to evaluate claims regarding the unprecedented nature of surveillance capitalism. Contemporary manifestations of capitalism may well be a mutation and departure from market capitalism, but are alien forces of manipulation and persuasion unprecedented phenomena? What if we leaned into Williams’s cryptic allusion to the similarity of such contemporary persuasive forces with those found in religion? And what if we turned to the wisdom of religious traditions as resources for naming and framing this force, for collective action against such forces, and as a motivating counterforce to inspire a coup from below (cf. Zuboff 2019, pp. 495–525)? A prelude to such an approach took shape in Walter Benjamin’s (1892–1940) Kapitalismus als Religion (1974–91, pp. 6.100–03). I have explored these concepts elsewhere (see Thate 2016; cf. Hengsbach 2008), but for the sake of this essay I would like to summarize what Benjamin sees as four features of the “religious structure” (religiöse Struktur) of capitalism (Benjamin 1974–1991, p.  6.100; Benjamin 1996, pp. 1.288–91). The first is that capitalism produces an enclosure, or sphere (Jacobs 1999, 91–113; Jacobs 1993, pp.  128–41), in which meaning (Bedeutung) can be found. “Meaning” lives nowhere outside the enclosure. The cult of capitalism thus produces standardized forms of meaning, value, and relationality through its precise rendering of space. Second, Benjamin refers to the eternality of the cult of capitalism through its sacralizing of time. Time proceeds in-step with the meaning-making of the enclosure. And all must rush to keep pace. The cult of capitalism thus produces standardized forms of meaning, value, and relationality through its precise rendering of time. Third, the cult of capitalism is a universalizing of Verschuldend / Schuld. In context, Schuld can signify “guilt” or “debt.” The production of Schuld as opposed to the atonement schemes of other cults sets the cult of capitalism apart (see Singh 2016). Schuld—and not Entsühnend (absolving or atonement)—is the operative dynamic within the cult. As such, the cult produces a rhythm to which Schuld is hammered into an individual’s consciousness (dem Bewußtsein sie einzuhämmern; Benjamin 1974–1991, p.  6.100; Pavlov 2008, p. 453). It is through Schuld, then, that the self is minted. The dynamics of personhood assume and are assumed by the logic of Schuld. The cult of capitalism thus produces standardized forms of meaning, value, and relationality through its precise rendering of being. The fourth and final feature is the cult’s eclipse of “God.” This is not the death of the divine. It is rather its functional displacement or merger. In the end, debt becomes divinity—Schuld becomes Sovereign. As Fredric Jameson phrased it, “we have come to think of capitalism [and no longer the divine!] as natural and eternal” (Jameson 1999, p. 7). The precisely rendered valuations of space, time, and being by the divine have merged into and have been acquired by the cult of capitalism. In Benjamin’s estimation, the eternality and enclosing order of capitalism have eclipsed what was once the dwelling of God. Within the logic of Schuld and the totalizing enclosure of the cult—where standardized forms of meaning, value, and

24

M. J. Thate

relationality are shaped through precise renderings of space, time, and being—all experience emerges as a form of capitalist experience. And this experience is shaped by the religious structure of the cult of capitalism (cf. Fenves 2011, pp. 125–51). In this light, Wallace’s articulation of the urgent task for simple awareness within the directive currents of a worship harnessed and shaped by underlying forces gains a striking legibility. There is a religious structure to water it seems.

2.6 “Capitalism,” “Gnosticism,” and the Religion of the Elsewhere Uncommitted In considering the contribution of world religions and spiritualities to conscious capitalism in this important edited volume, we might well follow Benjamin’s lead and consider contemporary forms of capitalism as sharing a structure of a religion. I mean this as more than mere metaphor. Capitalism in its contemporary form is the religion of the elsewhere uncommitted (cf. Cox 2016). Such an approach invites broad comparison across religious traditions and spiritualities on ranging subjects like agency, freedom, subjectivity, alien persuasive forces, cosmologies, environmental attitudes, exchange, idolatry, desire, and so on. Such an approach would not only help name what feels unprecedented in our moment of surveillance capitalism but also reveal productive pathways of communal gathering toward alternative desires—and, perhaps, a coup from above. A productive example of such a counterintuitive move was the masterstroke of Hans Jonas (1903–1993), who placed Gnosticism and existentialism in comparison. When placed in comparison, these “two movements, or positions, or systems of thought,” though widely separated by time and space, and seemingly incommensurable at first glance, revealed a “dimly felt affinity” at the point of nihilism. Moreover, “a reciprocal illumination of both” systems of thought, Jonas maintained, emerged as a result of the comparison (Jonas 1963, p. 320). Jonas’ project, I suggest, deserves not only renewed attention but imitation. The diverse movements living under the umbrella term of “Gnosticism” offer numerous felt affinities with surveillance capitalism. Such a comparison could work a reciprocal illumination of both precisely on the question of consciousness and how these systems produce their own respective forms—and, to recall Hoffman, their own species needs. The word “Gnosticism” and the realities it represents are of course complex and contested (cf. van den Broek 2013; Brakke 2010; Denzey Lewis 2013; Markschies 2003). The word itself does not appear in the second century material. It seems to have first occurred in a commentary by the poet and philosopher of religion Henry More (1614–87) on the book of Revelation in reference to a heretical assembly in Thyatira (Layton 1995, pp. 348–49). The noun “Gnosticism” was constructed from the Greek adjective gnostikos that appears in the writings of the heresiologist Irenaeus of Lyons (130–202) as an identifier of those (Valentinians) who claimed to possess secret knowledge (cf. Markschies 1992). “Gnosticism” became a way of

2  Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention…

25

talking about varying philosophical movements in the second century and beyond that devoted themselves to and organized themselves around the pursuit of this secret knowledge. Subsequent scholarship pushed back against generalizing disparate texts under such a label. Some even called for abandoning the terms “Gnostic” and “Gnosticism” all together (e.g., Williams 1996; King 2005). Insofar as we are aware that “Gnosticism” as a term is not extant in the second century, the term can function as a useful aid to talk about social groups and writings that organized themselves around the nature of gnosis—a secret knowledge or hidden wisdom about the nature and organization of the world. Even amongst scholars that critique the label, there is a tendency to discuss the same group of texts—the so-called Nag Hammadi Library discovered in 1945. As a concept, then, “Gnosticism” remains “useful— even necessary—to denote the philosophical presuppositions regarding creation and salvation” that underlie these texts (Burns 2016: p. 57). What is this secret knowledge or wisdom? Gnosis functions as an insight into the nature of reality—and the wild, infinite wonder that lives outside any order of things. It also leaves us with ethical quandaries on how to live responsibly within the realm of illusion. Gnostics, after all, tended both toward pro-assimilationists with Rome and local regional customs as well as speculative experimentalists (Denzey Lewis 2013, p. 46). The precise rendering of this gnosis, of course, depends upon the texts in question—be they the representations of Irenaeus and other heresiologists or texts like those found in the Nag Hammadi Library. Generally speaking, the secret or hidden wisdom is that what we see and experience all around us is in fact a ruse. What we experience as real is a lie finely told. Who we think we are, how we think of ourselves, what we name ourselves, the visions of progress that guide our systems of exchange and pursuits of power, the manner in which we know, and our very desires themselves are the result of Error and Illusion (cf. Denzey Lewis 2013). One of the more beautiful literary discoveries among the Nag Hammadi codices is the so-called Gospel of Truth (cf. Denzey Lewis 2013, pp. 89–92). There are two versions preserved in the Nag Hammadi Library. A more or less complete Subakhmimic Coptic version appears in Codex I. And Codex XII contains a fragmentary Sahidic Coptic version (Robinson 2000, pp. 1,3:16.31–43.24). The Gospel of Truth (GosTruth), is an early Christian homily from the mid-second century perhaps given by Valentinus (100–160) himself (cf. Irenaeus Adv. Haer. 3.11.9). The text communicates Valentinian teaching for what appears to be an external audience (cf. Markschies and Thomassen 2020; Attridge and MacRae 1990, pp. 38–39). The elaborate cosmologies and mythologies in other gnostic texts are therefore not as readily pronounced. The homily seems intended to gain adherents, encourage initiates, and perhaps dissuade public suspicion from the gathered Valentinian assembly. Instead of offering a detailed summary of the homily, I instead suggest three salient points the GosTruth might lend to the wider discussion both of this chapter and to this important edited volume on the contribution of world religions and spiritualities to conscious capitalism. The hope is that the GosTruth and Gnostic texts in general might provide useful mythologies and ways of thinking about god-like

26

M. J. Thate

forces acting on our attention, actions, and desires that theorists of persuasive technologies suggest are lacking in the current debate (e.g., Williams 2018, pp. xii and 103). First, the world in which we live is a world created by “Error.” According to the GosTruth, ignorance of “the incomprehensible, inconceivable One”—the One who is superior to every thought and system (17:22)—is the cause of an enveloping fog of “anguish and terror” (17:10–12). What the GosTruth refers to as “Error,” a demiurge figure who created a world of power and beauty in place of the truth, is the purveyor of this ignorance (17:18–21). Error created our world. Living in the creation of Error thus leads to the forgetfulness of our true belonging within the One. This forgetfulness leads to ignorance. And ignorance leads to all manner of agony, fear, and self-harm. The Apostle Paul spoke of “the present evil age” (Gal. 1:4) and “the god of this world blinding the minds of those who do not believe” (2 Cor. 4:4). Error in the GosTruth is like this but different (cf. Pagels 1975). Error, the demiurge, is the creator of a powerful, beautiful substitute world. Habituating and normalizing forces within this world blind us from the reality of the Truth that is “beyond all beauty” and form (17:25–27). We thus forget our true dwelling and origin; and act against our best interests. Though life within this world is experienced as real, it is a thing of air lacking any root (17:29–30; 26:26–27). The demiurge’s creation lures the unaware away from the perfection of the One and imprisons them (17:34–35). Perfection and joy dwell within the uncontainable and inconceivable One. The Father of Truth “keeps within himself perfection,” giving to those who return to him a special knowledge of this perfection (19:3–19:7). Perfection is in the Father of Truth (21:19)—or “Mother” as it is called elsewhere (42:17). All else is Error. And insofar as we remain ignorant, we live within the world of Error. The demiurge figure of Error within the GosTruth is not as malevolent as in other gnostic texts. Still, the demiurge’s creation—though beautiful and powerful—is not the reality in which our perfection dwells. It is deficient. The result is a pervading sense of alienation. “It is a great wonder,” the preacher opines, that those who were in the Father neither knew him nor remained (22:28–30). This wandering and drifting led to ignorance, creation and deficiency, and alienation. What is needed is gnosis. In the GosTruth, Jesus came from the Father so that we might return to the Father. The grace of gnosis grants awareness. It obliterates ignorance through a transformation of consciousness (Denzey Lewis 2013, p. 91). The conflict is thus between consciousnesses: viz., the consciousness that Error’s creation produces on the one hand, and that which originates from the perfection of the One and the spark that slumbers dormant within us on the other. Second, Error disciplines our sense of self away from our true being. According to the GosTruth, our sense of self is disciplined, habituated, and branded by Error. Our sense of self exists in lieu of our knowledge of the One, the Father of Truth, and our being in him (20:34–31:37). Our sense of self is a delusion insofar as it remains within and normalized by the creation of Error. In the beautiful section on “naming” (38:7–41:3), the homily repeatedly connects the act of naming with the realm of which one is aware. Those who receive grace from the One, from the Father of Truth, learn the secret of the Word that came from the realm of fullness. The Word,

2  Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention…

27

who is “in the thought and mind” of the Father of Truth, entered the created world of Error so that those who were ignorant of the Father might receive gnosis. That is, to remind those who are ignorant of their true name to the reality of their original belonging (16:31–17:4). Life’s pursuits within the realm of Error—and the aura of authenticity that pervades such pursuits—alienate us from who we really are. Or, at least, it creates a public profile or a “name on loan” that shrinks our being (40:9–10). Those who receive the grace of gnosis are made worthy to share in the name of the Father/Mother of Truth. Third, there is an alternative to the world of Error. Our feelings of alienation bear witness to a deeper truth from an altogether different realm dwelling within us (cf. 32:33). Those who receive the grace of gnosis are from the Father/Mother of Truth (33:32). According to the GosTruth, we are to speak of this truth with those who seek it so that we might become the understanding that has been loosed in the world of Error (32:35; 33:9). Error’s creation blinds us to “the infinity of the Father” (35:10–11). Those who live their lives in accordance with the world of Error lose themselves to oblivion. We neither see nor experience reality as it is. We experience the world created by Error and are habituated into the needs therein.

2.7 Concluding Reflections Read together, surveillance capitalism and the GosTruth add a critical dimension to recurrent questions within media and communications studies regarding why do we attend to the things to which we attend (cf. Innis 2008). What we attend to and what we experience as reality is increasingly becoming a networked world created by technological demiurges (Wu 2016). As of January 2021, according to the website smartinsights.com, an estimated 53.6% of the planet use social media. Persuasive technologies are guiding, curating, and filtering our attention. The GosTruth portrays an even more effectual demiurge; one who created a world in which all of humanity lives, moves, and has its being. “Error,” as the demiurge is called, is not necessarily malevolent. Nor are the technological demiurges of surveillance capitalism. Neither, however, have our best interests in mind. Our online behaviors are being spied upon, collected, manipulated, and sold. And, as a result, our species is adapting its behavior toward the fabrication of advertised “needs.” Surveillance capitalism, or technological capitalism, or whatever we choose to name the moment through which we are currently living, like the demiurge “Error” in the GosTruth, is manipulating our attention, our desires, and our needs. The demiurges have produced their own consciousness. Likewise, our identities, names, and “data” are gathered together to form a bundled profile of a networked identity. As with the “name on loan” that results from living within the world created by Error, this branded profile is a truncated version of who we. This truncated identity disciplines our sense of self. Moreover, it casts us into an echo chamber of shared algorithmic patterns (cf. Sunstein 2017). With respect to the GosTruth we noted how the demiurge disciplines our self-­understanding

28

M. J. Thate

according to the world of its own making. The same is true with the demiurges of persuasive technologies who create online profiles that lead to anxiety, wantonness, and alienation (cf. Frankfurt 1988; Rey 2012). Though beautiful, powerful, convenient, and meaningful in many ways, the algorithmic world created by technological demiurges has enveloped human experience and threatens us with a forgetfulness of life and desire in the wild infinities of the unplugged world. Finally, just as with the world of Error, so with the worlds created by technological demiurges: there are alternatives. Our feelings of alienation—both collective and individual—testify to something deeper both within us and outside of us. The technological demiurges have created an algorithmic cosmos suffused with a lust for attention. Mackey and Sisodia point powerfully toward such an alternative. To live “fully awake and mindful, to see reality more clearly, and to more fully understand all the consequences—short term and long term—of our actions.” Conscious Capitalism might well be an alternative to the algorithmic forces and systems of intelligent persuasion in its call to strive for “a greater awareness of our inner self, our external reality, and the impacts we have on the world” (2013, p. 29). This essay has attempted to provide a complementary value-add to the evolving system of conscious capitalism by considering the consciousness capitalism itself produces. It has aimed to provide a critical edge to the urgent task of ennobling exchange and theorizing responsibility in a world created by technological demiurges. By bringing these systems of intelligent persuasion into comparison with “Gnosticism,” the hope has been to offer a framework for realities current theorists are terming “unprecedented.” And that we might inch closer toward simple awareness in fresh and freeing ways.

References Attridge, Harold W., and George W. MacRae. 1990. The Gospel of Truth (I,3 and XII,2). In The Nag Hammadi Library in English, ed. James M. Robinson, 38–51. New York: HarperSanFrancisco. Benjamin, Walter. 1974–1991. Gesammelte Schriften. Edited by Rolf Tiedemann and Hermann Schweppenhäuser. 7 Volumes. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkampf. ———. 1996. Selected Writings. Translated by Rodney Livingstone. 4 Volumes. Belknap Harvard Press. Brakke, David. 2010. The Gnostics: Myth, Ritual, and Diversity in Early Christianity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Broek, Roelof Van Den. 2013. Gnostic Religion in Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burns Dylan, M. 2016. Providence, Creation, and Gnosticism According to the Gnostics. Journal of Early Christian Studies 24 (1): 55–79. Chalmers, David. 1995. Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (3): 200–219. Cox, Harvey. 2016. The Market as God. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Crisp, Roger. 1987. Persuasive Advertising, Autonomy, and the Creation of Desire. Journal of Business Ethics 6 (5): 413–418.

2  Can Capitalism Be Conscious of Anything But Itself? Gnosticism, Attention…

29

Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Translated by Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ———. 1983. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Translated Robert Hurley et  al. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Denzey Lewis, Nicola. 2013. Introduction to “Gnosticism”: Ancient Voices, Christian Worlds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fenves, Peter. 2011. The Messianic Reduction: Walter Benjamin and the Shape of Time. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Fisher, Mark. 2009. Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Zero Books. Frankfurt, Harry G. 1988. The Importance of What We Care About: Philosophical Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hengsbach, Friedhelm. 2008. Kapitalismus als Religion? In Ein neuer Geist des Kapitalismus? Paradoxien und Ambivalenzen der Netzwerkökonomie, ed. Gabriele Wagner and Philipp Hessinger, 145–191. Berlin: Springer. Hoffman, Donald. 2019. The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes. New York: W.W. Norton and Company. Innis, Harold. 2008. The Bias of Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Jacobs, Carol. 1999. In the Language of Walter Benjamin. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ———. 1993. Telling Time: Lévi-Strauss, Ford, Lessing, Benjamin, de Man, Wordsworth, Rilke. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Jameson, Fredric. 1994. The Seeds of Time. New York: Columbia University Press. ———. 1999. Brecht and Method. New York: Verso. Jonas, Hans. 1963 [1958]. The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the Alien God and the Beginnings of Christianity. 2nd ed. Boston: Beacon Press. King, Karen L. 2005. What Is Gnosticism? Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Kocka, Jürgen. 2016 [2014]. Capitalism: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Konings, Martijn. 2015. The Emotional Logic of Capitalism: What Progressives Have Missed. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Konings, Martjin. 2018. Capital and Time: For a New Critique of Neoliberal Reason. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Layton, Benltey. 1995. Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism. In The Social World of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne A. Meeks, ed. L. Michael White and O. Larry Yarbrough, 334–350. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Mark, Justin T., Brian B. Marion, and Donald D. Hoffman. 2010. Natural Selection and Veridical Perceptions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 266: 504–515. Markschies, Christoph, and Einar Thomassen. 2020. Editors. Valentinianism: New Studies. Leiden: Brill. Markschies, Christoph. 2003. Gnosis: An Introduction. Translated by John Bowden. London: TandT Clark. ———. 1992. Valentinu Gnosticus? Untersuchungen zur valentinianischen Gnosis mit einem Kommentar zu den Fragmenten Valentins. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr. Martin-Juchat, Fabienne. 2015. Le capitalisme affectif: enjeux des pratiques de communication des organisations. Communications organisationnelles, management, et numérique: 1–7. Marx, Karl. 1990 [1867]. Capital: Volume 1: A Critique of Political Economy. Translated by Ben Fowkes. New York: Penguin Books. Neal, Larry and Jeffrey G. Williamson. Eds. 2014. The Cambridge History of Capitalism. 2 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O’Neil, Cathy. 2016. Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. New York: Crown.

30

M. J. Thate

Pagels, Elaine. 1975. The Gnostic Paul. Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. Pavlov, Evgeny. 2008. Killing Time: Walter Benjamin, Osip Mandel’shtam and the Stalinist Metaphysics of History. Russian Literature LXIII: 443–460. Piketty, Thomas. 2017. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. Cambridge: Belknap Press, Harvard University Press. ———. 2020. Capital and Ideology. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. Cambridge: Belknap Press, Harvard University Press. ———. 2015. The Economics of Inequality. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. Cambridge: Belknap Press, Harvard University Press. Rey, P.J. 2012. Alienation, Exploitation, and Social Media. The American Behavioral Scientist 56 (4): 399–420. Robinson, James M., ed. 2000. The Coptic Gnostic Library: A Complete Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices. Volume I. Brill: Leiden. Schäffle, Albert E.F. 1870. Kapitalismus und Socialismus mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Geschäftsund Vermögensformen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Singh, Devin. 2016. Who Absolves the Priests? The Panama Papers, Transparency, and Confession. Huffington Post, 6 May 2016. Storrs, Landon R.Y. 2000. Civilizing Capitalism: The National Consumers’ League, Women’s Activism, and Labor Standards in the New Deal Era. Chapel Hill, N.C: The University of North Carolina Press. Sunstein, Cass R. 2017. #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Taylor, Charles. 1989. Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Thate, Michael J. 2016. Messianic Time and Monetary Value. Religions 7 (112): 1–18. Wallace, David Foster. 2009. This Is Water: Some Thoughts, Delivered on a Significant Occasion, about Living a Compassionate Life. New York: Little, Brown and Company. Weddigen, Walter. 1939. Der Organismusgedanke in der Wirtschaftstheorie. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft 99 (1): 1–22. Weil, Simone. 1970. First and Last Notebooks. Translated by Richard Rees. New York: Oxford University Press. Williams, Michael Allen. 1996. Rethinking “Gnosticism”: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Williams, James. 2018. Stand Out of Our Light: Freedom and Resistance in the Attention Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wu, Tim. 2016. The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads. New York: Alfred Knopf. Zizek, Slavoj. 1989. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso. Zuboff, Shoshana. 2019. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: Public Affairs. Michael J. Thate is an Associate Research Scholar at Princeton University (USA) with the “Faith and Work Initiative and Keller Center for Innovation”. He has held visiting fellowships at Yale Divinity School and the “Center for the Study of World Religions” at Harvard Divinity School. His latest books include: Remembrance of Things Past? (Mohr Siebeck, 2013); The Godman and the Sea (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019). The first book is a kind of social history of the rise of history-as-science in nineteenth and twentieth century German universities and the emergence of an “historical Jesus” discourse which came out of this “new science”. The second book reads varying representations of the sea in antiquity and early Christianity through the rubrics of desolation and trauma.  

Chapter 3

Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion in Modern Societies Christian Danz

3.1 Introduction Modern societies, which have emerged in the process of social evolution, are characterized by functional differentiation.1 Their individual functional systems – politics, economy, science, law, religion, etc. – operate autonomously and follow their own functional logic. This form of differentiation fundamentally distinguishes modern societies from pre-modern societies, which were organized in a stratifying way. Connected with the modern form of society is the loss of an overarching unity that integrates it. No functional system is any longer capable of representing society as such. Instead, each system represents it in its own perspective. This leads to a pluralization of the descriptions of modern society of itself, which stand side by side and can no longer be conveyed. How does unity emerge in such societies and under their conditions? Is it ultimately the economy that dominates modern societies and colonizes all other areas of life (Jürgen Habermas)? In many debates on religion and economics, especially in the German-speaking world, modern economics itself is often interpreted as religion. It is claimed that the capitalist market economy is itself a form of religion that has replaced and inherited the old historical religions such as Christianity and Judaism in modernity. An important guarantor of such an interpretation of modern capitalism is Walter Benjamin.2 In a fragment from 1921, which has been handed down from his estate, it says that capitalism has a “religious structure” and is therefore itself an

 Cf. Luhmann (2002).  Cf. also the article from Michael Thate in this volume.

1 2

C. Danz (*) University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_3

31

32

C. Danz

“essentially religious phenomenon”.3 However, it was not until the end of the century, against the background of global financial crises, that Benjamin’s suggestive text was widely taken up in the relevant debates on religion and capitalism. In them it is interpreted as a prophetic anticipation of later developments, and as proof of the view that the total mediation of the market has replaced the old God of religion,4 and that a new form of religion is manifesting itself in modern capitalism.5 While Benjamin uses the concept of religion to describe the demonic and destructive consequences of modern economics,6 the religious core of capitalism can – in a different manner  – also be understood as a constructive element. “In the long arc of history, no human creation has had a greater positive impact on more people rapidly than free-enterprise capitalism. It is unquestionably the greatest system for innovation and social cooperation that has ever existed.”7 The heroic spirit of conscious capitalism does not lead to the shattering of being, as Benjamin postulated, but exactly the other way round to its constructive social development. The background to both interpretations is the assumption of a quasi-religious core of the economy and thus a transfer of the old distinction between true and false religion to the modern market economy. Both refer to a spirit of capitalism, which is, however, evaluated differently. But what does this spirit consist of, and what does it contribute to the understanding of modern economics so as to interpret it in religious categories? In the following, this question will be pursued following Max Weber’s famous study on Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism.8 Benjamin’s interpretation of capitalism as religion explicitly refers to them. John Mackey’s and Raj Sisodia’s vote for a conscious capitalism does not explicitly refer to Weber, but to a heroic spirit of capitalism that can be reconstructed with the categories of the social economist. Thus, the framework is named in which the relationship between religion and capitalism will be discussed in the following. To begin, the firsts section is on Weber’s investigations into the genesis of the occidental economy. The second section will deal with Paul Tillich’s program of religious socialism and conscious capitalism against the background of Weber’s interpretation of modern capitalism. Both approaches can be understood as answers to Weber’s description of modern society. In the concluding third section, the systematic problems of both conceptions will be discussed.

 On Benjamin’s interpretation of capitalism as religion, cf. Arndt (2017), 170–178; Steiner (1998), 147–171; Thiessen (1996), 400–418. 4  Cf. Wagner (1984); Dierken (2017). 5  Most notably Ruster (2000); ibid. (1999), 179–206; cf. Jacob et al. (1991); König (2014). 6  Cf. Benjamin (1991), 101: Capitalism is a religion that consists in the “shattering” of being. 7  Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 11. 8  Cf. Weber (1993). 3

3  Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion…

33

3.2 The Spirit of Capitalism and Its Religious Roots In his famous studies The Protestant Ethics and the “Spirit” of Capitalism, published in 1904/05, Max Weber examined the significance of religious motives in the genesis of occidental rationalism.9 His – controversial – thesis is that modern capitalism is a consequence of religion, more precisely, of the puritanical Calvinism of the 17th and 18th centuries. It is based on a complex structure of theoretical assumptions and asserts, against Karl Marx, the importance of habitualized religious formative forces for social change, which cannot be derived monocausally from social production relations.10 Although Marx had already placed Protestantism in The Capital in parallel with the capitalist economy,11 for him religion is a consequence of the alienation caused by social development. Fundamental to social evolution are the social relations of production. They, i.e. the social substructure (Unterbau), determine their superstructure (Überbau) and not vice versa, so that man, as the famous Feuerbach theses say, is an ensemble of social relations.12 Weber is different. For him, it is not exclusively the relations of production that bring about social changes, but he claims that the superstructure has a retroactive effect on the evolution of society.13 In order for the modern economy that is based on rationality to emerge at all, a rationalized way of life is required, which Weber calls the spirit of capitalism.14 Its roots, so is his thesis, lie in puritanical Calvinism and its ascetic ethics. The spirit of capitalism is a consequence of the Reformation, albeit against its will. By transferring monastic asceticism from the monastery to the world with the dissolution of the consilia evangelica, that is, by denying that monastic asceticism surpassed the inner-worldly duties of Christians, the world became a place where faith was put to the test and an inner-worldly asceticism developed.15 Associated with this is an ethical revaluation of the profession in the sense of calling or vocation. Christian perfection is no longer realized in a monastery and in a special status, but rather democratically by everyone in the world within a profession, which is the task God has set for the individual. However, this transgression from the medieval religion is only one aspect. Added to this is the specifically Calvinist doctrine of predestination and its consequences for the way of life. Since no one knows whether  Weber has continued this program in his studies on the Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen. Cf. Weber (1991–2008). 10  Cf. Schluchter (1991). 11  Cf. Marx (1962), 93: “And for a society based upon the production of commodities, in which the producers in general enter into social relations with one another by treating their products as commodities and values, whereby they reduce their individual private labor to the standard of homogeneous human labor – for such a society, Christianity with its cultus of abstract man, more especially in its bourgeois developments, Protestantism, Deism, andc., is the most fitting form of religion.” 12  Marx (1983), 371. 13  Cf. Weber (1993), 31. Cf. Bourdieu (2000). 14  Cf. Weber (1993), 11–14. 15  Cf. Weber (1993), 39. 9

34

C. Danz

they belong to those who were chosen by God before the foundation of the world, the only remaining option is to prove one’s faith in restless professional work, combined with a strict inner-worldly asceticism, to assure oneself of the state of grace.16 This ethically qualified work thus becomes a service of worship itself, which is not about the establishment of salvation, but rather about its probation. With the two aspects mentioned, inner-worldly asceticism on the one hand and the doctrine of predestination on the other, the religious motives are named which have created the spirit of capitalism. Their combination promoted, as Weber shows above all on the basis of many references from the Puritan edification literature,17 a rationalization of the way of life that originated precisely from irrational religious motives. Strict turning away from the world, renouncing any kind of enjoyment, while at the same time morally qualifying professional work as a divine duty, resulted in a regulated lifestyle that was habitualized by the individual. Weber calls this motivational complex, including its irrational religious roots, the spirit of capitalism.18 “The inner-worldly Protestant asceticism […] thus acts with full force against the uninhibited enjoyment of possessions, it restricts consumption, especially luxury consumption. On the other hand, in effect it relieves the acquisition of goods from the inhibitions of traditionalist ethics, it breaks the fetters of the striving for inheritance, in that it not only legalizes it, but […] directly regards it as willed by God.”19 In his famous studies on Protestant ethics, Weber identified the motivational foundations of modern capitalism in the heroic spirit of the ascetic Puritans. This spirit created a rational way of life, which is the prerequisite for the emergence of modern economy. It was not only the radical renunciation of pleasure in restless professional work that led to the accumulation of capital, but the internalization of this spirit and its religious valuation of professional work created the rational attitude to work that is the prerequisite for the modern economy. Modern capitalism was born from the spirit of puritanical ethics. But as modern economics and modern society emerge, the religious formative forces to which it owes itself become superfluous. “The Puritan,” said Weber, “wanted to be a professional man, – we must be”.20 For the genesis of modern society and its functional systems, the Puritan idea of a calling is indeed an important factor, but this itself no longer requires religious impulses. Modern society and its economy, have become

 Cf. Weber (1993), 71: “And on the other hand, to achieve that self-assurance, restless professional work was inculcated as an excellent means. She and she alone scared away religious doubt and gave the security of the state of grace.” 17  Cf. Weber (1993), 122–155. 18  Cf. Weber (1993), 146f. This spirit consists in the “religious evaluation of the restless, steady, systematic, secular professional work as the par excellence of the highest ascetic means and at the same time the most secure and visible proof of the reborn man and his certainty of faith” and it had to be “the most powerful lever conceivable for the expansion of that conception of life which we have here called the ‘spirit’ of capitalism”. 19  Weber (1993), 144f. 20  Weber (1993), 153. 16

3  Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion…

35

an inescapable fate from which there is no escape for the individual.21 For social evolution, driven by the spirit of capitalism, has differentiated itself into diverse subsystems that stand side by side and no longer have any unity that spans them. Each modern functional system only follows its own functional logic, which can no longer be communicated with that of the other systems. This process of occidental rationalization, which Weber vividly describes on the last pages of his Protestant Ethics with the metaphors of an “iron cage” and the burning up of “the last hundredweight of fossil fuel”,22 places the individual in a thoroughly rationalized world that no longer knows any instance that is capable of guaranteeing a binding unity of meaning and being.23 Being and meaning, signs and significance break apart, as it were, because the cultural and social systems stand side-by -side, and no longer have a unity that spans and integrates them. Like all other social functional areas, this also affects the economy. As a modern one, it functions only in such a way that it follows its own autonomous autonomy, which means nothing other than that it must treat everything as an economic issue. And likewise, under the conditions of a modern society, religion is only responsible for religion, and ethics for ethics. Weber’s vivid description of modern society, the analysis of which is the focus of his investigation, brings its ambivalence into focus. Given the question that arises with his diagnosis of the steel-hard rationality of capitalism born of the ascetic spirit of religion, what does this mean for the relationship between religion and economy under the conditions of modernity?

3.3 Between Religious Socialism and Conscious Capitalism, or: Ways Out of the Iron Cages of Modern Rationality Not only does Walter Benjamin’s interpretation of capitalism as religion, mentioned at the beginning, refers to Weber’s analyses of the emergence of modern society, but also the Protestant theologian Paul Tillich. Weber’s iron cages of modern rationality appear to him as the “spirit of bourgeois society,” which is a “spirit of the finiteness resting in itself”.24 For Tillich, too, this spirit is the result of social development, for the genesis of which Calvinism, which emerged from the Reformation, and the Enlightenment play a central role.25 Unlike Weber, however, he did not stop at the  Around 1900, various attempts of an exodus from the iron-hard cages of modern rationality were tried out, which were by no means limited to the Christian religion. These include youth movements like the Wandervogel, or a new interest in mysticism, far-eastern religions, and much more. Cf. Danz (2020b), 17–28; Bolz (1989). 22  Weber (1993), 153. 23  Cf. Weber (1993), 154: “Then, however, the word could become the truth for the ‘last men of this cultural development: ‘specialists without spirit, pleasure-seekers without heart, this nothingness imagines that it has ascended to a stage of humanity never before reached.’” 24  Cf. Tillich (1968), 41. 25  Cf. Tillich (1998b), 322, but also the implicit criticism of Weber’s thesis in: Tillich, (1965), 116. 21

36

C. Danz

diagnosis, but with the religious socialism he developed in the 1920s and 1930s, he constructed a way out of the iron cages of modern rationality that had become inescapable for the individual.26 For Tillich, religious socialism is the form in which religion is realized and takes shape in culture.27 Also for Tillich, man is always integrated into social structures, but unlike Karl Marx and similarly to Weber, man is not absorbed into the social substructure, so that the superstructure has repercussions on the social structures. This leads to Tillich’s thesis that religion is the insight into the demonic character of capitalism, and to its overcoming in religious socialism.28 The basis of Tillich’s religious socialism is his understanding of religion.29 It aims at understanding religion as the foundation of a new unity, which is below the differentiated modern culture, and is therefore able to integrate it in a new way.30 Tillich constructs religion as an act of reflection in the consciousness that functions as the general basis of culture. What Tillich means is this: Religion is the realization that consciousness as the producer of all reality already presupposes a kind of conscious awareness. This realization is bound to its realization. In the religious act alone, consciousness is given its relationship to its origin and wholeness. Tillich describes this structure with the concept of the unconditional. It already underlies all cultural and religious acts of consciousness, and religion describes nothing else than the awareness of this precondition of consciousness in the acts of consciousness.31 Religion, of course, can realize itself only in the cultural forms of consciousness. But it does not refer to these forms, but rather uses them to represent the awareness of consciousness, which itself cannot be represented. Alone, in religion it must be represented, but every representation is at the same time its transgression. In this reflexive knowledge there exists for Tillich the true religion. As reflexive consciousness it knows that the unconditional must be represented in concrete images and forms, but any representation fails to do so. Religion is thus realized in the dialectic of criticism and forming (Gestaltung). Every image that it must set to designate the unconditional, it must negate again, since, as a precondition of all

 On the reception of Weber in the crisis discourses of the 1920s, cf. Bolz (1989).  Cf. Tillich (1998a), 169: “Religious socialism is the attempt to understand socialism religiously and to shape it from this understanding and at the same time to relate the religious principle to social reality and to give it shape in it.” 28  On Tillich’s understanding of the demonic as a category of the ambiguous, cf. Danz (2018), 147–184. 29  Cf. Danz (2014), 71–103. 30  Tillich’s definition of religion stands in the context of various other redefinitions of religion around 1900. In Judaism, too, new versions of what is to be understood by religion emerge during this period. Cf. J.  B. Soloveitchik (1991), Halakhic Man, New  York: The Jewish Publication Society. 31  Cf. Tillich (1959a), 228: “The precondition of this view is the realization that religion is not a sphere of meaning (Sinn) beside the others, but an attitude in all spheres: The immediate direction toward the unconditional.” 26 27

3  Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion…

37

representations, it is itself in principle unrepresentable.32 Thus, the religious-­ theoretical foundations of Tillich’s religious socialism have been presented to the extent that we can now turn to this itself and the interpretation of capitalism associated with it. The spirit of bourgeois society, with which Tillich describes modernity as a whole, is the result of a process of social emancipation. The tragedy of this process is that its prerequisites and foundations are themselves dissolved in this process. Weber’s notion of the burning of religious fuel within the process of the modernization of society is reformulated by Tillich on the basis of his theory of religion, which is based on the theory of consciousness, as a disconnection of consciousness from the dimension of unconditionality that underlies its structure. As this, and thus the basis of culture, becomes emancipated and autonomous from religion, it transforms the presupposed unconditional, which is already claimed in every act, into a task of consciousness. Tillich describes this historical self-understanding as a finite in itself and claims it as significant for modern bourgeois society.33 With religion, the spirit of bourgeois society has lost its unity and content, which it presupposes, but cannot produce itself. What remains is a belief in harmony and a formalism that robs people and things of any intrinsic value. This spirit finds its expression in the modern economy, which in bourgeois society becomes the dominant functional system of society. Modern capitalism is the result of a process of rationalization that has detached itself from the unconditional dimension of consciousness and proceeds as a quasi-­ autonomous formation that merely obeys its own functional logic.34 Its basic features are reification and analysis. “In the free market economy, the relationship to things becomes eros-less, community-less, manorial. Things become commodities, i.e. objects whose purpose is to create profit by buying and selling, but not to expand the scope of personal life.”35 By transforming the unitary dimension on which it is based into one that can be produced by economic action, modern capitalism is subject to an infinite process of formation that no longer knows any inner limit. In this, in the infinite self-reproduction of itself, is the perfect expression of the finiteness resting in itself: a mechanism as hard as iron from which there is no escape. Modern capitalism is thus inscribed with an ambivalence and tragedy that it reproduces in  Cf. Tillich (1959b), 318: “Here is now the place to bring the dialectic of the concept of religion to complete transparency: As soon as the consciousness is directed to the unconditional, the duality of act and object arises. But now the religious act is not a special one; it is real only in the other acts. It must therefore give them a form in which the religious quality is visible. This formation is the paradox, i.e., at the same time the affirmation and negation of the autonomous forms.” 33  Cf. Tillich (1998b), 323: “Your [sc. of bourgeois society] is the radical dissolution of all primordial conditions, ties and forming into elements that can be rationally mastered and the rational combination of these elements into functional entities for thought and action.” 34  Cf. Tillich (1968), 41: “It is not the economy per se that is an expression of finiteness resting in itself, but rather a certain position of the economy in the social whole and the forms of its execution that result from it.” 35  Tillich (1968), 41. 32

38

C. Danz

each of its actions and from which there is no escape for it. Tillich interprets this ambivalence inscribed in capitalism with the concept of the demonic.36 Demonic, and this is important to note, does not mean something purely negative in this context. It is a category of ambiguity. Tillich certainly takes into account that the modern economy leads to an improvement of living and working conditions. Therefore, capitalism permanently produces its contradiction, that of socialism. Tillich interprets socialism as the self-consciousness of the proletariat.37 But the socialist criticism of capitalism and the reification and mechanization of life associated with it remains on the ground even in the struggle against it. It does not break through the finiteness that rests in itself. Like capitalism, socialism lacks the religious dimension. Therefore, its critique is itself ambivalent and does not lead beyond the structural contradiction of society. From this diagnosis Tillich’s demand arises that socialism be further developed into religious socialism. This consists in a reflexive awareness of history and action. It is the place of insight into the ambivalence of modern economy and, through this, is its overcoming. It is associated with objective action. The reason for this is that religious socialism breaks through the inherent finiteness of bourgeois society. In it religion realizes itself in society by creating a new unity through the inner being of the Absolute. Through the insertion of the religious dimension (in the sense of a reflexive awareness of action) into the economic system, the latter is integrated into a comprehensive horizon of unity, which functions simultaneously as a transcendental goal and as a critique of social forming. For Paul Tillich, it is religious socialism that combines modern economy with a reflected idea of purpose and in this way frees capitalism from its destructive inherent laws. This idea is taken up in the economic considerations of his friends Adolf Löwe and Eduard Heimann, who emphasize the function of religion for the economy.38 This combination creates an economic model in which freedom and order are intertwined, as in the so-called German social market economy. However, the religious element, whose insertion into the economy Tillich’s religious socialism is about, can also be connected with capitalism itself. This is the model of a conscious capitalism. Business “is good because it creates value, it is ethical because it is based on voluntary exchange, it is noble because it can elevate our existence, and it is heroic because it lifts people out of poverty and creates prosperity”.39 This model differs both from the German model of the social market economy and the so-called crony capitalism of Asia.40 In contrast to the first model, state regulation of the economy takes a back seat to the free market, and unlike the second model, the maximization of profit is placed in a superordinate framework. In this way,  On the inclusion of Tillich’s category of the demonic in contemporary interpretations of capitalism, cf. Tillich (2008), 139–163; Deutschmann (2014), 7–42. 37  Cf. Tillich (1998b), 333. 38  Cf. Heimann (1938), 245–284; Kruse (1994). 39  Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 21. 40  Cf. Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 15f. On the various forms of capitalism, cf. Graf (2004), 183f. 36

3  Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion…

39

a reflexive economy is created. “Now business is awakening to itself and becoming conscious. It is recognizing that it is a force with enormous power and responsibility. By becoming conscious, it can do what it does even better. It creates more community, more mutuality, and paradoxically, more profit, by engaging everyone in the system.”41 The model of conscious capitalism is based on four tenets: higher purpose and core values, stakeholder integration, conscious leadership and conscious culture and management.42 The higher purpose is fundamental.43 They constitute the guiding principles of a company and function as its overarching normative framework, towards which economic activities are aligned. These core values transcend the economic system, because as a superior framework they reach out to a transcendent dimension. With the core values, the medieval theory of transcendentalism, which itself goes back to ancient roots, is incorporated into the model of a conscious capitalism. These core values are the good, the true and the beautiful.44 Combined with the level of the acting, these values become a fourth value.45 “The fourth type of purpose is the Heroic, describing businesses that are motivated by a desire to change the world, not necessarily through service to other or through discovery and the pursuit of truth, or through the quest for perfection, but through a powerful Promethean desire to really change things – to truly make the word better, to solve insoluble problems, to do the really courageous thing even when it is very risky, and to achieve what others say is impossible.”46 The heroic represents, as it were, a reflexive economic consciousness through which economic action is linked to a comprehensive ethical goal. Capital maximization is thus not the guiding principle of a company but is rather placed within the overriding values of the good, true and beautiful. Thus the heroic spirit of conscious capitalism, similar to the spirit of capitalism born of puritan ethics, is itself characterized by a basic religious-ethical orientation that does not have to be fed into the economy from outside.47 Consequently, conscious capitalism is itself the social realization of religious and ethical aspects, which leads from and through itself to a better world. These are certainly the characteristics of the spirit of capitalism born of puritanical ethics, yet they are now experiencing their resurrection under the conditions of a modern, differentiated society. It corresponds to this when Mackey and Sisodia, like Weber’s puritanical Protestants, understand the profession as a calling and thus give a religious-ethical valuation to the eclectic action.48 As a calling,

 Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 22.  Cf. Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 32–35. 43  Cf. Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 33: “Purpose is the reason a company exists.” Cf. ibd., 41–67. 44  Cf. Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 60–62. 45  Cf. Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 63f. 46  Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 63. 47  On the religious function of desire for economic action cf. King (2019), 625–634. 48  Cf. Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 55: “It becomes a calling – something we were born to do.” 41 42

40

C. Danz

capitalism, which has become reflexive, is not only the motor of progress, innovation and wealth for more and more people, it – so the claim – also integrates the differentiating society through a new unity born of its spirit.

3.4 Religion, Economy and Modern Society According to Max Weber’s interpretation of modernity, from which we started out, its religious roots have dissolved into the process of modernization to which they gave rise. The process that produced modern society and culture led to its differentiation. In modern culture and society, the most diverse interpretative languages of the world coexist. They stand side by side, as it were, and no longer have a unit that integrates them into an overall picture. Weber has described this loss of social unity as rationalization and Georg Simmel as a tragedy of culture.49 Connected with this development is, as Weber already noted in the closing passages of his Protestant ethics, that – like all modern functional systems – modern economy becomes self-­ referential and follows only its own functional logic. In other words, it emancipates itself from the religious guidelines of meaning and ethical norms. All issues confronting the modern economy can only be treated as economic questions. This is precisely what its efficiency and its resounding success compared to pre-modern forms of economic activity consists of. But religion and ethics also differentiate themselves in modern society and become self-referential. This process of differentiation, which is described in literature as secularization,50 means that religion in a modern society and culture is no longer responsible for political, economic, ethical, artistic, etc. issues, but only for religious communication. This structure, which is constitutive for modern societies as opposed to pre-modern ones, is linked to the question of how religion and economy can be related to each other at all when a level of mediation for both functional systems is no longer present. Both Paul Tillich’s conception of a religious socialism and the model of a conscious capitalism can be understood as answers to this structural problem of modern societies. For Tillich, as shown, it is religion that creates a new unity of society and allows economic action to take on a reflexive moment to overcome the destructive moments of modern capitalism. Religious socialism stands for a reflexive economic action, in which this is inserted into a superior goal idea. It is similar in the model of conscious capitalism. Economic action is integrated into an overarching framework, so that a reflexive awareness of action is established, the heroic spirit of capitalism. In contrast to Tillich’s conception, in conscious capitalism it is not religion or a social group such as religious socialism that feeds reflexivity into economic action from outside, but rather the economic action itself that develops this heroic spirit within itself.

49 50

 Cf. Simmel (2001), 194–223.  Cf. Luhmann (2000), 278–319.

3  Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion…

41

But under the conditions of a modern society, can economy and religion or ethics be communicated in this way at all? Weber and other modern-day diagnosticians have pointed out the autonomy of social systems in differentiated societies. This means, as Weber already pointed out in his Protestantism study, that it is no longer possible to convey religion and economics directly.51 Both systems operate self-­ referentially and develop their own languages of interpretation of reality, which cannot be transferred from one system to the other. The spirit of capitalism has disappeared from it and given way to an iron-hard economic rationality.52 Professional worker must be modern man, whether he wants to be or not. Against this background, Tillich’s attempt to breathe a new spirit into capitalism through religion appears as pure romanticism. The religious socialism he proclaims and the uniform model associated with it undermine the social differentiation of society.53 It is different in conscious capitalism. Its heroic spirit is not inserted into the economy from another social system like religion or ethics. Rather, it comes from the economic system itself. The insight is taken up that there is more at play in economic action than was assumed by classical rational choice models.54 Every economic action is located in a cultural horizon that determines it as well as its motives. And even the economy, in the interest of its own self-preservation, cannot ignore the tension between the particular and the general. Consequently, for reasons inherent in the system, it must relate both to each other. Such a reflexive model exists in conscious capitalism. “Conscious capitalism is an evolving paradigm for business that simultaneously creates multiple kinds of value and well-being for all stakeholders: financial, intellectual, physical, ecological, social, cultural, emotional, ethical, and even spiritual.”55 But conscious capitalism does not become a religion or an instance of a new integration of the differentiated world. It represents a reflexive model of economic action that is immensely efficient. But conscious capitalism remains economic and thus subject to all its ambivalences. For it too operates in a free market, and thus under the conditions of competition. As an economic system, conscious capitalism is one system among others. To expect from it a redemption of the world or an integration of the fragmented modern society would be a fatal ideology that ignores the complexity of modern societies and thus tends towards romantic visions of unity, similar to Tillich’s religious socialism.

 Cf. Weber (1993), 154: “Where ‘professional fulfilment’ cannot be directly related to the highest spiritual cultural values, − or where, conversely, it must not be subjectively perceived as simply an economic constraint – the individual today usually dispenses with its interpretation at all.” 52  Cf. Danz (2005), 118–122. 53  In view of the problems associated with the underlying model of social unity, it is understandable that Tillich modified his conception of religious socialism in the United States beginning in the 1930s. 54  Cf. Graf (2004), 179–181; King (2019), 625–634. 55  Mackey and Sisodia (2014), 32. 51

42

C. Danz

What does this mean for the function of religion for modern society and its economy?56 First of all, religion cannot be transferred to the economic system to give it a goal or purpose. It is neither a resource of meaning for the economy nor another precondition for economic action. Rather, religion is a sign system in its own right, which has differentiated itself in the process of social development. It refers exclusively to itself by creating its own image of the world, with which it presents itself as a religion. Religion depends on the religious use of communication that individuals make of it and it is strictly bound to this use.57 One of the fundamental achievements of modernity is the differentiation of religion and economy. Thus, it is not very illuminating to describe modern capitalism itself as religion. What would the gain in knowledge consist of if one tries to grasp the economy with religious categories? Of course, it remains undisputed that religious attitudes have a decisive influence on people’s economic actions. But even this does not turn this action into religion.

References Arndt, Andreas. 2017. Kapitalismus und Religion. In Die Irritation der Religion. Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Philosophie und Theologie, ed. Carla Danani, Ugo Perone, and Silvia Richter, 170–178. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. Benjamin, Walter. 1991. Kapitalismus als Religion. In ibid.: Gesammelte Schriften, Vol. VI, 100–103. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Bolz, Norbert. 1989. Auszug aus der entzauberten Welt. Philosophischer Extremismus zwischen den Weltkriegen. München: Fink-Verlag. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2000. Das religiöse Feld. Texte zur Ökonomie des Heilsgeschehens. Konstanz: Universitätsverlag Konstanz. Danz, Christian. 2005. Sozialethik als Theorie der modernen Gesellschaft. Sozialethische Implikationen philosophischer Theologie. In ibid.: Religion zwischen Rechtfertigung und Kritik. Perspektiven philosophischer Theologie, ed. Jörg Dierken and Michael Murrmann-­ Kahl, 105–122. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. ———. 2014. Vom natura sua Gott setzenden Bewusstsein zum Meinen des Unbedingten. Überlegungen zu Paul Tillichs Religionsphilosophie. In Evangelische Theologie und urbane Kultur. Tillich-Lectures Frankfurt 2010–2013, ed. Hans Günter Heimbrock, 71–103. Leipzig: EVA. ———. 2018. Das Dämonische. Zu einer Deutungsfigur der modernen Kultur bei Georg Simmel, Georg Lukács, Leo Löwenthal und Paul Tillich. In ibid.: Das Dämonische. Kontextuelle Studien zu einer Schlüsselkategorie Paul Tillichs, ed. Werner Schüßler, 147–184. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. ———. 2020a. Religious Diversity and the Concept of Religion. Theology and Religious Pluralism. NZSTh 62: 101–113. ———. 2020b. Moderne? Eine begriffsgeschichtliche und historische Annäherung. In Die Geburt der Moderne aus dem Geist der Religion? Religion, Weltanschauung und Moderne in Wien um 1900, ed. Rudolf Leeb and Astrid Schweighofer, 17–28. Göttingen: Vienna University Press.

 To the current debate cf. Tanner (2019).  On the concept of religion and his problems cf. Danz (2020a), 101–113.

56 57

3  Religion and the Spirit of Capitalism. Remarks to the Function of Religion…

43

Deutschmann, Christoph. 2014. Capitalism, Religion, and the Idea of the Demonic. In Kapitalismus and Religion, ed. Robert König, 7–42. Wien: Ferstl and Perz. Dierken, Jörg. 2017. Gott und Geld. Ähnlichkeiten im Widerstreit. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Graf, Friedrich Wilhelm. 2004. Gottes Stimme auf globalen Märkten. In ibid.: Die Wiederkehr der Götter. Religion in der modernen Kultur, 179–202. München: Beck-Verlag. Heimann, Eduard. 1938. Communism, Fascism or Democracy? New York: W.W. Norton. Jacob, Willibald, Jakob Moneta, and Segbers Franz. 1991. Die Religion des Kapitalismus. Die gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen des totalen Marktes. Luzern: Edition Exodus. King, Matthew W. 2019. Desire. Classifying Capital: A Roundtable. JAAR 87: 625–634. König, R., ed. 2014. Kapitalismus and Religion. Wien: Ferstl and Perz. Kruse, Volker. 1994. Historisch-soziologische Zeitdiagnosen in Westdeutschland nach 1945. Eduard Heimann, Alfred von Martin, Hans Freyer. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, Niklas. 2000. Die Religion der Gesellschaft, ed. A.  Kieserling. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. ———. 2002. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, 2 Vol., Darmstadt: WBG. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2014. Conscious Capitalism. Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Marx, Karl. 1962. Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Vol. 1. Berlin: Dietz Verlag. ———. 1983. Thesen über Feuerbach. In ibid.: Ausgewählte Schriften in zwei Bänden, ed. F. Engels, Vol. 2, 370–372. Berlin. Dietz-Verlag. Ruster, Thomas. 1999. Jenseits aller Ethik: Geld als Religion. In „Ich habe meine eigene Religion“. Sinnsuche jenseits der Kirchen, ed. Hermann Kochanek, 179–206. Zürich: Benzinger Verlag. ———. 2000. Der verwechselbare Gott. Theologie nach der Entflechtung von Christentum und Religion. 2nd ed. Freiburg i. Br./Basel/Wien: Herder Verlag. Schluchter, Wolfgang. 1991. Religion und Lebensführung, Vol. 1: Studien zu Max Webers Kulturund Werttheorie. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Simmel, Georg. 2001. Der Begriff und die Tragödie der Kultur. In ibid: Gesamtausgabe, Vol. 12, 194–223. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Soloveitchik, Joseph B. 1991. Halakhic Man. New York: The Jewish Publication Society. Steiner, Uwe. 1998. Kapitalismus als Religion. Anmerkungen zu einem Fragment Walter Benjamins. Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 72: 147–171. Tanner, Kathryn. 2019. Christianity and the New Spirit of Capitalism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Thiessen, Rudolf. 1996. Kapitalismus als Religion. Prokla. Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialwissenschaft 24: 400–418. Tillich, Paul. 1959a. Das System der Wissenschaften nach Gegenständen und Methoden. In ibid.: Frühe Hauptwerke (= Gesammelte Werke, Vol. I), 111–293. Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk. ———. 1959b. Die Überwindung des Religionsbegriffs in der Religionsphilosophie. In ibid.: Frühe Hauptwerke (= Gesammelte Werke, Vol. I), 367–388. Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk. ———. 1965. Die Bedeutung der Kirche für die Gesellschaftsordnung in Europa und Amerika. In ibid.: Das religiöse Fundament des moralischen Handelns. Schriften zur Ethik und zum Menschenbild (= Gesammelte Werke, Vol. III), 107–119. Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk. ———. 1968. Die religiöse Lage der Gegenwart [1926]. In ibid.: Die religiöse Deutung der Gegenwart. Schriften zur Zeitkritik (= Gesammelte Werke, Vol. X), 9–93. Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk. ———. 1998a. Klassenkampf und religiöser Sozialismus [1930]. In ibid.: Sozialphilosophische und ethische Schriften (= Main Works, Vol. 3), ed. Erdmann Sturm, 168–188. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. ———. 1998b. Die sozialistische Entscheidung [1933]. In ibid.: Sozialphilosophische und ethische Schriften (= Main Works, Vol. 3), ed. Erdmann Sturm, 283–408. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter

44

C. Danz

———. 2008. Das Dämonische. Ein Beitrag zur Sinndeutung der Geschichte. In ibid.: Ausgewählte Texte, ed. Christian Danz, Werner Schüßler, and Erdmann Sturm, 139–163. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter Wagner, Falk. 1984. Geld oder Gott? Zur Geldbestimmtheit der kulturellen und religiösen Warenwelt. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Weber, Max. 1991–2008. Die Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen. Max Weber-Studienausgabe. Vol. I, 19–21. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ———. 1993. Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus, ed. Klaus Lichtblau and Johannes Weiß. Bodenheim: Athenäum. Christian Danz is professor of systematic theology at the University of Vienna. Since 2006, he is President of the German “Paul Tillich Society”. His main fields of research include: dogmatics, philosophy of religion, theology of religions, history of Protestant theology in the nineteenth and twentieth century, and German idealism (Schelling). His latest books include: Grundprobleme der Christologie (Mohr Siebeck, 2013); Einführung in die Theologie Martin Luthers (WBG, 2013); Systematische Theologie (UTB, 2016); Gottes Geist. Eine Pneumatologie (Mohr Siebeck, 2019); Jesus von Nazareth zwischen Judentum und Christentum. Eine christologische und religionstheologische Skizze (Mohr Siebeck, 2020).  

Chapter 4

The Responsible Leader David W. Miller and Michael J. Thate

4.1 Introduction “Responsibility” has had varying articulations within ethical philosophy (see esp., Jonas 1985) as well as business literature (esp. Badaracco 2013). Gleaning from these literatures, we explore the concept through the thought-world of twentieth-­ century martyr, ethicist, and Lutheran theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906–1945). Admittedly, Bonhoeffer is an odd choice for inclusion in this essay. A noble characteristic within better business practice is the winsome art of compromise. Ostensibly, Bonhoeffer did little of that. He was unflinching in his convictions. Moreover, equating the absorptive powers of financialized capitalism with the evil against which Bonhoeffer stood will not get us very far. His radicalism and stubborn convictions notwithstanding, Bonhoeffer’s articulation of “responsibility” remains instructive for our purposes here. Living through the brutal force of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, Bonhoeffer had little time for theoretical ethics and abstractions. He focused on concrete situations. Through his notion of “Christian Responsibility” (christliche Verantwortung), and, in particular, how such responsibility confronts injustice, we explore how his conception of responsibility provides a fresh angle of vision regarding leadership challenges in today’s market economy. Bonhoeffer’s articulation complements contemporary debates on shareholder theory versus stakeholder theory—as well as conscious capitalism—by dealing with the specificity of situations and responsible action within those situations. Such an approach clarifies ethical grey zones by expressly naming the ethical context of a given situation and then asking to what or to whom am I responsible in a given situation.

D. W. Miller · M. J. Thate (*) Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_4

45

46

D. W. Miller and M. J. Thate

Our essay proceeds in four moves. First, we explore the complex milieu of “capitalism” that creates relations and networks not readily apparent or easy to demarcate and name. Questions of complicity and complexity are raised as ethical challenges. We set out an example taken from a popular Protestant Christian text to demonstrate the complexities and complicities of ethical stances within a market economy. Second, we consider the third tenant of Conscious Capitalism and how it might address the example raised in the popular text. Third, we introduce Bonhoeffer’s notion of responsibility and how it might address the situation. Fourth, we conclude with a few summary points on responsible leadership.

4.2 The Challenges of Co-implication The role and responsibility of the individual is a perennial question within ethical philosophy. Though perhaps not the best starting point, it is the most immediate situation presented to us: viz., what should I do? The individual is enmeshed within a field of dynamic relations of people, places, animals, histories, environments, things, institutions,—and, of course, beliefs about each of these. We are all experiencing these latent dynamics while living through a pandemic. What is good for the individual is bound up with what is good for one’s community. What is good for one’s community is bound up with a series of social spheres that may or may not immediately affect the individual but most certainly affect the public health of social ecosystems. And yet the question of the right thing to do remains most proximate to the individual reflecting on a particular situation. Ethical responsibility therefore requires ethical awareness. That is, an awareness of the ethical field of a particular situation in which one is acting and upon which one is acted (Thate 2019). This, we maintain, is the riddle of ethics: the individual in, and, indeed, as an ecosystem. Perhaps the most dominant field in which we live and move and have our being is, for want of a better descriptor, “capitalism.” Capitalism, however, as Jürgen Kocka shrewdly observes, is “too frequently the ill-defined component of a one-­ sided narrative.” Definitions of capitalism are chalked full of “ardent simplifications” amongst its critics and apologists alike (Kocka 2016, p. vii). Defining words properly, as Simon Winchester has beautiful narrated, is indeed a fine and peculiar craft (Winchester 1998, p. 151). So it is with “capitalism” (Kocka 2016, pp. 1–24). We must distinguish between the word and its historical usage on the one hand, and as a concept manifesting itself throughout history on the other (Salvioli 1906; Pirenne 1914; Cunningham 1916; Tawney 1926; Sée 1926). The term in French (Capitalisme), German (Kapitalismus), and English gained lexical acceptance— after a few scattered antecedents—in the second half of the nineteenth century (Kocka 2016, pp. 2–7). The concept, however, “emerged out of a critical spirit and from a comparative perspective.” It is thus frequently evoked “to make observations about one’s own era” that was imagined in marked contrast to previous conditions (Kocka 2016, p. 6).

4  The Responsible Leader

47

We will set our exploration of leadership challenges within the dynamics of a global market economy that functions as a mechanism of allocation and coordination of relationships at varying levels of abstraction (Fontana et  al. 2019). As a result, personal ethics and personal conscience can sometimes sit uncomfortably within an organization. A kind of gordian knot approach to this riddle is the establishment of two sets of morality: one personal; the other organizational. There is something of this approach that is not only salutatory but also inevitable. That is to say, the assembling forces of financial capitalism run deeper than any of us can possibly detect in any given situation. The outspoken professor, e.g., may rage all he wants against the evils of “capitalism,” but that same professor’s salary and 401K flow together in an endowment that is likely populated by unsavory relations. There is no purity in this game. The market swirl of financialized capital mixes us with institutions and industries we would otherwise avoid at a personal level. Still, in our view at least, focusing only on the personal side of ethics valorizes unhelpful views of the individual. No one is an island—least of all ethically so. To illustrate these challenges, consider an example put forward by New  York Times Best-Selling Author, Timothy Keller (Keller and Leary Alsdorf 2014). Keller is a thoughtful Christian leader who ministers at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan, N.Y.  His is a congregation with some 6000 regular attenders each Sunday, and he has helped start over 300 churches worldwide. He is also the author of several best-selling books and a regular conference speaker to crowds of thousands (McMillan 2013). His influence has been documented by feature-length essays in places like The Atlantic and The New York Times. He also represents the limitations of some of classical Protestantism’s and contemporary Christianity’s ethical reflections on the relationship between the individual and the realities of market relations. In Every Good Endeavor (2014), Keller tells the story of a friend who works in private equity at a major financial services firm as an example of character and integrity within complex ethical situations (Keller and Leary Alsdorf 2014, pp. 117–18). His friend, let us call him Ted, “was torn between his obligation to create the highest value for his company and staff, and his faith-based commitment to human flourishing” (Keller and Leary Alsdorf 2014, p. 118). Keller does not give any specifics—only the broad outline of the situation. Ted was faced with a deal that was legal but felt to him unethical. He possessed veto power over the investment. If he vetoed the deal, however, the same deal would have gone to a competing bank. His ethical convictions and personal conscience—informed as they were by his faith—could not agree to the investment. To do so would put himself in a position to profit from something he could not condone. Ted decided to take a stand and live out his personal convictions. He announced to his team that he would not veto the deal. Nor would he participate in any bonus that might result from the investment deal. Taken aback by such a move, Ted’s team asked about his motivations. Ted responded by speaking of God’s intentions for human flourishing and other explanations based on his faith. The deal closed. Ted’s conscience remained clear. And the investment made Ted’s firm a lot of money. Keller suggests this was an ethical win-win scenario. But can we really say that Ted did not profit from this deal?

48

D. W. Miller and M. J. Thate

Keller never specifies the situation. In some respects, this is beneficial from a pedagogical perspective. It allows one to populate the case study with concerns of their own ethical priorities. From the perspective of the responsible leader, however, it stumbles out of the gate precisely for not naming the ethical field. Nevertheless, it reveals the tension between personal convictions and the realities of co-implicated relations.

4.3 Conscious Leadership Clayton M. Christensen and Derek van Bever have advanced what they called “The Capitalist’s Dilemma” (2014). That is, long-term prosperity tends to be at cross purposes with the tools that guide most investments. Ted’s situation illustrates what we may refer to as the “Conscious Capitalist Dilemma.” That is, individual convictions remain co-implicated within deeper systems of value. By the nature of global markets, a well-intended individual doing their best to live according to their principles is always already co-implicated within relations of capital that may be contrary to their principles. Ted did not personally condone the deal that was against his principles. Still, he chose not to veto the deal. And though he made it clear he did not wish to receive a bonus from the deal, can we really say that he did not profit from the deal? The answer to this question is not immediately clear. How would conscious leadership approach this scenario? Conscious leadership, according to the authors “is perhaps the most important element in Conscious Capitalism” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  178). The conscious leader is “emotionally and spiritually mature,” with motivations beyond power and personal enrichment (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 179). They are driven by a sense of purpose and the mutual benefit of the business and its stakeholders. They “view themselves as trustees of the business, seeking to nurture and safeguard it for future generations, not to exploit it for the short-term gains of themselves or current stakeholders” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 179). And in their chapter on “The Qualities of Conscious Leader” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, pp. 183–94), the authors name integrity as reigning supreme among leadership qualities (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, pp. 187–88). This reads like a description of “Ted”—like the kind of praise he might receive at his retirement party someday. According to the narration of Keller, Ted exudes what Danah Zorah and Ian Marshall refer to in their book, Spiritual Capital, as spiritual intelligence: an intelligence that considers meaning, values, purpose, and higher-ordered motivations (2004, p. 3). Does it work in concrete situations? Are these win-win situations realistic and attainable in a world that also contains dark corners and malicious actors in the marketplace? And is Keller’s win-win assessment of Ted’s actions really a win-win? Mackey and Sisodia remind us that to become more conscious is to evolve ethically. This means “taking responsibility” for a wider dimensionality of the consequences of our actions that are imbedded within “interdependencies” and “nuances

4  The Responsible Leader

49

of larger systems” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 264). Conscious leaders thus commit to growing in an awareness of such systems thinking. This is near what we mean by “the responsible leader.” We position Bonhoeffer as a complementary approach to this facet of conscious leadership. Bonhoeffer shares Mackey’s and Sisodia’s commitment to values, integrity, spirituality, and moral courage. And yet, he also names and addresses concrete problems that the authors tend to gloss over.

4.4 Bonhoeffer and Responsibility Bonhoeffer was neither a corporate CEO nor a business school professor. He was a theologian, ethicist, Lutheran pastor, international diplomat, and practicing Christian. He grew up through the human carnage and economic devastation of World War I Germany. As an adult, he encountered first-hand the exacerbation of these challenges in World War II. And in the final years of his life, he joined the German Abwehr (military intelligence) as a cover for his secretive participation in smuggling Jews out of Germany, and eventually joining a conspiracy plot to assassinate Hitler. Patriot though Bonhoeffer was, in 1941 he commented to a friend, “I pray for the defeat of my country, for I think that is the only possibility of paying for all the suffering that my country has caused the world” (Brocker 2006, p. 10). As alluded to in the introduction of this essay, perhaps such unflinching conviction and lack of compromise are leadership traits best left to the side? To appreciate the value of Bonhoeffer’s complement to Conscious Leadership, we need to understand Bonhoeffer’s context (Bethge 2000). Bonhoeffer was raised in a prominent Berlin family. Religious life and church attendance—other than major holidays—was not part of his upbringing. All were stunned when he announced at age fourteen that he planned to study theology. Bonhoeffer successfully completed his first doctoral dissertation at the age of twenty-one. He was well on his way to a prestigious academic career in the German university system and soon thereafter in the international theological and diplomatic communities. Academic isolation from real-world problems that demanded fresh ethical attention and practical solutions, however, gnawed at him. As Hitler’s aims became clearer, Bonhoeffer wrote that the church’s old ways were insufficient for today’s battles, comparing them to “rusty swords” that needed to be replaced with a new and radical “bright steel” (Bonhoeffer 2008, p. 81). In the early years of Hitler’s ascendancy to power, Bonhoeffer was one of the first figures to speak out publicly against his growing fascist and dictatorial agenda. In 1933, Hitler became Chancellor, thereby completing his grab for full and unchallenged power based on his “Leader Principle” (Führerprinzip). Shortly thereafter, Bonhoeffer publicly denounced the Leader Principle during a live radio national broadcast. Bonhoeffer’s radio speech was censored and cut off before he could complete it. Refusing to vow allegiance to Hitler as a condition of being in the now pro-­Nazi German National Protestant Church (Deutsche Evangelische Kirche), Bonhoeffer was forbidden to teach theology at university or perform any official

50

D. W. Miller and M. J. Thate

Church functions. In response, he founded and led an underground seminary, training dozens of pastors for an alternative church, the Confessing Church (die Bekennende Kirche), who sought close adherence to the Christian Gospel, refusing to bow the knee to false gods. Many clergy joined Bonhoeffer in the underground church—some of whom became participants in different conspiracy plots to halt the Nazi party agenda. Bonhoeffer was initially imprisoned for smuggling Jews out of Germany. While imprisoned, he was discovered to be part of the assassination plot. He was tortured and sent to the concentration camp in Flossenbürg. There he was hung a mere two weeks prior to the liberation of the campy by American Allied forces. Bonhoeffer never sought to rationalize his participation in the assassination plot. He acknowledged murder was a sinful action for which he must bear the guilt. “Thou shall not commit murder” was a clear command in the Christian Bible of Bonhoeffer (Exod. 20:13; Matt. 5:21). It is God alone, according to Bonhoeffer’s theology, who as the pure exception and lawgiver possessed the sovereign right to administrate life and death (Exod. 34:32; Isa. 33:22; Isa. 51:4). As noted in the editors introduction to Bonhoeffer’s Ethics, “Rather than trying to justify his involvement in the conspiracy by appealing to some principal or casuistry, Bonhoeffer […] was willing to take the guilt of his action upon himself” (Bonhoeffer 2008, p. 13). Bonhoeffer forcefully rejects normalizing the utilitarian logic of “the ends justify the means” (Bonhoeffer 2008, p. 89). Rather, he discerned the deed to be necessary. And, as such, it was the burden of responsibility in this particular, complex, concrete situation to take vicarious representative action to save others.

4.5 Bonhoeffer, Mackey and Sisodia, and “Ted” With this context in mind, now we can address the question, what leadership wisdom does Bonhoeffer have to offer Conscious Capitalism? John Mackey, an iconic modern-day CEO along with his co-author and Babson College professor, Raj Sisodia, have been lionized for crafting an image of conscious capitalism. And perhaps rightly so. Unlike Bonhoeffer, the authors live in a more diverse western cultural context, and during a time of relative global peace and unimaginable prosperity. This allows for the luxury to imagine a Conscious Leader who has freedom, autonomy, choices, and the ability to make “win-win” choices when facing tough moral choices (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  191). They describe a world where a Conscious Leader should “treat every person you encounter as fully enlightened” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 206). But is this realistic? How might the victims of the Holocaust felt about such a statement? Or in our times, how George Floyd and Jamal Khashoggi—if they were still alive—or the victims of Bernie Madoff’s cool, calculating Ponzi scheme would react to the authors’ conscious leadership recommendation to treat every person as fully enlightened? Though appreciative of the authors’ good intentions, such estimations do not align with the lived experience, concrete realities, and co-implicated compromises of the broken world in which corporate leaders exist.

4  The Responsible Leader

51

Creating an imaginary conversation between two people from different eras and hypothesizing what they might say to each other, how they might challenge or critique each other, and where they might agree or disagree can be a productive exercise. We attempt that here with a particular focus on such issues as moving from the abstract to concrete, confronting injustice, personal conscience, and understanding the nature of responsible leadership. As long-time students of Bonhoeffer and his prolific and tantalizingly unfinished theological writings, his life, and the socio-political context in which he lived, we suspect Bonhoeffer would have enjoyed conversing with authors Mackey and Sisodia (and Keller, too). Bonhoeffer was no stranger to the finer and sophisticated things of life. We can imagine Bonhoeffer hosting Mackey and Sisodia to his family home in Berlin or later in Göttingen, talking over a glass of vintage wine and a fine cigar. Accompanied perhaps by playing Gospel music and African-American Spirituals records in the background, acquired during Bonhoeffer’s transformative experiences worshiping in the Harlem Abyssinian Baptist Church while a visiting scholar at Union Theological Seminary in New York City. Bonhoeffer would embrace much of what Mackey and Sisodia wrote in Conscious Capitalism—particularly the ideas put forward in the two chapters on “The Qualities of Conscious Leaders” and “Becoming a Conscious Leader.” After all, how could a renowned theologian, ethicist, church leader, and international diplomat be critical of a CEO and business school scholar who laud such leadership attributes as viewing business leadership as a calling, pursuing spiritual intelligence, dedicating oneself to servant leadership, making tough moral choices, and recognizing the danger of charismatic leaders (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 183)? Mackey and Sisodia also recognize the role that religion and religious teachings play for many people in the world. They respectfully nod to “role models” found in particular religious traditions (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 198). They also reflect on the importance of their own spiritual practices (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 208). And claim respect for “timeless wisdom” and being open to it wherever it is found (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 213). Bonhoeffer would push the authors for details, specificity, and hard concrete examples where such qualities were evident. Were Mackey’s tough moral decisions, e.g., really that hard? Besides fractions of his millions, what did it cost him? Were his basic freedoms, legal rights, his businesses, or his life ever threatened by the ruling government or by organized crime, and protection rackets? Few of us will ever face such pressures. In marking conscious leadership as “perhaps the most important element in Conscious Capitalism” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 178), the authors reject other leadership styles such as charismatic leadership as being particularly destructive and dangerous; citing none other than Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Bonhoeffer would likely agree. Bonhoeffer would likely be leery of the authors’ abstract reflections about “spiritual intelligence.” He would observe that such notions come across as rather thin as opposed to embodying the depth and weight that come with sacrificial leadership: a concept he refers to as the “cost of discipleship” (Bonhoeffer 2003). In addition, Bonhoeffer might be stunned to hear the authors advocate “following our hearts and doing what we most love” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  196) as

52

D. W. Miller and M. J. Thate

unavailable options to the vast majority of the world’s population—even in developed countries. In contrast, Bonhoeffer’s theology insisted that the life of the Christian and the freedom it brought entailed an outward facing set of responsibilities; not an inward facing pursuit of doing what we most love. Bonhoeffer described this not as a freedom from laws and other constraints but rather as a freedom for others to help them in their moment of need. After his initial arrest and incarceration in Berlin’s Tegel prison, for example, he wrote that “if we want to be Christians,” it can only be done by “acting with responsibility and in freedom when the hour of danger comes […] for all who suffer” (Bonhoeffer 1972, p. 14). Bonhoeffer would have likewise pressed Mackey on how to respond to tough moral choices. Mackay, quoting Harvard Business School professor of ethics, Joseph Badaracco, argues that “the real test of leadership” is not choosing between right and wrong but rather “when the choice is between right and right” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 191). In complex, concrete cases, the ethical grey zone is not simply about choosing between right and right. Nor is it about choosing between clear visions of what is right or wrong. In Ethics, Bonhoeffer writes that responsible action considers a plurality of conflicting rights and wrongs. “Responsible action must decide not simply between right and wrong, between good and evil, but between right and right, wrong and wrong” (Bonhoeffer 2008, p.  284). In many business contexts, there are only wrong choices, bad choices, and unethical choices that business leaders sometimes feel they have no choice but to make. Or, at a minimum, even well-intended choices of the right tend to be co-implicated with systems and institutions that do harm. They would likely debate conscience and its role in guiding our decisions, actions, and behaviors. Mackey suggests a conscious leader’s “inner heart knows the answers to these questions” about life’s purposes and how we should make tough moral decisions (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 196). For Mackey, listening to one’s heart functions as the metaphor for following one’s conscience. When facing periods of uncertainty, he insists, “the solution is simple”: follow your “heart’s guidance” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, pp. 196–97). Bonhoeffer would aver. In Ethics, Though Bonhoeffer argues that “conscience claims to be the voice of God” (Bonhoeffer 2008, p. 308), he had a critical sense of the human capacity to rationalize and justify doing what one wants to do or our obedience to what we are told to do, even if it is at variance with our deepest values and beliefs. Bonhoeffer also has a different conception of calling than Mackey and Sisodia. Bonhoeffer would affirm the authors in recognizing that religious callings are not limited to the clergy but can take place in all walks of life and work. Yet in such callings, no matter the job description, Bonhoeffer insists that all are called to righteous action, to vicarious representation of the underrepresented; or, to what we here are calling Responsible Leadership (Bonhoeffer 2008, p. 289). Let us further imagine Bonhoeffer responding to Tim Keller and his parishioner Ted’s lucrative, legal-but-unsavory business dilemma. Bonhoeffer’s first reaction would surely have been one of suspicion. From the outset, Bonhoeffer would admonish Keller to specify the ethical field of Ted’s situation as an ethical imperative. After learning further details, Bonhoeffer would commend Ted for recognizing

4  The Responsible Leader

53

that he was facing a moral dilemma. Many in Ted’s position would not have felt uncomfortable about the transaction or questioned the integrity of it. Indeed, they might have felt it would be unethical not to do the deal so long as it was legal and helped create the highest value for shareholders. When confronted with a concrete situation where one’s personal and intuitional values are in tension, we tend to bifurcate our value systems, applying one set of ethical standards to work life and another to personal life. Few face the realities of being co-implicated within a wider web of social relations and forces. Bonhoeffer would have then pressed Ted along the lines of co-implication. Did Ted do enough by simply recusing himself from the decision? Was his recusal a noble act, or was it a copout, an abdication of his corporate and ethical responsibility? Ted declined his bonus portion resulting from the deal’s profits. Ted is still co-­ implicated, however, in the net outcome of his firm. Intentions aside, can he even say he did not profit from the deal? Surely he continued to profit from the deal’s contribution to his firm’s overheads and fixed costs, and the subsequent deal flow from that particular client. Bonhoeffer would argue that the notion of responsibility, and the principle of vicarious representation and action would compel Ted to engage in a deeper debate with his colleagues. Ted need not resort to religious vocabulary or authority, but he could have made a case that legality is not always ethical or moral. By recusing himself he lost the opportunity to influence the decision or try to find a creative way to align it with his conceptions of responsible leadership and vicarious representation. By abdicating his responsibility, Ted inadvertently committed the error of being an “ethically neutral leader” (Trevino et  al. 2000). Bonhoeffer refers to this as the “flight from public controversy” into the “sanctuary of private virtuousness” (Bonhoeffer 2008, p. 80). When a leader, like Ted, appears to keep his hands clean by not speaking out against or actively being involved in an unethical act, responsibility for the wider ethical field is abdicated. While it might make the actor feel good, it inadvertently signals to the organization that the leader’s moral convictions do not rival the company’s bottom line. Scholars call this “motivated blindness,” where it remains in one’s interest to look the other way and permit a questionable activity to continue (Bazerman and Tenbrunsel 2011). Ted was caught in a web of admirable corporate and personal ideals in the abstract. Conscious capitalism offers several correctives to Ted’s lack of systems thinking—what we elsewhere refer to as an ethical field approach (Miller and Thate 2017). And yet, as we suggest above, it falls prey to thin designations of win-win thinking and loose abstractions such as following one’s heart. Bonhoeffer’s complementary corrective is immediately apparent in the assertion that specifying an ethical situation is an ethical imperative. Keller’s abstraction of Ted’s ethical quandary never gets off the ground in this regard. It also falls prey to unhelpful bifurcations of one’s personal ethics and one’s corporate ethics. Conscious capitalism also falters along this dividing line. The specificity of Bonhoeffer’s ethical situation inverts this bifurcation in illuminating ways. There was no win-win scenario. There was no separation from the personal and the corporate. His private ethics dictated killing was wrong. And yet the specification of the ethical field revealed the need for an

54

D. W. Miller and M. J. Thate

immoral actor to be removed. Bonhoeffer acted against his conscience and personal ethics; he took a loss on account of bearing the burden of responsibility within the demands of the wider ethical field.

4.6 Closing Thoughts In this essay, we have highlighted several aspects of Bonhoeffer’s ethical thought that both challenge and complement Mackey and Sisioda’s advocacy for conscious capitalism and conscious leadership. Drawing on Bonhoeffer’s notions of responsibility, vicarious representative action, and accenting the concrete over the abstract in ethical situations, we propose The Responsible Leader as a conceptual tool for reframing popular leadership models and stakeholder theories. Many South African anti-apartheid activists and leaders drew heavily on and credited Bonhoeffer’s life and teachings as the basis for challenging and ultimately peacefully defeating the injustices of apartheid. Similarly, the American Civil Rights Movement and other social justice movements have adopted and adapted Bonhoeffer’s theology to concrete situations. Is it possible to transpose Bonhoeffer’s Christian centered theology and ethics in the extreme into wider secular and trans-­ religious vocabulary and categories? Bonhoeffer himself would no doubt answer yes. While incarcerated in Tegel prison in Berlin, he smuggled out various letters and papers in which he wrote, “it is simply not true that Christianity has the only answers” to worldly problems (Bonhoeffer 1972, p. 30). Indeed, while in prison, Bonhoeffer provocatively raises the question of what “religionless Christianity” might look like and how we might “speak of God without religion” for the sake of addressing pressing world problems (Bonhoeffer 1972, pp. 280–82). Though Bonhoeffer represents ethics in the extreme, he might inspire a new generation of Responsible Leaders as they seek wisdom and integrity in their respective callings to enable their personal ethics and corporate ethics to flourish side by side. His calling for specifying ethical situations as an ethical imperative leads to a critical awareness of the complicated realities of living within a global market economy. Few of us will ever face the extremes he faced. Perhaps a new generation of Responsible Leaders, however, might employ vicarious action in concrete ways on behalf of their neighbor in the face of complex, challenging, and unjust situations.

References Badaracco Jr., Joseph L. 2013. The Good Struggle: Responsible Leadership in an Unforgiving World. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Business Review. Bazerman, Max, and Ann, Tenbrunsel. 2011, April. Ethical Breakdowns. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2011/04/ethical-­breakdowns. Accessed 17 Mar 2021. Bethge, Eberhard. 2000. Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Biography. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

4  The Responsible Leader

55

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 1972. Letters and Papers from Prison. New York: Macmillan. ———. 2003. Cost of Discipleship, Volume 4 of 17 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. ———. 2008. Ethics, Volume 6 of 17 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Brocker, Mark S. 2006. Editor’s Introduction to the English Edition. In Conspiracy and Imprisonment: 1940–1945, Volume 16 of 17 in Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, 1–32. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Christensen, Clayton M., and Derek van Bever. 2014, June. The Capitalist’s Dilemma. HBR. https:// hbr.org/2014/06/the-­capitalists-­dilemma. Accessed on 1 Nov 2020. Cunningham, W. 1916. The Progress of Capitalism in England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fontana, Giuseppe, Christos Pitelis, and Jochen Runde. 2019. Financialisation and the New Capitalism? Cambridge Journal of Economics 43 (4): 799–804. Jonas, Hans. 1985. The Imperative of Responsibility. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Keller, Timothy with Katherine Leary, Alsdorf. 2014. Every Good Endeavor: Connecting Your Work to God’s Work. New York: Penguin Books. Kocka, Jürgen. 2016. Capitalism: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Press. Mackey, John, et  al. 2020. Conscious Leadership: Elevating Humanity through Business. New York: Portfolio. McMillan, William M. 2013. Contextualization, Big Apple Style: Making Conservative Christianity more Palatable in Modern Day Manhattan. Symposia 5: 1–16. Miller, David W., and Michael J. Thate. 2017. Are Business Ethics Relevant? In Economics as a Moral Science, ed. P. Rona and L. Zsolnai, 163–173. Berlin: Springer. Pirenne, H. 1914. The Stages in the History of Capitalism. American Historical Review 19: 494–515. Salvioli, G. 1906. Le capitalism dans le monde antique. Paris: V. Giard and E. Brière. Sée, H. 1926. Les origines du capitalism moderne. Paris: A. Colin. Tawney, R.H. 1926. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism: A Historical Study. London: Hazell, Watson and Viney. Thate, Michael J. 2019. Simone Weil and a Critical Will to Serve. In Servant Leadership, Social Entrepreneurship and the Will to Serve, ed. Luk Bouckaert and Steven Van den Heuvel, 87–101. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Trevino, Linda Klebe, Laura Hartman, and Michael Brown. 2000. Moral Person and Moral Manager: How Executives Develop a Reputation for Ethical Leadership. California Management Review 42 (4): 128–142. Winchester, Simon. 1998. The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary. New York: HarperCollins. Zohar, Danah, and Ian Marshall. 2004. Spiritual Capital: Wealth We Can Live By. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. David W. Miller is the Director of the Princeton University Faith and Work Initiative (in the Keller Center for Innovation), a Senior Professional Specialist, and a Lecturer. Before receiving his Ph.D. in ethics and joining the faculty at Princeton University, he spent 16 years in senior executive positions in international business and finance, including 8 years in London. At Princeton the nickname of his signature course is “Business Ethics: Succeeding without Selling Your Soul.” His research interests include ethics in the gray zone, fruitful leadership, healing broken company cultures, gaps between personal and organizational values, and the growing demand for faith diversity and inclusion at work.  

56

D. W. Miller and M. J. Thate

Michael J. Thate is an Associate Research Scholar at Princeton University (USA) with the “Faith and Work Initiative and Keller Center for Innovation”. He has held visiting fellowships at Yale Divinity School and the “Center for the Study of World Religions” at Harvard Divinity School. His latest books include: Remembrance of Things Past? (Mohr Siebeck, 2013); The Godman and the Sea (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019). The first book is a kind of social history of the rise of history-as-science in nineteenth and twentieth century German universities and the emergence of an “historical Jesus” discourse which came out of this “new science”. The second book reads varying representations of the sea in antiquity and early Christianity through the rubrics of desolation and trauma.  

Part II

Theistic Religions and Conscious Capitalism

Chapter 5

The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception of Jewish Business Ethics Moses Pava

5.1 Introduction Today even capitalists’ loudest friends recognize that traditional capitalism, as understood and practiced for nearly two hundred years, is no longer working as Adam Smith promised in The Wealth of Nations (2003) or even as Milton Friedman promised more recently in Capitalism and Freedom (1962). Consider a recent article in Forbes Magazine entitled “Capitalism is Failing Us Just When We Need It Most” (Kobayashi-Solomon 2020). The author is deeply concerned about the long-term existential threats associated with climate change, but points out that capitalists are busy with other and far more trivial concerns: The Valley is all-hands-on-deck coding up new mobile apps, designing algorithms to better track and profile American consumers (to more efficiently pick their pockets), automating society’s way into an even more extreme labor crisis…and evading responsibility for its role in the breakdown of civil discourse.

The problem according to this article is that corporations incentivize their employees to do one thing – and one thing only – maximize the value of corporate stock prices. The solution according to the article is simple enough – change the incentives to encourage everyone to engage in pro-social behavior. As Forbes Magazine put it:

M. Pava (*) Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University, New York, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_5

59

60

M. Pava Capitalism, the perfect expression of human ingenuity, problem-solving capacity, and adaptability is failing us when we need it most. We must find a new way to incentivize the agents of our current system if we are to thrive and survive the difficult century ahead (emphasis added).

I believe that the magazine has correctly recognized the severe limitations of contemporary capitalism, and that is a major step forward for a well-respected, iconic, pro-capitalist business magazine. But the solution of merely focusing on changing incentive schemes is woefully inadequate. Forbes Magazine, in emphasizing a relatively simple and familiar economic solution to remedy the failures of traditional capitalism, is suggesting that we can fix capitalism by supercharging one of neo-liberalism’s worst inclinations and beliefs – i.e. everyone is always and only interested in their own self-interest, narrowly conceived. This is like telling the captain of the Titanic that the best way to avoid the looming iceberg ahead is to stay the course and just speed up the vessel a bit. This chapter is not suggesting that economic incentives do not matter, but it is suggesting that the deeper and far more significant problem with today’s capitalism is the obsessive focus on the single human task of creating the most wealth with the least amount of effort. The problem with capitalism is not a problem that will be fixed by tinkering with incentive schemes at the margin in order to get the economics just right. Rather the problem with capitalism, especially as it has been practiced in the last 40 years or so, particularly in the United States, derives from its insistence that the single human value that really matters when it comes to business is the efficient production of the greatest amount of wealth for the least amount of cost for the exclusive benefit of the owners of capital. This belief is so deeply lodged, not only at a conscious level of awareness but even at an unconscious level, that it is often quite understandably mistaken to be not just a version of capitalism, but it is often unthinkingly assumed to be its very definition. From the point of view of this chapter, capitalism’s most essential problem is not an economic problem at all, but it is primarily a problem concerning human values. As odd as it may seem, especially for those of us who studied at business schools, the fundamental tasks for today’s capitalists are to identify, reflect, and understand the rich and complex variety of values necessary for human flourishing and to consciously design and to co-create organizations that will produce enough wealth for everyone, on the one hand, and to contribute to the development and well-being of workers, consumers, and society, across a hierarchy of various needs, on the other hand. The thesis of this chapter is that these new tasks demand a new level of consciousness, one informed not only by business, but by a broad and varied spectrum of philosophies including world religions and spiritualities. The specific purpose of this chapter is to explore the potential contributions of a broadly expanded conception of Jewish business ethics to the task of contributing to the continued emergence of a new kind of more self-conscious capitalism.

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

61

5.2 Business as a Human Enterprise Over the last decade, a new kind of capitalism is slowly emerging. For the purposes of this chapter I will refer to this emergent entity as next stage capitalism. While this movement is not yet mainstream, nor is there a single philosophy or organization that fully articulates it, the basic outline of next stage capitalism is becoming more legible with each passing year. Next stage capitalism subsumes traditional capitalism but as its vision becomes clearer and more coherent over time, it is fair to say that it represents the early steps of an entirely new developmental phase of capitalism, sufficiently distinct from its neo-liberal progenitor to assign it a new label. Next stage capitalism has not yet reached its tipping point, nor has it fully coalesced into a fixed set of doctrines. It has many and various tributaries that continue to its development, with no one person or organization managing its development from on high. And, in this sense, it is a purely emergent phenomenon. Some of the major sources for my understanding and presentation of next stage capitalism include the following: Ed Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory (2010), John Mackey and Raj Sisodia’s Conscious Capitalism (2013), Joseph Badaracco’s Entrepreneurial Capitalism (2013), Michael Pirson’s Humanistic Management (2017), Mark Benioff’s Compassionate Capitalism (2019), Paul Jones’ Just Capital (2020), Ken Wilber’s Integral Business (2017), Robert Kegan’s Deliberately Developmental Business (2016), Robert Quinn’s Economics with a Higher Purpose (2019), Michael Porter and Mark Kramer’s Shared Values (2011), Peter Senge’s Learning Organization (2006), Ed Kaplan’s Balanced Scorecard (1996), Baruch Lev’s Strategic Resources and Consequences Report (2016), John Martin’s Value Based Management (2009), Ken Banks’s Social Entrepreneurship (2016), the Well Being Alliance (see https://wellbeingtrust.org), and the B Corporation Movement (Honeymann and Janna 2019). Below I identify ten basic propositions that taken together constitute the main building blocks for this newly emergent stage of capitalism. While some of these propositions have been around for a long time and are now considered mainstream and even “common sense” (although, originally they were considered quite controversial) others are newer, more tentative and more experimental. The list is not intended to include every proposal and claim in the exponentially growing literature on the next stage of capitalism nor is every proposition on the list necessarily endorsed by all or even most of those companies promoting the project of next stage capitalism. The list is intended primarily to highlight the notion of business as a human enterprise and to underline the discontinuity between neo-liberalism and next stage capitalism. Society and the economy are shifting from a singular focus on materialism to a focus on a broad array of human values and meanings. Next stage capitalism, although it grows out of the ground of neo-liberalism, is different in kind from its predecessor. The propositions listed below do not claim to describe the actual practice of the majority of today’s businesses but rather the point is to pick and choose propositions that paint an aspirational vision of where we are

62

M. Pava

going, if the many well-meaning and disparate voices of next stage capitalism can patiently learn to compromise and harmonize with one another. Business in the near future will require the softer, patient, and more delicate skills of a conductor, teacher, or gardener than the harsher and more blunt services of a general or a political leader. It will require philosophies closer in spirit to John Dewey’s pragmatism rather than Nico Machiavelli’s power politics. Next stage capitalism is not competing with neo-liberalism as much as it is replacing it with something altogether new. The list below proceeds from the least controversial aspects of next stage capitalism to its more controversial propositions: 1. Business possesses legal and moral responsibilities to shareholders of a corporation and to all stakeholders including employees, customers, suppliers, governments, and local and global communities. This proposition is well-established and nearly every major corporation either fully endorses it or, at least, pays it significant lip-service. 2. These corporate legal and moral responsibilities evolve over time and, at the margins, are contestable or even highly contestable. This implies that there has been a significant broadening of corporate accountability over time and that the concept of accountability is today grounded in active dialogue with various stakeholder groups rather than as a monologue on the part of the corporation (Pava and Krausz 2006). Or to put this in a slightly different way, horizontal accountability among stakeholders is fast replacing the more traditional, top-­ down, or vertical accountability (Badaracco 2013). 3. Wealth is not a single variable but is made up of several constituents including financial, manufactured, social, human, natural, and even spiritual assets (Porritt 2007). In turn, each of these asset categories include many distinct examples. The value of these assets, especially the social, human, natural and spiritual ones, cannot be reliably expressed through money and are often omitted altogether from a company’s balance sheet. Today, some of the most important assets are intangible in nature and possess no physical substance. 4. Net income (or profits) is not a single variable but is made up of several constituents including economic, social, and environmental performance. This means that, contrary to popular imagination, there is no such thing as a “bottom line.” Rather, there are multiple bottom-lines (Lev and Gu 2016). And, just as many aspects of wealth cannot be reliably expressed through money, economic, social, and environmental performances cannot always be expressed through money in a meaningful way. The regulative ideal of profit maximization under conscious capitalism has become an anachronism. Similarly, economic “rationality” is being replaced by economic “intelligence” or economic “reasonableness” (See March 1994). 5. Business values the efficient creation of wealth but this is just one of many relevant business values. Business values now include an expanded and growing list of items including human dignity, well-being, flourishing, interdependency,

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

63

power, responsibility, kindness, care, love, environmental sustainability, competition and cooperation, playfulness, and a paradoxical embrace of both-­and thinking rather than either-or. Managers attempt to avoid framing business decisions in terms of trade-offs among stakeholders and search for solutions that can work to everyone’s benefit, often (but not always) discovering win-win resolutions. 6. Managers and all stakeholders are expected to become self-conscious of these emerging individual and business values and are expected to implement appropriate values under the appropriate circumstances. Cost-benefit analysis is one tool managers use to aid in decision-making, but given the incommensurability of many of the values (and the inability to meaningfully translate values into currency) managers are now expected to define both their own identity and the identity of the corporation through their ability to order and to choose values wisely, consistent with the company’s vision, mission, and strategy, to embed those values in a compelling narrative, and, finally, to implement them in a fair and practical way (Badaracco 1997). 7. Business has higher purposes beyond the efficient creation of wealth. 8. Employees, especially younger ones, now expect and demand meaningful work beyond fair compensation and even beyond the higher purposes of the business. This emerging expectation represents one of the most dramatic changes from more traditional conceptions of capitalism. While in the past a small minority of elites may have enjoyed meaningful work experiences, most workers, most of the time, rarely entertained such high aspirations. Today’s younger workers are expected to and want to bring their whole selves into the workplace. Similarly, consumers demand high quality, healthy, safe, and even aesthetically pleasing products, services, and meaningful experiences (Heath and Heath 2017). They expect these products will be manufactured using sustainable methods, while respecting diversity, justice, fair labor practices, and human rights. 9. Business ethics has evolved far beyond the endorsement of maximizing shareholder value subject to a list of ethical constraints. Today’s business ethics is more about the search for meaning in organizations than providing a list of dos and don’ts (Pava 1999, 2003). 10. Under classical liberalism and neo-liberalism, capitalism was justified and legitimated as the system that produced the greatest amount of wealth with the least amount of effort – full stop. Advocates of conscious capitalism justify and legitimate the existence of business in terms of its ability to instantiate a wide variety and balance of good-enough human values and the ability of business to contribute to solving seemingly intractable social problems like global ­warming, racial and wealth inequalities, health emergencies, access to health care, diminishing privacy, animal rights, and discrimination of all sorts, to name just a few.

64

M. Pava

5.2.1 Next Stage Capitalism in Practice Advocates for next stage capitalism can point to an increasing number of companies who have explicitly adopted many of the above propositions as part of their visions, missions, and strategies. Some of the most well-known companies include: Ben and Jerry’s who aim is “to create linked prosperity for everyone that’s connected to our company” (benandjerry.com), Costco “a place where efficient buying and operating practices give members access to unmatched savings” (costco.com), The Container Store whose “goal is to help provide order to an increasingly busy and chaotic world” (containerstore.com), Lego who is “inventing the future of play” (lego.com), Panera Bread who is “raising, serving and eating food that is good and good for you” (panerabread.com), Patagonia committed to “build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis” (patagonia.com) Southwest whose purpose is to “connect people to what’s important in their lives through friendly, reliable, and low-cost air travel” (southwest.com), Starbuck’s where the corporate mission is “to inspire and nurture the human spirit – one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time” (starbucks.com), Unilever who promises “to make sustainable living commonplace” (unilever.com), and Zappos dedicated to “delivering happiness to customers, employees, and vendors” (zappos.com). The above list, of course, could be multiplied many times over but perhaps the best signal of how far next stage capitalism has come in recent years is the decision by the Business Roundtable to redefine the purpose of the corporation (businessroundtable.org). After insisting for decades that the sole mission of the corporation is to maximize shareholder value, in August of 2019 the Roundtable issued its new Statement. Specifically, the signatures to this document committed their companies to (1) delivering value to their customers, (2) investing in employees, compensating them fairly, providing them with important benefits, and fostering a diverse and respectful workplace, (3) dealing fairly and ethically with suppliers, (4) supprting local and global communities by embracing sustainable business practices, and (5) generating long-term value for shareholders. While none of these commitments are completely new, the document is important for several distinct reasons. First, the Roundtable is an association of chief executive officers of nearly 200 of the most important, powerful, and influential companies in the United States. Second, the document is an explicit repudiation of profit maximization and shareholder primacy, the most sacrosanct planks of neo-­ liberalism. Third, the very first sentence of the document underscores the significance of two of the most important values of next stage capitalism, meaning and dignity. The document begins by noting: “Americans deserve an economy that allows each person to succeed through hard work and creativity and to lead a life of meaning and dignity.” And, finally and most importantly for the purposes of this chapter, the document represents a formal recognition on the part of America’s top business leaders that capitalism can no longer be legitimated solely in terms of how efficiently it creates wealth for the owners of capital. Viewing the document in its

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

65

entirety, the goal is to justify capitalism not just because it creates positive outcomes for its stockholders, but because it satisfies the needs of its multiple stakeholders and it does so consciously, in a dignified and meaningful way. For sure, the document falls short of advocating any kind of “higher purpose” for business, but all things considered, this is an astonishing document, one that pushes the economy away from the status quo, neo-liberal orthodoxies, toward the next stage of capitalism.

5.2.2 Scammers, Fantasists, or Experimentalists Not everyone sees the evolution of capitalism as progress. Social democrats prefer to frame the emergence of next stage capitalism as a pure scam (and hardly an evolution). They view social problems like global warming, racial and wealth inequalities, etc. as deep structural problems caused directly by the inherent injustices of capitalism, requiring the need for radical changes to the way we govern ourselves. Allowing capitalists the opportunity to fix capitalism by importing soft values like cooperation and kindness into the business corporation is like putting the foxes in charge of the henhouse (Reich 2007). Advocates for next stage capitalism, from this perspective, are engaged in an elaborate con game, deepening the structural problems and causing injustices to worsen by providing capitalists with a rhetorical fig-leaf to hide their true intentions. The Business Roundtable and Conscious Capitalists recognize that neo-­ liberalism is under attack, but their responses are best understood and interpreted as a scam to pacify the increasing number of critics and to prevent real political action, rather than as attempts to solve real-world social and political problems, regardless of how sincerely they may sound. Social democrats are realists and they understand that each one of us is hard-­ wired to pursue our own self-interests, when provided with the opportunity to do so. They are unwilling to allow themselves to be fooled by the rhetoric of higher purposes and meaningful work, especially as income and wealth inequalities reach historic levels and the threat of the devastating effects of global warming continue to rise. Social democrats insist on the need to implement radical political reforms rather than relying on those that have caused the problems in the first place to now fix their own mess. For evidence on the real intentions of Conscious Capitalists, they point to the anti-union stance of some of the most celebrated exemplars of next stage capitalism, including Whole Foods, the company that literally coined the phrase Conscious Capitalism and is now owned by Amazon. They point out the political opposition of John Mackey, Whole Food’s CEO, to the passing of Obamacare that allowed millions of poor people the opportunity to purchase medical insurance for the first time. They ask tough questions like why critical issues related to lack of real competition in the high-tech industry were excluded from the Business Roundtable’s new Statement on Corporate Purpose. Or, why doesn’t the Statement include any

66

M. Pava

mention of how to reduce the significant dangers to democracy surrounding the unprecedented political lobbying and political advertising of major US corporations, arguably the single most important political issue of our time. Finally, they emphasize that there is an undeniable libertarian strand at the heart not only of Conscious Capitalism but of Ed Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory of Business, upon which it is based, that is seemingly at odds with core next stage values like cooperation and interdependency. Further how can so-called humanistic executives be trusted with implementing aspirational values on their own when they can’t even follow today’s legal requirements? Consider, for example, just a partial list of ethics and compliance failures during 2019. Google was hit with a nearly $2 billion fine for engaging in unfair competition by the European Commission. Facebook, among a growing list of assorted complaints, was charged $5 billion by the Federal Trade Commission for fooling users about their ability to control the privacy of their personal information. Novartis announced a $700 million settlement over lawsuits alleging that the drug manufacturer paid hundreds of millions of dollars to doctors to bribe them to prescribe their drugs. And, one of the top accounting firms in the world, KPMG, reached a $50 million settlement over stealing confidential information from the Accounting Oversight Commission (complianceweek.com). This evidence suggests that businesses continue to vigorously promote the pursuit of wealth more than ever and hardly suggests any hopeful signs of the emergence of next stage capitalism. Think about it. Suppose you were an unrepentant profit-maximizing chief executive officer. What better way would there be to scam your critics than to adopt, at little or no cost to yourself, the rhetoric of pretty visions and idealistic mission statements, while you continue to figure out new and more ingenious ways to exploit workers, to take advantage of consumers, and to increase profits? Social democrats believe that business leaders, who are always and forever out to promote private interests over public interests, whenever given the opportunity, literally cannot help themselves but to game the system for private gain. George Akerlof and Robert Schiller (2015) have dubbed this phenomenon “phishing for phools.” It’s just human nature, at least according this critique. An entirely different set of criticisms against the hope of the emergence of a next stage capitalism is launched, from the right flank, by traditional and neo-liberal capitalists in favor of the status quo. These unrepentant Milton Friedmanites believe that no company could possibly put the higher purposes of business ahead of profit maximization for the simple reason that all of us are hard-wired to pursue personal interests over social responsibilities. And, even if a company could somehow pursue higher purposes, competition against “real capitalists” would eliminate these “progressive” companies in short order. In any case, the traditional capitalists don’t see the system as broken, so why bother seeking ways to fix it? Ironically, this belief that we are all imprisoned by our own self-interests is the identical belief that is at the heart of the social democrat’s criticism outlined above. Where traditional capitalists and their social democratic competitors disagree is that the traditional capitalists do not view next stage capitalism as an elaborate scam invented to fool critics so much as it is a self-generated fantasy to fool themselves.

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

67

These critics will point out the fact that many of the companies that self-identify as consciously capitalistic are relatively small, privately held companies and many of those that are not are soon enough bought up by larger corporations. In other words, for the Friedmanites, it is eat or be eaten, as it always was, and it always will be. Finally, this is not something to be lamented but celebrated. Next stage capitalists are being squeezed from the left by social democrats and from the right by traditional and neo-liberal capitalists, both of whom claim the mantle of realism. Their way out of this trap, Max Weber called it the iron cage (2003), is based on their belief that humans are both self-seeking and other-directed beings, depending on the context, neither wholly righteous nor completely wicked. Advocates of next stage capitalism ask their critics for some wiggle room here. Suppose they say, rather than imagining business as a simple machine-like structure, populated by self-interested individuals who always respond to rewards and punishments in predictable ways, let us see what would happen if we slowly and consciously introduced a set of complex human and social values into business on the assumption that sometimes we can be motivated by our better angels and produce better results for everyone. From this third perspective, one that offers a more complex model of human behavior, next stage capitalists are neither scammers nor fantasists, but are most productively thought of as experimentalists. Conscious capitalists do not knowingly claim possession of a kind of final truth about the nature of human beings but they entertain the possibility that humans are messy creatures with mixed motives, open to new possibilities and new forms of organizations, ones that can pursue multiple goals simultaneously and do so in meaningful ways. From this perspective, next stage capitalists could agree that traditional capitalism is still the dominant and default ideology in our society, and they could also explicitly recognize that, historically, capitalism has been the goose that lays the golden eggs. At the same time, though, they could agree with social democrats that many of today’s social problems will require a heavy dose of government regulatory oversight, especially for problems like climate change and income and wealth inequalities. Such a perspective, however, demands an expanded consciousness, what the poet Keats once described in a letter to his brother as negative capability, one that includes both-and thinking rather than either-or and is patient in the face of seemingly contradictory evidence. There is no question that there is some truth to all three of these perspectives. No doubt many companies do use the language of next stage capitalism to scam their critics. This is sometimes described as green washing or pink washing. At the same time, one cannot help but think that some companies are sometimes engaged in fantastical thinking. Is it really true, for example, as some of the more passionate advocates of Conscious Capitalism claim, that there are no more trade-offs when it comes to business decision-making? I doubt it. The important advantage of next stage capitalism, however, is that one can accept the critiques from both the left and the right but still insist that experimenting with new ways of thinking about business is a reasonable and worthwhile gamble, especially when the stakes are so high. For those of us who believe that the failures of traditional capitalism are real and that the government cannot possibly solve

68

M. Pava

problems like income and wealth inequality and global warming by itself, the practical optimism of next stage capitalism is compelling, and one should keep an open mind in evaluating it. My conclusion here is not the claim that next stage capitalism has or will necessarily win the day. Rather I conclude this overview of next stage capitalism by claiming that the many and quite varied experiments-in-living, to borrow John Stewart Mill’s phrase, that are blossoming across the globe under various labels like Stakeholder Theory, Conscious Capitalism, Humanistic Management, Integral Business, and Economics with a Higher Purpose are positive signs of hope and possibility, ones that should be respected and nurtured when they work and jettisoned when they do not. I began the first section of this chapter with a quote from Forbes Magazine that made the claim that traditional capitalism is “the perfect expression of human ingenuity, problem-solving capacity, and adaptability…” only to go on to state that it is now “failing us when we need it most.” This is an odd claim when you think about it. Perhaps the real problem with traditional capitalism is hiding right here in plain sight. Capitalism is neither perfect, as its most ardent backers like Forbes’ claim, nor is it evil, as some of its enemies assume. Capitalism is still a work-in-progress and for the moment, at least, it remains good enough.

5.3 Jewish Business Ethics as a Constructive Project Serious writers on Jewish Business Ethics for the past 50  years have limited its conception, for the most part, by equating Jewish Business Ethics with Jewish Business Law. Those who study and write about traditional Jewish Business ethics, have raised a variety of questions about whether specific business activities (like selling tobacco products or owning gambling stocks) are permitted or forbidden, according to halacha (Jewish Law). Aaron Levine (1979, 1987, 1993), Meir Tamari (1995), Jonathan Sacks (2009), Walter Wurzburger (1999), Hershey Friedman (2017), David Schnall (1999), and several others have contributed to this literature. Tamari, for example, in an article in the Business Ethics Quarterly entitled “The Challenges of Wealth: ‘Jewish Business Ethics,’” concluded his article by noting: Economic activity is legitimate for it is essential for the existence of human beings. This activity is limited both by the Sabbath and Festivals, but also by the obligation to study Torah; all these leave less time for economic activity…The existence of a divinely revealed law predicates a ramified network of forbidden – and permitted – actions, rather than the concept of the ethical and unethical. Such actions preclude fraud in all its forms and protects the ignorant, weak, poor or disadvantaged. (1997, p. 55)

Tamari’s use of the term Jewish Business Ethics is ambiguous, to say the least. Note that even in the title of his paper he qualifies the phrase by putting it in scare quotes, signaling to the observant reader that while the phrase is widely used, it is not his preferred expression. And, in the final paragraph of the paper he explicitly makes

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

69

the point that since Jewish law identifies the forbidden and the permitted, it thus precludes altogether the need for the “concept of the ethical and unethical.” What is remarkable about the literature on Jewish Business Ethics is how similar many of its basic attitudes towards capitalism are with the major assumptions of the dominant paradigm of neo-liberalism over the past 50 years, as discussed above. Advocates of neo-liberalism and Jewish Business ethicists have generally assumed that capitalism is legitimated because it is the system that produces the greatest wealth at the least cost. According to both neo-liberalism and Jewish ethics, markets justify themselves purely in terms of the degree of wealth that they produce. According to Jonathan Sacks, former Chief Rabbi of Great Britain, capitalism is not legitimated in specifically Jewish or religious terms, but its worth is grounded in a purely utilitarian calculus. Sacks (2009) writes approvingly that “The market economy has generated more real wealth, eliminated more poverty and liberated more human creativity than any other economic system.” If there is a problem here, “The fault is not with the market but with the idea that the market alone is all we need.” Most Jewish Business ethicists understand the practice of business in much the same way that most finance and accounting professors understand it. Corporations are organizations designed and operated to efficiently maximize the creation of wealth for the owners of the corporation, by harnessing the power of individual self-­ interest. Jewish ethicists writing about economics accept the existing traditional definition of a business corporation provided by both American and International Law and business practitioners on its own terms. There is no need or desire to re-­ describe or to translate the process of wealth creation into a priori Jewish terms. It stands upon its own legs and there is no to reason to incorporate higher purposes, multiple bottom lines, values like interdependency, kindness, or the search for meaning in organizations. Jewish Business ethicists have shown little or no interest in creating “linked prosperity for everyone that’s connected” to the business, to providing “order to an increasingly busy and chaotic world.” They have shown even less interest in “inventing the future of play,” to connecting “people to what’s important in their lives through friendly, reliable, and low-cost” service, or “to inspire and nurture the human spirit  – one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time.” If Jewish Business ethicists notice this kind of rhetoric at all, the attitude is more one of suspicion than curiosity. The effort employees put into their respective jobs is not justified in terms of meaningful work. It is more likely that it is justified in terms of the goals of the business – in the case of business managers this is to produce the most wealth for the owners of the business at the least cost – and do not require any external justification. As Rabbi Walter Wurzburger (1999), an outstanding twentieth century Jewish philosopher and ethicist, has noted, “from a Jewish point of view, the pursuit of economic self-interest—the linchpin of the capitalistic system—is perfectly legitimate” (p. 27). Traditional Jewish Business ethicists are happy to define business in terms of the maximization of business profits. They distinguish themselves from Milton

70

M. Pava

Friedman and his neo-liberal followers, however, in two important ways. First, Jewish Business ethicists add the additional external constraint that businesses must limit their profit maximization by working within tenets of Jewish Law. And, second, through the observance of Jewish Law in the domain of business, the status of economic activity can be raised up beyond its merely mundane standing. Or, in other words, economic activity can be potentially sanctified or made holy to the extent that it is carried out within the appropriate and well-marked boundaries of Jewish Law. To quote Tamari again: Earning and keeping of economic assets is considered by Judaism as legitimate, permissible and beneficial, yet restricted and sanctified by the observance of God's revealed Commandments.

Thinking of Jewish Business Ethics as identical to Jewish Business Law and restricting the real meaning of economic activity to the sacred observance of God’s commandments, works relatively well in a neo-liberal society that sees no meaning inherent in economic activity other than the efficient production of wealth. Things get more complicated, however, when we move to next stage capitalism which attempts to justify business in terms of wealth and a host of other values including human meaning. From Tamari’s perspective, it is not at all clear what the pursuit of meaning in organizations could even mean beyond the unique and sacred meaning of obeying God’s commandments. There is simply no language and no vocabulary in Jewish Business Ethics, as it has traditionally been practiced, to allow it to participate constructively in the many conversations and issues raised by next stage capitalism. If next stage businesses are not violating explicit Jewish Laws, traditional Jewish Business Ethics remains mute. I suggest in this chapter that for Jewish Business Ethics to participate fully in the emergence of Conscious Capitalism in all its varied forms, it will need to evolve in several different dimensions. Most crucially, a broadened conception of Jewish Business Ethics will not only have to accept the legitimacy of business as a stand-­ alone practice, but it will need to learn how to consciously use the Jewish tradition and Jewish values to help construct meaning-based organizations, where meaning is understood to require more than the efficient creation of wealth but far less than the sacred meaning associated with the fulfillment of God’s Laws. From this perspective, Jewish Business Ethics will need to resemble Jewish Art far more than Jewish Law.

5.3.1 Towards a Constructivist Jewish Business Ethics But, one may ask, what is it to build truly? Is it to intuit some platonic reality, an image in God’s mind, and to materialize it in gold, linen, and wood, exactly according to the model? Is there an ideal form that, as consummate craftsman, Bezalel simply knows, before and beyond words? Or is his intuition, as we have suggested, free to create entirely new combinations of elements, to think new thoughts whose fitness for God’s presence is manifested not in the exactness of the replica but in the intensity of the vision? (Aviva Zornberg 2001, p. 478, on the Bezalel building the Tabernacle in the wilderness)

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

71

Is there an appropriate way of understanding the pursuit of meaning in business through Jewish lenses that is something more than working in order to satisfy basic human needs, but something far less than the holiness experienced in obeying God’s explicit commandments? For constructivist, the answer resides in one’s ability to identify Judaism’s most significant values and to select and to use those values to help co-create, along with others working in other religious or philosophic traditions, business organizations that seek to promote the satisfaction of the highest level human needs including dignity, integrity, beauty, kindness, community, joy, spontaneity and play, creativity, love, and social purpose. This task does not ask one to violate Jewish Law, but it does suggest that one of the purposes of Jewish Law may be to help create a society where kindness, joy, spontaneity, and love are likely to thrive not just in our personal lives but in our organizational lives, as well. This is a perspective where one contributes in good faith to a broader dialogue on business ethics, one that includes various and contradictory voices, where the point is to consider and reveal your own religious values and to work out together with others how best to blend the disparate views. Unlike Jewish Law, where one judges business as an authoritative umpire with the rulebook in hand before he or she even arrives on the scene, here one is a part of an ongoing give and take, speaking as a business insider, searching for good enough and practical solutions. Solutions that work in the real world. This means that one must learn how to listen more carefully to others and to figure out how best to voice one’s own beliefs in a way that is honest, confident, and respectful of others. One must be prepared to compromise, even when it comes to deeply felt religious values. Pluralism is not a second-best aspiration here, but pluralism, and respect for others is an ideal to be actively pursued. Constructivists who participate in such public or quasi-public dialogues make an assumption about tradition and how it works that needs to be made explicit, although it rarely is. Constructivists assume that Jewish values have a modular quality. Values can be plucked from their original context, combined with other values, and used to co-construct, with others, something quite new and different. And, further, this can be done in such a way that the original values retain enough of their original power and meaning to positively contribute to the purely secular task of building more humanistic organizations. Values that when used and talked about from within the tradition as sacred parts of an intricate tapestry of holy and ancient meanings, ones that continue to provide a deep and satisfying sense of the transcendent, eternal, and sublime quality of life when experienced from inside of the tradition, are treated simultaneously as flexible tools to be used in constructive, limited, and imminent ways to build finite but humanely-meaningful organizational structures. The conceit is that all of this can be done in such a way that the tradition itself is not harmed in the least and that one understands that the traditional values when used and spoken about in a secular context are not really identical to the original traditional values at all but are only like these traditional values in some important ways. For example, the desire for kindness in business may for some Jewish business leaders derive directly from their understanding of the Jewish tradition and from their traditional education and

72

M. Pava

upbringing. Nevertheless, whatever kindness they generate at work is not exactly what kindness means to religious purists, but the hope is that such kindness is a good enough likeness. Traditionalists, critical of a constructivist approach, are deeply skeptical about both the claim that this can be done with no harm to the tradition and that treating Jewish values as modular is really something positive at all. From this perspective: 1-Jewish Business Ethics is identical to Jewish Law (recall Tamari’s rejection of the category of the ethical), 2-business is a necessary and legitimate activity, but it is not really meaningful in its own terms, beyond the material wealth that it creates, in a way that really matters. Religion possesses a monopoly on the meaningful. And, 3- business activity can be raised to the level of the sacred when it is conducted within the set boundaries of Jewish Law, in exactly the same way that other mundane activities like eating bread with friends and drinking a cup of wine on Friday nights are sanctified when consciously carried out as part of a much larger divine plan. Constructivists counter that the risk of using Jewish values in a public setting in a way that damages the Jewish tradition is quite low, given its ancient lineage, sacred status, and extreme durability over time. And, further, for constructivists, participating in the construction of next stage businesses is experienced as a compelling, meaningful, and worthwhile project in strictly human terms, independent of any sacred quality that it may possess. Using Jewish values to broaden, energize, and enhance, the potential human meaning inside business organizations is the best and only way for Jewish Business ethicists to uniquely contribute to the project of next stage capitalism. But this does imply that religion relaxes is traditional monopoly on meaning. Although there can be no formula, there are many and varied ways of using Jewish values and concepts to help build better organizations. First, and perhaps most importantly, one can use the tradition to invent better metaphors for understanding the underlying contours of next stage business corporations than today’s dominant and mainstream metaphors, which seem more appropriate for old style capitalists. This will be explored in the next section. Second, through an examination of the tradition, one can identify several Jewish values as potential candidates appropriate for next stage capitalism. These values include Sabbath Consciousness and kindness, among many others, and will be discussed in a later section. And, finally, a constructive approach to Jewish Business Ethics necessarily prods us to raise new questions about the connection or lack of connection between the sacred and the profane. Specifically, what is the relationship between the holy, as it is understood in purely religious terms, and what we might call stand-alone human meaning, merely informed by religious values, as it is understood in today’s emerging businesses? This, too, will be discussed below.

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

73

5.3.2 A Better Metaphor: Business Is More Like a Covenant Than a Family George Lakoff is a philosopher and cognitive scientist who has studied the relationship between social views and their underlying metaphors for many years. According to Lakoff, the dominant metaphor for thinking about society is that society is like a family. Conservatives and their neo-liberal followers compare society to a family with a “strict father,” while progressives and today’s social democrats use what he calls the “nurturant parent” model. It is worth comparing these two ways of thinking before I suggest an alternative model based on the Jewish tradition. According to Lakoff, the strict father metaphor is based on the following set of assumptions: The world is a dangerous place, and it always will be, because there is evil out there in the world. The world is also difficult because it is competitive. There will always be winners and losers. There is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. Children are born bad, in the sense that they just want to do what feels good, not what is right. Therefore, they have to be made good. (Lakoff 2014)

Children are made good, according to this view, through obedience and external discipline, which eventually, if parents carefully follow through, allows the child to internalize what is right and what is wrong. And, it is precisely this behaviorally-­ induced internal discipline that allows one to prosper in terms of wealth over the long run, as long as one is pursuing their own self-interest, especially in free market capitalism. From this perspective, the worst enemy is the do-gooder who will eventually “screw up the system.” Progressives and social democrats also see the world through the metaphor of a family, but for the progressives the ideal family is very different. According to the nurturant parent worldview: Both parents are equally responsible for raising the children. The assumption is that children are born good and can be made better. The world can be made a better place, and our job is to work on that. The parents’ job is to nurture their children and to raise their children to be nurturers of others (2014).

The three key values in this model are empathy, responsibility, and a commitment to do your best for “your community, your country, and the world.” Among other implications of this metaphor of the nurturant parent, is that their progressive politics tends to focus on things like environmental protection, worker protection, and consumer protection. And, this is often associated with a socioeconomic progressive agenda. From this point of view “everything is a matter of money and class and that all solutions are ultimately economic and social class solutions” (2014). I suggest here that while Lakoff is certainly correct that social, political, and economic worldviews are dramatically influenced by conscious or unconscious metaphors, that neither of these two family-based metaphors help very much when it comes to better understand next stage capitalism, which is an attempt to

74

M. Pava

consciously move beyond both neo-liberal and socially democratic political and economic worldviews. I believe that Lakoff is right in emphasizing the pervasive power of metaphor and because of this power one needs to carefully identify, examine and perhaps even replace their guiding metaphor, to the extent that this is possible. Otherwise, one is being led around by quite opaque reasons. Uncovering the power of metaphor is a huge step forward in beginning to understand ourselves and to recognize why it is that act as we do. But next stage capitalism sits uneasily with either the strict or the nurturant parent models. I suggest here that for those looking for guidance with Conscious Capitalism that business is more usefully thought of, from the perspective of next stage capitalism, as more like a biblical covenant (in Hebrew brit) than a family. At least, it is worth considering a new metaphor and its possibilities. Daniel Elazar describes a covenant or brit as follows: The idea of covenant is perhaps the most daring in the Bible and one of the most daring in all of human history. The idea of covenant is that God, the omnipotent and omniscient, enters into a partnership with humans for the conduct of affairs on earth in this world. A covenant requires that partners to it be roughly equal or at least equal with regard to the task at hand for which the covenant is made. Thus God not only makes space for humans to exist, but gives them a certain equality in matters of this world in a situation where otherwise equality is unthinkable. (n.d.)

In an earlier book, I argued that the Jewish concept of covenant can be borrowed from the Jewish tradition and used in business as a model way of thinking about contemporary organizations. For this purpose, I defined covenant in secular and pragmatic terms as: A voluntary agreement among independent but equal agents to create a “shared community.” The primary purpose of the agreement is to consciously provide a stable social location for the interpretation of life’s meanings in order to help foster human growth, development, and the satisfaction of legitimate human needs. (2003, p. 2)

Although a full discussion of the covenant metaphor is beyond the scope of this chapter, several points should be emphasized. First, one could argue that the whole idea of covenant is first introduced in the Bible as a way of replacing or moving beyond the metaphor of family. Until the revelation at Sinai and the ensuing covenant between God and his people, the Israelites were more like a big and ragtag family than a nation, and they presumably thought of themselves in this way, as well. It is at the moment of choosing to accept willingly the covenant, and all of its implications, that the children of Israel began their long and transformative march beyond family towards nationhood. Second, the definition is meant to be open-­ ended, long-term in nature, and respectful of both human integrity and equality. And, while families are to some degree open-ended, they are permanent rather than long-term in nature, and equality is rarely a value at all. Finally, and most importantly, covenants are about the central importance of agents coming together, consciously and with intention, to construct shared meanings and higher purposes. And, note that the satisfaction of legitimate human needs only comes after the interpretation and as a result of the establishment of covenantal meaning. This, I am

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

75

suggesting here, is a more fruitful way of thinking about next stage capitalism’s conception of business. For a practical example of an organization built upon something like the covenant model (see their Mission Statement below) consider the unlikely case of Yosef Abramowitz and Energiya Global. Abramowitz, a former activist for the Soviet Jewry movement in the 1980s and a Jewish family educator in the 1990s, moved to Israel from the United States in 2006, bringing his family with him. Before he even had a chance to sit down and write his long-planned book, Abramowitz was baffled by the lack of solar energy in Israel and almost immediately began looking for a solution. What seemed obvious to Abramowitz was met with skepticism by his new Israeli neighbors. “Israelis saw me as this naïve American kibbutznik coming up against Israeli politics and bureaucracy,” he says. “They told me I’d never win. As soon as you say, ‘You’ll never win,’ to an old Soviet Jewry activist, it triggers that idealistic gland buried deep within the psyche. I said to myself that if we can get a Hebrew teacher out of solitary confinement in Siberia, we can change a couple of laws in our country.” Despite the governmental obstacles that Abramowitz encountered, his natural optimism kept him focused and buoyed. (Bolton-­ Fasman 2016)

Within the first week in Israel, Abramowitz and two partners had formed the Arava Power Company with the goal of creating a new industry in Israel. Abramowitz has been successful beyond his own most optimistic dreams. The company, now called Energiya Global, built its first solar field in Israel in 2011 and has not looked back since then. The Mission Statement reads as follows: We like to describe ourselves as a "for-profit company with a non-profit soul". We are driven by our mission of bringing clean renewable energy to 50 million people worldwide by 2020. By succeeding in this goal we will build a very profitable company, but we will also help lift millions of people in the world’s poorest countries out of poverty, reduce carbon emissions and place Israel and the Jewish People at the forefront of addressing one of the world’s biggest challenges. All of these matter to us and we see them as interconnected. (downloaded on July 1st, 2019 from https://energiyaglobal.com/about/.)

As the Mission Statement suggests this company is not in the business of maximizing profits for its owners but it is driven by the higher purposes of bringing energy to people with no access to affordable power, lifting millions of people out of poverty, and doing so in a sustainable way. This company is not constituted by its brick and mortar physical assets or its many and varied intangible assets, nor is it at all like a family – strict or nurturant, but at the deepest level the company is best imagined as a voluntary agreement among partners concerning its shared meanings and purposes in order to meet the legitimate human needs of the least well-off members of the global community. In 2014 Energiya Global completed the first utility-scale solar field in eastern Sub-Saharan Africa and is today poised for further growth. Energiya Global is certainly a good example of an experiment-in-living that alters our pre-conceptions about the limits of capitalism. It is also a good example of what one can potentially create when one imagines business as a shared community, interpreting life’s

76

M. Pava

meanings, in order to satisfy legitimate human needs, instead of using more familiar metaphors like Lakoff’s families or hierarchical and top-down metaphors like business as war or the corporation as a sports team. Lakoff was correct in pointing out that all of us are enmeshed in metaphors of our own devising, he was wrong in thinking that he had identified the best or the only ones.

5.3.3 Bringing the Value of Hesed or Kindness into Business: The Case of Aaron Feuerstein Perhaps the best and most famous example of the constructive approach to Jewish business ethics is provided by the famous case of Aaron Feuerstein and his decision to rebuild his Polartec factory in Massachusetts and to continue paying his idle workers after a devastating fire destroyed most of his production facilities. One way of telling this story is to frame the case as a defining moment for Aaron Feuerstein and Malden Mills. Starkly put, Feuerstein seized an opportunity to promote and instantiate the Jewish value of hesed, usually translated as kindness, into business. He cared deeply about his employees and he was fully prepared to undergo the Herculean and maybe even Sisyphean task of keeping employees on the payroll and rebuilding his mill in Massachusetts, in spite of the risk of failure. He did so despite the fact that he was acting outside of the confines of a traditional community but in the context of a modern, pluralistic, and purposive organization (for an alternative interpretation of this case, see Badaracco 2016, Chap. 2). At age 70, he put aside the tenets of the rational model of decision-making, the most potent symbol of the modern purposive organization, not out of emotional immaturity, a lack of professional managerial skills, or ignorance, but he ignored the rational model in favor of a commitment to broadening the set of legitimate business values, including in this case especially kindness. Aaron Feuerstein quickly intuited that a person like him in a situation like this prioritizes the ancient and traditional value of hesed or kindness first and looks for strategic ways to implement his decision only afterwards. To Feuerstein, in this moment, rationality would have been a settling. From the perspective of this telling of the story, what is important to explore is not why Malden Mills eventually went bankrupt, but what is important is to carefully investigate Aaron Feuerstein’s motivation and stubborn effort to promote kindness in business. And, to accomplish this task, one must grasp more fully what kindness entails and what it may have meant to Aaron Feuerstein in the moment of crisis, immediately following the fire. There is no reason to assume that Feuerstein acted on the basis of an existing moral responsibility to keep paying his employees, nor is there a need to assume a shared sense of corporate social responsibility. Had Feuerstein consulted either a business ethics professor or his local rabbi, it is highly unlikely that either of them would have told him that he must pay idle workers and that he must rebuild in Massachusetts. Thinking of hesed or kindness as a burdensome constraint, Jewish, legal or even moral, entirely misses the point of what kindness is, from a Jewish point of view.

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

77

Feuerstein continues to pay his workers as a voluntary and expressive act of kindness. It is a going beyond the letter of the law. In continuing to pay his employees and to rebuild his factory in Massachusetts, he is acting out of a compassionate and genuine interest and concern for the plight of his employees as partners in the business and as fellow human beings. He recognizes that he is not a fully independent agent, but he and his employees are interdependent members of a covenantal organization. Simply put, he cares about what happens to them and surrenders to this shared concern, with a mature sense of fulfillment and joy. Kindness or hesed from this perspective is an exchange but it is not a market-based exchange. In fact, it is more like a gift, given freely, perhaps with the hope of someday seeing it reciprocated, but this cannot be its immediate motivation. I believe that part of Feuerstein’s genius was his intuitive and immediate recognition that kindness is the glue that keeps covenants together. Feuerstein’s most important message, from my perspective is that if we are to succeed in developing a Conscious Capitalism, it is the value of kindness that will be most necessary. Feuerstein knew instinctively what Daniel Elazar has made explicit: To prevent brit [covenant] from turning into contract, the Bible adds hesed [kindness] as covenantal dynamics. There is no true English equivalent for the Hebrew word hesed. It involves interpretation of the covenant in such a way that it goes beyond narrow construction to a liberal construction of its provisions, going beyond the letter of the law. The talmudic aphorism is lifnim meshurat hadin din hu (going beyond the letter of the law is the law). That is acting b'hassidut [with kindness] is the proper way to implement the brit [covenant]. (no date)

To his critics, Feuerstein’s “misplaced kindness” inevitably led to the company’s eventual bankruptcy years later. But when Aaron Feuerstein was asked directly, if given the chance, would he do it again? He says yes. Feuerstein understands that his personal financial success or even his control over the company is much less important than his serving as a role model to the rest of us. If capitalism is to survive, it may be in spite of its loudest supporters who keep insisting on the primacy of profit maximization. Perhaps the single biggest distinction between old style and next stage capitalism is the former’s insistence that what keeps organizations together is individual self-interest and in the latter it is kindness. As Feuerstein no doubt knew from his own studies of the Pirkei Avot (Chapters of the Fathers), Rabbi Tarfon said, “It is not incumbent upon you to finish the task. Yet, you are not free to desist from it, either.” In this case, the critical task, is to continue experimenting on how best to bring more kindness into business.

5.3.4 Sabbath Consciousness as an Ethical Accomplishment Observing the Sabbath makes no knowledge claims other than the need to familiarize yourself with the traditional (and emerging) practices associated with it in the same way that playing baseball makes no knowledge claims other than knowing its rules. To observe the Sabbath appropriately, one needs a bottle of wine, two loaves

78

M. Pava

of special bread, a festive meal, a supportive community, family, good friends, shared songs and stories, and, the ability to develop a regular habit of finding time to put aside the world of work, competition, control, and accomplishment, in favor of embracing a parallel world of rest, contemplation, bodily pleasures, joy, playfulness, acceptance, gratitude, wonder, and, on occasion, radical amazement, once every seven days. All the while, we recognize that this parallel world is really the exact same world that we live in during the remaining six days of the week. The accomplishment of achieving a “Sabbath Consciousness” is no easy task and requires practice, expert advice, and experimentation. This is true in a world dazzled by the promises of progress, science, 24/7 online technology, and global communications. It is especially difficult to achieve in the face of continuous competition for power and survival and the growing fears of the contemporary world. Rabbi David Hartman, the late Israeli rabbi and social advocate, elaborates on the Jewish Sabbath and its implications for contemporary life. He writes: Halakhah [Jewish law] prohibits my plucking a flower from my garden or doing with it as I please [on the Sabbath]. At sunset the flower becomes a “thou” with a right to existence irrespective of its instrumental value for me. I stand silently before nature as before a fellow creature and not as before an object of my control. (1999, p. 78)

Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, one the greatest rabbis of the last century, a teacher and poet, provides one of the single best articulations of a Sabbath Consciousness: He writes: To gain control of the world of space is certainly one of our tasks. The danger begins when in gaining power in the realm of space we forfeit all aspirations in the realm of time. There is a realm of time where the goal is not to have but to be, not to own but to give, not to control but to share, not to subdue but to be in accord. Life goes wrong when the control of space, the acquisition of things of space, becomes our sole concern. (1951, p. 3)

Achieving a Sabbath Consciousness is certainly a religious accomplishment of the highest order, according to Hartman and to Heschel. My point here, however, is that it is also an ethical accomplishment available to everyone regardless of one’s religious beliefs and independent of one’s theology. I suggest that attaining a Sabbath Consciousness and then allowing it to spill over into the remaining six days of the week in order to intermingle with our default Work Consciousness will serve to heighten our ethical sensitivities both at home and at work. There is a way to be in the world and to turn off the ubiquitous utilitarian mind-set in favor of acceptance, gratitude, wonder, and, radical amazement. This is the gift of the Sabbath. Even just the memory of the Sabbath Consciousness gives you the license and the ability to pause to ask yourself new questions, one’s that cannot even be formulated through a utilitarian mind-set: Is this really what you want to do with the rest of your life? How much of your real self are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of your job? How do your actions affect those that you love? How can you continue to contribute to a company whose whole purpose is to creates apps that treat people like things to be manipulated and not as a “thou” with a right to existence irrespective of you? Has the acquisition of the things of space become your sole concern?

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

79

And, finally, how can you join with others to co-create a business with higher purposes and infused with values? Certainly not everyone hears God’s commandment not to pluck a flower on the Sabbath. In proposing a Sabbath Consciousness as a way of heightening the meaning of our work-lives, one worth reinvigorating in today’s world, I assume very little about Jewish theology and beliefs. What I do suggest, however, is that nearly everyone can hear the echo of Rabbi Heschel’s claim that there is an important aspect of life where the goal is “not to control but to share, not to subdue but to be in accord.” There is a Jewish song that celebrates the Sabbath by suggesting that the Sabbath experience gives one a tiny taste of the world to come. I prefer to think that the Sabbath is more more about heightening the experience of this world than the next, including the world of work.

5.4 Is There Human Meaning Independent of the Sacred? Traditionally, meaning is a uniquely religious or sacred phenomenon whose boundaries must be protected from secular intrusion. If there is any real meaning in business, it is only as a byproduct of conducting business within the rules of Jewish Law, by faithfully obeying God’s commandments to the letter, and no more. A major goal of this chapter has been to question this claim and to offer an alternative perspective, one where religion can endorse the legitimacy of and even participate in the construction of human meaning in business. For constructivists, one continues to experience the transcendent and holy quality of one’s private religious practices in the same way as do the traditionalists, but now such sacred experiences also serve as the prototype for human meaning. Purely human practices, including wealth creation in all its varieties may provide a secular, temporary, this-worldly, and finite analogue, a taste of something similar enough to the sacred to call it humanly meaningful, without causing undue confusion. The ability to instantiate one’s values, to give at least temporary reality to one’s deepest hopes through institutionalizing those values in businesses designed with “higher” purposes in mind, is an experience that can remind one of more profound and transcendent experiences. Using religious vocabulary like covenant, hesed, and Sabbath Consciousness metaphorically to enhance the significance of human interactions is a pragmatically useful activity. As long as one continues to remember that business covenants are only like religious ones, that kindness in business is not precisely what Jewish kindness expects in purely religious contexts, and as long as one knows that Sabbath Consciousness is a mere reflection of the experience of observing the traditional rules of the Sabbath, purposefully choosing to secularize such concepts and to put them to work in business will not harm them at all and may, in turn, actually deepen one’s religious appreciation for them in the long run. Just as the Song of Songs, a collection of secular poems celebrating the love between a woman and man, when interpreted

80

M. Pava

appropriately, allowed the Talmudic Rabbis to deepen and re-energize their sacred relationship to God by viewing it like the love between a woman and a man, so too can an enhanced version of business deepen our relationship to the sacred. If mundane human relationships improve with the use of religious vocabulary, it is reasonable to expect that our relationship to the holy can be deepened, as well. And, further, as our relationship to the holy is deepened, mundane human relationships can become even more meaningful. A virtuous circle is created. It is important to be as clear as possible here. There remains an infinite gap between the holy and the profane, between God’s meaning and ours. But as the profane gains in human meaning, it becomes easier to imagine a more profound relationship to the holy, at least this is the aspiration articulated in this chapter and it is an idea worth testing through real world experiments-in-living. Finally, for the constructivists, the need to search for meaning in organizations may be so great, their faith in the polysemic character of Jewish values so firm, and their belief in the strength and integrity of Torah so stable that constructivism is experienced as a natural and obvious next stage in the development of their Jewish identity rather than seeing it as a risky choice, at all.

5.5 Conclusion The most important construction project in the Five Books of Moses is the building of the Tabernacle or the Mishkan that was to be a dwelling place for God on Earth. Anyone familiar with the Pentateuch will know that God dictated to Moses precise and intricate instructions concerning its exact dimensions. Even so, the ancient Rabbis intuited that there was a deep paradox here. How can mere mortals build a physical structure with human materials, even with God’s explicit directions and blessings, that will ultimately contain God, so to speak, given the infinite gap between the sacred and the profane? Is it even possible for God, even a God assumed to be all-powerful, to communicate to Moses the holy recipe for producing a finite and concrete version of the Infinite? The following Rabbinic Midrash attempts to grapple, if not finally answer this curious and seemingly impossible question. It is worth quoting in its entirety: When the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded Moses, “Make Me a Mishkan,” he [Moses] should have just put up four poles and spread out the Mishkan over them! We must therefore infer that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Moses on high red fire, green fire, black fire, and white fire, and said to him: “Set it up according to the manner of it that you were shown on the mountain.” (26:30) R. Berechyah in the name of R. Bezalah compared this to a king who, possessing an exquisite robe worked in precious stones, said to a member of his household, “Make me another like it!” The latter answered, “My lord the king! Am I capable of making one like that?” The king replied, “I remain in my glory and you use your materials!” In the same way, Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He, “O God, am I capable of making such things?” God answered him, “Do it in the manner I am showing

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

81

you …”—with blue, with purple, with scarlet, and with fine linen. “If,” said the Holy One, blessed be He, to Moses, “you will make in the world below what is in the world above, I shall leave my counselors on high. I will descend and condense My Presence among them below.” (Bamidbar Rabbah 12:10 as quoted by Zornberg 2001, p.478-479.)

According to the Rabbis, when God commanded Moses to make Him a Mishkan, Moses hesitated just for a moment, reflecting his uncertainty about how to proceed. “…he [Moses] should have just put up four poles and spread out the Mishkan over them!” But he didn’t. From Moses’s slight wavering the Rabbis infer that God must have provided Moses with a fiery model showing him what He wanted. As the Midrash puts it, He “showed Moses on high red fire, green fire, black fire, and white fire…” and told him to make a human version just like this one, as if Moses somehow already possessed these holy and colorful fires. The Midrash then goes on to compare what God is asking Moses to do to a human king asking a member of his entourage to make him “an exquisite robe worked in precious stones…” But the workman, like Moses, is confused. How can he reproduce the exquisite robe without the precious stones, when it is precisely the precious stones that make the robe exquisite in the first place? In the parable, the king replies somewhat gnomically, “I remain in my glory and you use your materials!” In the Midrash, God tells Moses to use his own colorful human materials, blue, purple, and scarlet linen, and to build a replica, as best he can. Further, God promises Moses, just as gnomically as the king in the parable, that if he does a good enough job with his colorful linen, God will condense His Presence and dwell among His people. Perhaps the question that the Midrash raises above about how to bridge the infinite gap between God and Man is ultimately better than the answer that it finally supplies. Nevertheless, I choose, in this chapter on broadening the scope of Jewish Business Ethics in response to the emergence of Conscious Capitalism, to read the advice of the king as a prescription for humans to construct their own meaning using their own materials, having briefly glimpsed, however dimly, God’s sacred meaning. The Mishkans that we build, for whatever purposes we build them, religious or secular, are at their best meaningful in exclusively human terms, and any holiness that they may or may not possess is entirely for God to determine. Next stage capitalism is in its infancy and deciding among it, neo-liberalism, or social democracy is not a question of distinguishing between right and wrong in any kind of conventional sense nor is it a question that one will answer with more or better data. It is important, no doubt, to keep track of how companies managed under the principles of Conscious Capitalism perform on the stock market over time, but if this is really all that we care about, then we have completely missed the historic opportunity that next stage capitalism is offering. We have reached a hinge point in time where we are being asked to pick and choose among those values that are most central to us, about those values we wish to use to define ourselves in the coming years and decades, and the kinds of

82

M. Pava

institutions and values we desire to pass on to the generations that are and will be replacing us, soon enough. This is a window that is open now. But, as Andre Neher has taught us: The future is ambiguous like silence. It can offer all, and surrender itself in successive waves, each one of which, following the one before, leads a little further on the path of eternity. But it can also rise to the surface of life like a bubble of soap, bursting at the very instant when the sun’s rays cross it with their sparkling fires. (As quoted in Zornberg 2009, p. 130)

Next stage capitalism may not be the path to eternity that some of its most passionate backers want us to believe, but it doesn’t have to be a bursting bubble either. We are living in an epoch where it appears to us that there are still meaningful choices to be made and significant commitments to be undertaken. This chapter has suggested that world religions and spiritualities, in the example at hand Judaism, interpreted appropriately, may have a major part to play in building a good enough future in work, business and otherwise, but only if that is what we really desire.

References Akerlof, George, and Robert Shiller. 2015. Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulatin and Deception. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Badaracco, Joseph. 1997. Defining Moments: When Managers Must Choose Between Right and Right. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. ———. 2013. The Good Struggle: Responsible Leadership in an Unforgiving World. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. ———. 2016. Managing in the Gray: Five Timeless Questins for Resolving Your Toughest Problems at Work. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Banks, Ken. 2016. Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation: International Case Studies. London: Kogan Page Ltd. Benioff, Mark. 2019. The Trailblazer: The Power of Business as the Greatest Platform for Change. New York: Random House. Bolton-Fasman, Judy. 2016. Let the Sun Shine: Solar Energy Entrepreneur Yosef Abramowitz. Jewish Boston. Elazar, Daniel. n.d. HaBrit V’HaHesed: Foundations of the Jewish System. jcpa.org. Accessed 29 July 2020. Freeman, R.  Edward. 2010. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Friedman, Milton. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. Friedman, Hershey H. 2017. The Impact of Jewish Values on Marketing and Business Practices. aish-­international.com. Accessed 13 Mar 2020. Hartman, David. 1999. A Heart of Many Rooms: Celebrating the Many Voices with Judaism. Woodstock: Jewish Lights Publishing. Heath, Chip, and Dan Heath. 2017. The Power of Moments: Why Certain Experiences Have Extraordinary Impact. New York: Simon and Schuster. Heschel, Abraham Joshua. 1951. Sabbath: Its Meaning for Modern Man. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Honeyman, Ryan, and Tiffany Jana. 2019. The B Corp Handbook. 2nd ed. Oakland: Berrett-­ Koehler Publishers, Inc.

5  The Emergence of Next Stage Capitalism and the Need for a Broadened Conception…

83

Jones, Paul Tudor. 2020, June 10. Paul Tudor Jones Shares His Economic, Responsible Investing Views at JUST Capital. Downloaded from cnbc.com. Kaplan, Robert S., and David P. Norton. 1996. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Kegan, Robert, and Lisa Lahey. 2016. An Everyone Culture: Becoming a Deliberately Developmental Organization. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Kobayashi-Solomon. 2020, May 28. Capitalism is Failing Us Just When We Need It Most. Forbes Magazine. Lakoff, George. 2014. The All New Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Chelsea Green Publishing. Lev, Baruch, and Feng Gu. 2016. The End of Accounting and the Path Forward for Investors and Managers. Hoboken: Wiley. Levine, Aaron. 1979. Free Enterprise and Jewish Law: Aspects of Jewish Business Ethics. Jersey City: Ktav Publishing. ———. 1987. Economics and Jewish Law: Halakhic Perspectives. Jersey City: Ktav Publishing. ———. 1993. Economic Public Policy and Jewish Law. Jersey City: Ktav Publishing. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. March, James. 1994. A Primer on Decision Making: How Decisions Happen. New York: Simon and Schuster. Martin, John D., J. William Petty, and James S. Wallace. 2009. Value Based Management with Corporate Social Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pava, Moses L. 1999. The Search for Meaning in Organizations. West Port: Quorum. ———. 2003. Leading with Meaning: Using Covenantal Leadership to Build a Better Organization. New York: Palgrave. Pava, Moses L., and Joshua Krausz. 2006. The Broadening Scope of Corporate Accountability: Some Unanswered Question. In Corporate Social Responsibility, ed. Jose Allouche, vol. 1, 141–153. Palgrave/Macmillan. Pirson, Michael. 2017. Humanistic Management: Protecting Dignity and Promoting Well-Being. In Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. New York: Taylor and Francis Group. Porritt, Jonathan. 2007. Capitalism as if the World Matters. London: Earthscan. Porter, Michael and Kramer, Mark R. 2011, January–February. Creating Shared Values. Harvard Business Review. Downloaded from hbr.org. Quinn, Robert, and Anjan Thakor. 2019. The Economics of Higher Purpose. Oakland: Berrett-­ Koehler Publishers, Inc. Reich, Robert. 2007. Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life. New York: Random House. Sacks, Jonathan. 2009. Morals: The One Thing Markets Do Not Make. http://rabbisacks.org/ morals-­the-­one-­thing-­markets-­do-­not-­make-­published-­in-­the-­times/. Accessed 1 July 2019. Schnall, David. 1999. The Employee as Corporate Stakeholder: Exploring the Relationship between Jewish Tradition and Contemporary Business Ethics. In Jewish Business Ethics: The Firm and Its Stakeholders, ed. Aaron Levine and Moses Pava, 27–44. Northvale: Jason Aronson Inc. Senge, Peter. 2006. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Random House. Smith, Adam. 2003. Wealth of Nations. New York: Bantam Dell. Tamari, Meir. 1995. The Challenge of Wealth: Jewish Perspective on Earning and Spending Money. Hoboken: Jason Aronson, Inc. ———. 1997. The Challenge of Wealth: “Jewish Business Ethics”. Business Ethics Quarterly 7 (2): 45–56. Weber, Max. 2003. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Economy Editions: Dover Publications.

84

M. Pava

Wilber, Ken. 2017. Trump and a Post-Truth World. Boulder: Shambhala. Wurzburger, Walter. 1999. Covenantal Morality in Business. In Jewish Business Ethics: The Firm and Its Stakeholders, ed. Aaron Levine and Moses Pava, 27–44. Northvale: Jason Aronson Inc. Zornberg, Aviva Gottlieb. 2001. The Particulars of Rapture: Reflections on Exodus. New York: Schocken Books. ———. 2009. The Murmuring Deep: Reflections on the Biblical Unconscious. New  York: Schocken Books. Moses Pava is the former Dean of the Sy Syms School of Business, the Alvin Einbender University Professor of Business Ethics, and Professor of Accounting at Yeshiva University (USA). He has numerous books including Business Ethics: A Jewish Perspective (Ktav, 1997); The Search for Meaning in Organizations (Praeger, 1999); Leading With Meaning (St. Martin’s Press, 2003); Jewish Ethics as Dialogue (Palgrave, 2009); and Jewish Ethics in a Post-Madoff World (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). He serves on the editorial board of Journal of Business Ethics and the Journal of Jewish Ethics.  

Chapter 6

Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions to the Search for a Moral Economic Vision Nadav S. Berman

6.1 Introduction: The Dialectics of Pragmatic Interestedness and Disinterestedness This chapter suggests the idea of pragmatic interestedness (henceforth: PI) as means for thinking on what may constitute conscious forms of capitalism as viable moral options, while shedding some light on why PI is often marginalized. This paper, however, does not presume to provide a new theory of capitalism,1 or a new perspective on Jewish approaches to economic policy. The human virtue of PI can be described as non-egoistic (but not self-sacrificial) inclination toward the promotion of personal and social flourishing. PI is often out of sight, since as Moses Pava (2009: 86–87) observes, pragmatism as general concept is frequently but misguidedly identified with sheer opportunism. For religious pragmatists (or

 I use here the terms “conscious capitalism” and “humane capitalism” interchangeably. On pragmatism and business ethics see the work of Sandra Rosenthal and Rogene Buchholz (2000), and the recent article by Matej Drašček et al. (2021). 1

I am grateful to the Editors, Moses L. Pava and Michel Dion, for the invitation to contribute this chapter, and especially to Prof. Pava for his instructive comments. For constructive feedback, I thank Alan L. Mittleman, Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, Timothy P. Jackson, James H. P. Lewis, Alon and Shalev, and the anonymous reviewers. Any mistake remaining is my own. Further thanks to Daniel Price, Librarian of the Shalom Hartman Institute of Jerusalem, for his kind help. Translations from the Hebrew are based on the Sefaria website, slightly modified; other translations from the Hebrew are my own (n.s.b.). Translations of New Testament verses are based on the New English Translation (NET) Bible. N. S. Berman (*) Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_6

85

86

N. S. Berman

pragmatist religionists), however, pragmatism is instructive for engaging holistically with complex problems. In the economic context, PI is a major (if implicit) theme of the capitalist economic ethos, most famously in Adam Smith’s philosophy. Smith opened his 1759 book Theory of Moral Sentiments with the following observation: How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or compassion, the emotion which we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are made to conceive it.2

Human beings, from such (proto-)pragmatist perspective, are rational and emotional creatures endowed with the capacity to care, and with interests that are not necessarily egoistic. PI means that having interests is basic to human nature, that interestedness is not necessarily negative  interestedness, and that interests are viewed as potentially positive, productive, and ultimately inescapable to human life. PI is in this regard akin to the basic intuitions of moral particularism. In the economic context, PI underlies the very idea of consent, and of consented transaction. Approving or disapproving a deal, a contract, or even the participation in religious covenants as such, are predicated on human volition.3 The philosophical anthropology which underlies PI views positively the openness to fellow human beings and to society at large, as well as the care for nature and animals.

6.1.1 Pragmatic Interestedness (PI) Versus Disinterestedness (DI) Pragmatic interestedness, which is proximal to the idea of meliorism in classical American pragmatism (hereafter: CAP),4 is non-trivial. Adam Smith (2002, 315) had typified three basic approaches to ethics: (i) governing human virtues and vices with propriety; (ii) pursuit of private interests with prudence; and (iii) praising disinterested benevolence. To Smith’s mind, “The great division of our affections is into the selfish and the benevolent” (ibid). Common to all these approaches is a contrast between the interests of the individual and of others. Western thinkers often assume a polarity of egoism and altruism as the default paradigm of human nature, and PI is thus frequently marginalized. Disinterestedness (DI) approaches commonly perceive the human creature as merely egoistic, whose initial interests do not accord morality in any substantive manner. This view typically dichotomizes

 Smith 2002: 11. For an assessment of his moral economy, see the discussion by Samuel Fleischacker (2004, chapters 3–5). 3  PI is also the basis of the idea of resentment: once a person’s expectation or interest fails, it makes sense to be disappointed. 4  On pragmatic meliorism see James 1974: 179–186. 2

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

87

between the individual (thus perceived as an egoistic ‘self’) and between her fellow humans, society, and nature, which are accordingly conceived as depriving the interests of the individual. Based on this dichotomy, a benevolent or pro-social action requires self-elimination or -sacrifice, or minimally self-indifference. As we often see in modern philosophy in thinkers such as Descartes and Pascal, the status of the individual is perceived as shaky and even worthless.5 As such, every profit or gain that individuals make is inevitably conceived as a exploitation: a worthless creature does not merit any reward.6 Based on that, moral disinterestedness is often taken in modernity as the ethical default (see Gaston 2005). The moral logic of DI is noble, and in modernity had its famous expression in Immanuel Kant.7 People often praise principled disinterested acts, yet from a consequentialist moral perspective this intentionality warrants nothing. Furthermore, as Moshe Halbertal claims, many horrific deeds of victimizing other persons, were conducted due to a principled disinterestedness.8 DI, as Adam Smith observed, is often not neutral as it presumes to be: “The great mob of mankind are […] most frequently the disinterested admirers and worshippers, of wealth and greatness.” (Smith 2002: 72). Based on pessimism concerning human nature, DI often assumes that there is no possibility for an ethic of the greater good and an intersection of moral worldly interests. DI thus  mandates that the interests of the individual vis-a-vis fellow humans should be suspended, while the interests of fellow humans should be prioritized. Whereas DI is predicated on a static and relatively gloomy conception of the human, PI appreciates the dynamic path. These rival approaches – PI and DI – have far reaching consequences for thinking about ethics and about ethical economy. Clearly, the idea of disinterestedness is found, to some degree, in every culture and tradition (including Jewish tradition, within which we shall consider PI below), but it seems that the appearance of DI in some intellectual schools is more profound. The remainder of the chapter will comprise of three sections. Section 6.2 will lay the axiological background and clarify why religious traditions at all matter for contemporary secularized societal discourses, and to business ethics in particular. It will do so by presenting the concept of agape and two of its influential modern  Consequently, as Erich Fromm had argued in his Escape from Freedom, many moderns tend to give up their individuality and surrender to the rule of the collective or to a self-deifying dictator. See Fromm 1941: 24–102. 6  On the political theological sources of the idea of merit, in the context of John Rawls’s theory vis-à-vis its Pelagian influences, see in Eric Nelson’s work (2019). Contra Augustine’s doctrine of the Original Sin, Pelagius contended that human beings do have substantial merit. Nelson proposes that Pelagianism inspired Rawls’s commitment to liberal egalitarianism. 7  Kant’s notion of aesthetic DI also characterized his ethical theory. The Kantian DI was rather extremized within twentieth century trajectories, such as the notion of absurdity in twentieth century Existentialism. Consider for instance Albert Camus’s books The Myth of Sisyphus and The Stranger. On Camus’s absurdity as prescriptive rather than descriptive, see the discussion by Avi Sagi (2002, 43–46). 8  In Halbertal’s words: “misguided self-transcendence is morally more problematic and lethal than a disproportionate attachment to self-interest” (Halbertal 2015: 78). 5

88

N. S. Berman

secularizations in Karl Marx and Peter Singer. The third section will demonstrate the role of pragmatic interestedness as it is found in early Jewish thought. The concluding section (Sect. 6.4) will reflect on how can the idea of PI contribute to the conception of conscious or humane capitalism.

6.2 Modern Secularizations of Agape and the Marginalization of Pragmatic Interestedness If conscious capitalism is predicated on these and other forms of pragmatic interestedness, then understanding how PI is marginalized by DI is significant. In this section we thus present the Christian concept of Agape or universal love, which emphasizes DI, and remark on two influential secularizations of agape.

6.2.1 Politics of Love and Its Discontents: “The Modern World Is Full of the Old Christian Virtues Gone Mad” Can human societies avoid interested-based (including economic) relations entirely, and predicate themselves solely on disinterested love? This, I believe, is a key question when coming to think about why markets and economic relations and transactions are so often condemned (on this hostility, see Mackey and Sisodia 2013). One can hardly understand the sources of the objections to financial interactions – not only to Capitalism – without considering the long religious career of disinterestedness and of the hate of money making. These objections were fueled in the modern era by the “spirit of suspicion” (see  Ricoeur 1970), which suspects motivations altogether. The prototypical alternative that DI sets in opposition to the imperfect reality of human interests (and to the legal attempt to handle them) is love. The quest for establishing a “politics of love” by eliminating instrumental social relations is longstanding. As David Nirenberg aptly observes, “Many who invoke love are optimistic about its powers”, but “If today love can seem as liberation from possession and exchange, it is because its ancient incest has been repressed” (Nirenberg 2008: 491, 492). Absent of a sustainable equilibrium between love, interests, and law, or between the abstract yearning for justice and between considering the concrete constrains and demands of human life and kinship, disinterested love threatens to foster injustice. This problem becomes more stressing as contemporary societies often ignore, as Nirenberg points out, their historical and traditional sources (from a pragmatist perspective, it should be noted, these sources do not dogmatically bind anyone to believe or do x, y, or z). Ignoring the complexity and richness of past religious

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

89

traditions makes the discussions about them less informed, and at times distorted.9 But the presumed remoteness of ideas does not prevent their actual impact. As Gilbert Keith Chesterton strikingly observed: The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and [inflict their] damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone. (Chesterton 1908: 38–39)

The modern project is full of good intentions, but it often ignores the ideational force of traditional virtues and vices as well as their fragile holistic textures. Paradoxically, as Chesterton observes, those are not necessarily the vices whose wandering in the modern atmosphere is most hazardous, but the virtues. When they wonder unrestricted in the modern world, most people are not aware – as Catholic Christianity often was10 – that these virtues have a history, that they have a religious context, and that they might be abused. And the more powerful an idea is, the more important it is to mediate it and to expose it to public reasoning.

6.2.2 Political Theology and Modern Secularizations of Agape Agape has, I believe, a tremendous relevance for the modern discourse of economy. Not recognizing the ongoing significance of agape in the present makes it harder to deliberate the role of PI. Let us define agape briefly. For Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle, philia denotes true love, which transcends eros or erotic love (Nussbaum 1986). The frequent translation of the Septuagint to the word love (A.H.Bh) in the Hebrew Bible, however, is agape. Parallel to the downgrading of legality in early Christianity, agape as love was transformed, and St. John’s conception is foundational: “The person who does not love (agapōn) does not know God, because God is love (agape [ἀγάπη])” (1 John 4:8).11 Agape is comprised of three principles: (i) God is love; (ii) true love does not discriminate; and accordingly, (iii) love is the principal religious virtue for humans to practice (see Nygren 1953, esp. 147). Agape was expressed implicitly in modernity in John Lennon’s famous 1967 song, performed by the Beatles: “All you need is love”. Agape is both theological and ethical concept. In simple words, agape  Recall, e.g., Richard Rorty’s notion of religion as a “conversation stopper” (Rorty 1994).  Thomas Aquinas, for instance, contended that self-love is vital for nourishing the love and care for others (Thomas Aquinas 2016: 92–94). On the Thomistic synergy between individual and society see Wohlman 2005, esp. 47–48. 11  Agape is clearly associated in Christianity with Jesus Christ: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). 9

10

90

N. S. Berman

strictly opposes any parochialism or privilege, and commands a total devotion to humanity as a whole, without any particular preference. Many traditional Christian authors, such as Origen of Alexandria, strive to mediate agape and eros, with the demands of maintaining societal interactions, sexual reproduction, and individual corporeal existence (Nygren 1953: 464–475). Modern scholars such as Martin C. D’Arcy, Paul Tillich, Gene Outka, Nicholas Wolterstorff, and Timothy P. Jackson have recognized the powerfulness and even explosiveness of agape, which mandates strict egalitarian regard, toward friends and foes alike, and at the same time challenges the notions of retribution and reciprocity (see Berman [forthcoming-a]). Those are precisely Christian scholars, then, who insist that agape should be moderated, especially when normative claims are at stake. Similarly to the dialectics in Judaism between mercy (ḥesed)12 and justice (din), agape must be balanced with normative and legal considerations.13 What happens when modernism rebels Christianity (think of Marx and Nietzsche) and gives rise to a disenchanted world? As Chesterton speculated, and contrastingly to the modernist eulogies of religions, traditional virtues and vices did not simply disappear, but remain intact. So, where did agape go in the secularized world? In today’s intellectual sphere, a productive way to think about such questions is through the discipline of political theology. This discipline is well recognized as vital for addressing questions of economic morality (see, e.g., the works of Max Weber [1950] and Adam Kotsko [2018]). It is widely acknowledged in political theology, following Carl Schmitt (see 2005: 36), that modern political concepts are secularized theological ones. In recent decades, various scholars discuss moral virtues, such as love and hope, against their religious backgrounds. Simon May, for instance, contends that  the modern obsession with disinterested love has its origin in the Christian Agape (May 2019: 11–31). This virtue will be explored here, vis-a-vis the phenomenon of PI and economic transactions. The basic challenge is that agape, when taken or comprehended in an isolated or exclusivist manner, does not leave a clear space or legitimacy for privileging anyone, including one’s spouse, family, children, friends,  and community. In fact, agape challenges and even denounces the very category of privilege and merit. From a plain anthropological and normative perspective, however, the demand for absolute impartiality seems problematic. At the same time, it is challenging to be critical toward the role of agape in the contemporary (so-called) “post-Christian” world, due to the very dialectics of secularization. It is, however, possible to address this complexity through the prism of post-­ secular theories (i.e., that of scholars such as Jürgen Habermas, Eliezer Schweid, José Casanova, and Philip Gorski). Post-secularism theories (see e.g. Casanova 1994), which overlap the discipline of Political Theology in many ways, are aware of the presence and potency of religious ideas in the modern world, but remain  Agape has a basis in the biblical idea of ḥesed, though it differs in that agape entails the active love of enemies. For elaboration see Berman (forthcoming-a). On the complications and genealogy of the term “Judaism” see Boyarin 2018. 13  On agape in the legal context, see Cochran and Calo (2017). 12

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

91

critical about the influence of their secularized forms.14 In the case of agape, the question is what its secularized forms are, and how do they impinge upon the ability to legitimate commercial transactions, humane capitalism, and PI more broadly.

6.2.3 Communism and Sentientism as Secularizations of Agape In this subsection I wish to propose a novel hypothesis, which has a significant relevance for the possibility of PI. I wish to sketch how the influential ideologies of both (i) Karl Marx’s Communism and (ii) Peter Singer’s ‘Sentientism’ appear to be – however in different ways – implicit secularizations of agape. The argument (which I will elaborate elsewhere) is formulated here in an introductory manner. 6.2.3.1 Communism as a Secularization of Agape The idea that Marxism or Communism is a secularization of Christian redemptive schemes is not new, as we learn from Alasdair MacIntyre (1968: 92).15 However, to my best knowledge, the concept of agape was not yet identified as the secularized ideational core of Communism. Communism originated by Marx as a rebellion against economic injustice, and against the way in which religious otherworldliness maintained the depression of the poor. Marx stressed the value of equal regard to all human beings, regardless of kinship, nationality, or collective affiliation.16 This type of egalitarianism, it should be stressed, goes several steps beyond the plain notion of equal regard as anti-­ discrimination. Marxism implies an active rejection of one’s personal affiliations and belongings to family, congregation, or nation. In this sense, Communism accords with agape as equal love (obviously, without the religious metaphysics of  agape).17 Interests obviously have a role in the Marxist critique of power

 This sensitivity is supported by the following observation by Israel J. Yuval (2010: 69): “cultural identities never develop wholly internally, but through a dialogical process in which one culture consciously separates itself from another culture to which it is sufficiently close”. 15  MacIntyre claims that both Christianity and Marxism recognize human fallenness but are less successful in paving the road for redemption. However, Macintyre’s analysis of Marx does not with agape. 16  For instance: “Let us finally imagine, for a change, an association of free men, working with the means of production held in common, and expending their many different forms of labour-power in full self-awareness as one single social labour force” (Marx 1977: 171). 17  Strikingly, both (John) Lennon and (Vladimir) Lenin aimed – declaratively, at least – to horizontalize human commitments while erasing any presumed parochialism. 14

92

N. S. Berman

structures, and in this sense overlaps PI.18 But the strict Marxist universalism and its either-or scheme (victims vs. victimizers) devaluates particular spheres of belonging, and this is where PI is superseded. The vast scholarly research on Marxism recognizes its indebtedness to St. Paul and to the famous verse in Galatians 3:28, which presumes to erase all human differences,19 but I am not aware of a scholarly connection between Marxism and agape. Communism applied the agape on the social level, by deconstructing the family unit so to ‘horizontalize’ the entire human society in an egalitarian manner.20 However, as Eugene Kamenka contended, Marx failed to understand that “It is in the pursuit of particular, specific goods, and not in the pursuit of the spurious universality of an ahistorical ‘common good’, that men reveal their ethical qualities and the extent to which knowledge and disinterestedness can shape or permeate their lives”.21 Disinterestedness or acting for the sake of another person or some worthy value indeed has ethical merit, but it can become meaningful, Kamenka argues, only within a relational framework.22 The Marxist portrayal of moral duty as inhabited by even, ‘flat’ human molecules appealed to the reductionist modern ear, and affiliates with the mechanistic worldview of the seventeenth century, and with Spinoza’s geometrical pantheism – which remain intellectually influential and attractive. This ‘ontological egalitarianism’ supersedes the medieval hierarchical and animated Aristotelian worldview, which was saturated with taxonomies and desires (including the desire of unanimated objects, such as stones, to return into their ‘natural home’).23 No simplistic return to Aristotelian science is needed, but an acknowledgement the significance or pragmatist postulates and of social modalities (see correspondingly James 1974, and Walzer 1983; Bell and Pei 2020).

 Interestingly, the affiliation with one’s class – and more specifically with the working class – is mandated by the Communist credo, despite its universal aim. 19  See for example Welborn 2017. See also the pioneering analysis by Daniel Boyarin (1994) of the profound complications of Pauline doctrine and its modern repercussions. 20  Jerry Z. Muller remarks that whereas for Marx “intermediate and particular identities block real happiness”, for Hegel family and other particular spheres are central for human flourishing (Muller 2002: 195–196). 21  E. Kamenka, “Marxism and Ethics – A Reconsideration”, in Avineri 1977: 119–146, at 134. 22  The great Zionist thinker, Aharon David Gordon (1856–1922) made a similar critique of Tolstoy’s philosophy of love. In this context, Einat Ramon (2007: 72–167) fascinatingly contends that Gordon foreshadowed feminist care ethics. 23  This worldview was criticized by modern science, though from a scientific perspective viewing the world through a pragmatist ‘as if’ lens seems possible and even indispensable. This pragmatism is akin to the Kantian utilization of postulates, namely that moral deliberation depends on certain metaphysical premises. 18

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

93

6.2.3.2 Sentientism as a Secularization of Agape Peter Singer is one of the most influential ethical philosophers of our time. His approach is utilitarian in method, and his axiology is egalitarian. Singer (2011, 117–118) indeed endorses Marx’s universalism and disinterestedness as means for expanding the moral circle. Singer’s central thesis is that all sentient animals have interests and are equal in their capacity to feel pain, suffering, and joy.24 Preferring one’s own species (namely, humans) is thus parochial and is considered by Singer as ‘Speciesism’,25 which is “a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species.” (Singer 2009: 35). The moral alternative to Speciesism and its self-interestedness, according to Singer, is to treat all sentient beings, as equal in worth. Singer’s ‘Sentientism’ or ‘Unitarianism’26 views sentient creatures in an ‘egalitarian’ fashion, thus aiming to distribute human empathy equally upon all living creatures (humans included). Singer’s connection to the agape, or his implicit reliance on agape, can be compared to Marx: similarly to Communism, Singer aims to avoid any partiality27; differently from Marx, Singer aims to spread human sympathy upon all sentient creatures.28 Interestingly, Singer is aware of the underlying duty to love one’s enemies which is central to agape (see his 2011, 40) and he acknowledges that something similar to his ethic exists in the thought of St. Francis of Assisi (Singer 2009: 287), whose universal – and presumably agapic – love was de-jure directed toward animal creatures  and inanimate entities (such as stones) alike.29 Singer is aware (Singer 2009: 288–289) that this kind of “ecstatic universal love” might harm the moral equilibrium. Yet, he understands that he stretches the boundaries of equal concern far beyond the human. On the one hand, interests lie at the core of Singer’s ethic, yet his equation of the moral worth of all sentient beings makes it hard to

 “The capacity for suffering and enjoyment is a prerequisite for having interests at all, a condition that must be satisfied before we can speak of interests in a meaningful way. […] A stone does not have interests because it cannot suffer” (Singer 2009: 37). 25  Singer (2009: 24) states that “our present attitudes to these beings are based on a long history of prejudice and arbitrary discrimination. I argue that there can be no reason  – except the selfish desire to preserve the privileges of the exploiting group – for refusing to extend the basic principle of equality of consideration to members of other species”. 26  ‘Unitarianism’ is how Shelly Kagan (2019, 2) titles Singer’s approach, as the term “egalitarianism” already labels socialist approaches. Kagan’s alternative ethical approach, “modal personism” (ibid, 137–145, 159–169), recognizes differences and continuities between humans and animals, as well as the existence of liminal cases (such as embryos and vegetative states). 27  On whether Singer’s own behavior and normative choices are relevant for thinking about the topic, see Leibowitz 2016. 28  Interestingly, both Marx and Singer are of Jewish background, which makes the identification of their indebtedness to agape more challenging. 29  Charles C. Camosy (2012: 168–169) made an important remark about the proximity of Singer’s ethic to agape, though I am not aware of any existing scholarly argument which straightforwardly proposes agape as the underlying (however implicit) factor in Singer’s ethic. 24

94

N. S. Berman

account for the peculiarity of human interests and how they are intertwined with human rationality. Despite Sentientism’s recognition of interests, it yet seems utterly different from humane PI as defined here.

6.2.4 Why Both Marx and Singer’s Approaches Marginalize Pragmatic Interestedness We saw in this section that the PI is deeply challenged by the concept of agape in its unmediated and secularized forms. The way Marx and Singer secularize and unleash the agape may account for the tremendous public tailwind that Communism and Sentientism enjoy. The ‘horizontalization’ of moral duty in both Communism and Sentientism seems harmful for PI, which endorses particular forms of kinship and affiliation. It should be noted, however, that the above discussion of Marx and Singer by no means intends to undermine the commitment to social injustice30 or to reduce animal suffering,31 but to direct the scholarly attention toward the concept of PI. What, then, is the role of PI in the Jewish economic context? Can it shed any light on the above questions? Addressing this is the task of Sect. 6.3, whereas the ramifications of this excursus for a pragmatist appraisal of economic transactions will be considered in Sect. 6.4.

6.3 Pragmatic Interestedness in Early Jewish Tradition We shall now demonstrate the role of pragmatic interestedness (or me‘unyanut pragmatit in Hebrew) as found in the context of the early Jewish thought, with special focus on the economic aspect. By exploring PI, I follow Moses Pava (2009) who emphasizes the role of pragmatism and dialogue in Jewish business ethics. Judaism stands out as a case study for capitalist ethos, for as Werner Sombart argued (2001: 186). For a consideration of Sombart’s complex attitude toward Jews and Judaism, (see Muller 2002: 252–257). Jewish civilization seems to have a significant teleological trajectory: “No term is more familiar to the ear of the Jew than tachlis, which means purpose, aim, end, or goal”. It seems that this pragmatist teleology is akin to PI: an interest is typically an interest in attaining a certain goal or purpose. As we learn from Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1950), this kind of motivation is not exclusive to Jewish culture.  The Marxist and later Communist (Russian and other) constellations need not be exclusively equated with the idea of sociality. Consider, for example, what David Graeber (2014: 67–68) had termed as ‘baseline communism’ which is social in a broad sense. 31  The philosophical approaches of Hans Jonas and Shelly Kagan, e.g., testify that there could be a commitment to reduce animal suffering, without sacrificing the redundancy of humans. This discussion exceeds the present one. 30

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

95

This section will (Sect. 6.3.1) present the complicated duality of the concept of interest, (Sect. 6.3.2) emphasize the recognition of human needs and interests in Judaism, (Sect. 6.3.3) highlight the Sages’ sensitivity to the modalities of human commitment, and (Sect. 6.3.4) comment on the axiological role of market place and economic considerations in Jewish tradition. This section, clearly, is only a bird’s eye view. It points out several currents in talmudic Judaism, in order to demonstrate what PI is. It does not provide a historical review of Jews and economic life32 or Jewish approaches to economic questions,33 and does not engage with modern-day transformations within various sub-groups of world Jewry.34 Clearly, there are many disputes among Jews and talmudic Sages (ḤaZaL)35 on most issues, and economy is no exception. Yet, I try to sketch a preliminary portrayal.

6.3.1 Interest and Its Discontents The starting point for analyzing pragmatic interestedness in the Jewish context is the historical intersection of Jews and interest  (see Penslar 2001). As Alan L. Mittleman observes (2008: 131), “Jews, as an economic factor, were given an inordinate share of the blame for the woes of the modern world”. True, throughout the Middle Ages many Jews were moneylenders (due to some prohibitions on owning land, and due to Jewish literacy), and were thus accused for charging usury – namely, interest (in Hebrew: ribbit):36 The paradoxical consequence of emancipation in modernity was that the Jewish role and contribution in Capitalism increased antisemitism, as Hannah Arendt (1962: 3–88) observed.

The dark shadow of this profession was philosophically influential and had long been associated with the accusation of Jews as interest-motivated (in the bad sense of the term). This shadow has its roots in the Hebrew Bible, which indeed restricts the charge of interest. According to the Mosaic, Written law, Jews are not allowed to charge interest from Jews (Deut 23:20). This could be seen as a double-standard but could nevertheless be perceived as a higher standard which is expected from the members of any particular community. As the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks contended, such a modal structure can be a part of a global covenant (Sacks 2003: 225–227).  See for example the articles included in the volume Religion and Economy (Ben-Sasson 1995), and the editorial introduction to this volume by Menahem Ben-Sasson, which concisely maps the territory. 33  See Levine 2012; Hellinger 2010; Navon 2018. 34  See e.g. Mittleman 2008 on the adaptiveness of Religious Zionism to the socialist ethos of early twentieth century Zionism. 35  ḥakhameinu zikhram li-bhrakhah (in Hebrew: our sages of blessed memory, hereafter: the Sages). 36  For the pre-modern historical picture, see comprehensively in Mell 2017. The ambivalence of the English translation of the Mosaic term ribbit – interest and usury – captures the complex ethical connections between interest and finance, and at the same time indicates its potential pitfalls. 32

96

N. S. Berman

The initial challenge is that getting rid of particularity does not necessarily strengthen social solidarity. Therefore, in the biblical ethos the “kinship group should be as large and diverse as possible while still allowing kin group members to feel socially, politically, and existentially connected to one another” as Joshua A. Berman contends (2008, 81–108, at 96). Yet, Jews had problems of observing the biblical usury-prohibition even within the Jewish circle. The interpreters of Jewish law (halakhah) thus developed the financial mechanism called hetter iska (hetter literally means permission; iska is literally a deal), which is a permission to charge interest from fellow Jews.37 This became customary in Jewish society, even though its biblical basis is questionable. At the same time, as historian Salo W. Baron contended, “Whatever drawbacks this [communal] system may have had […] it is apparently true that no Jew seems ever to have died of hunger, while living in a Jewish community” (Baron 1952: 100).38 The portrayal of Jews as narrowly-egoistic is thus inaccurate at best, but was nevertheless widespread in modernism, very much by the influence of Marx, who transformed and hyposthesized the hostility against Jews into a more general contempt against interestedness: “The god of practical need and self-interest is money. Money is the jealous god of Israel before whom no other god may stand” (Marx 2002: 67). As Jerry Muller asserts: “All the negative moral evaluations that traditional Christians and modern post-Christian […] applied to Jews should in fact [according to Marx] be applied to capitalist society. […] Marx himself reiterated so many negative characterizations of the Jews and their economic role” (Muller 2002: 187).39 And when social reparative energy is wasted on condemning interestedness (or PI) per-se, rather than searching for ways to amend injustices, the striving toward humanistic cooperation is often neglected. True, there are clearly some important ethical lessons to be learned from the systematic Marxist critique, and a binary discourse of ‘‘sons of light’ vs ‘sons of darkness’’ is not productive.40 The question is whether Marxism provides the constructive side of the coin, and not only the analysis of injustice, exploitation and so on.41  See Maimonides’s definition for this financial mechanism, in his Mishneh Torah, “Laws of Agents and Partners” (6:2). 38  This sentence by Baron is cited by Chaim Navon (2018: 120) who stresses (124–126) that the idea of free markets does not mean selfishness, radical individualism (a la Ayn Rand), or greediness. 39  A discussion of the place of Jews and Judaism within modern sociological conceptions (e.g. in the theories of Werner Sombart and Max Weber) is beyond the scope of this chapter. On the German, French, and American schools on Jews and economy, see Goldberg 2017. 40  As Yoram Hazony contends, Marxist social critique does have a merit: “By analyzing society in terms of power relations among classes or groups, we can bring to light important political phenomena to which Enlightenment liberal theories – theories that tend to reduce politics to the individual and his or her private liberties  – are systematically blind” (Hazony 2020). On binary inclinations see Haidt and Lukianoff 2017: 52–80. 41  Marx’s hostility toward tradition and metaphysics is contrasted to the pro-metaphysical and protraditional approach of Peirce, James, and Dewey. On metaphysical aspects of CAP see Berman (forthcoming-b). Marx’s hostility to religion does not mean that religious ideas were absent in his thought, as I suggest above (Sect. 6.2.3) concerning his secularization of Agape. 37

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

97

As we see how Jews become a symbol of interested greed, can the discussion about humane or conscious capitalism yet be enriched by Jewish tradition? The willingness to recognize pragmatic (or Jewish) interestedness as valuable is – as we learn from the case of Marx and Engels – depends largely on the axiology of the beholder, or simply on her interest. Rather than performing an in-depth textual examination of economic institutions in Jewish law (halakhah), we shall make a few remarks on the philosophical topography of PI in Jewish tradition.

6.3.2 Moral Values, Human Needs, and Transactions The most basic feature of PI in Jewish tradition is the initial attention toward human needs or neediness. To be sure, asceticism can be found in Judaism, but following the negative approach of the Hebrew Bible toward celibacy and monasticism,42 the main avenues of Jewish tradition identify human needs as something positive that needs to be channeled, satisfied, and/or sublimated, rather than suppressed or straightforwardly combated. A concise definition of the metaphysical role of needs and interests vis-a-vis values was given by Rabbi Prof. Eliezer Berkovits (2004: 87): All encounters in this world are meetings of needs set in a context of value. The needs have their origin in the essential imperfection of creation; the value, in the act of creation. […] value without need, giving us perfection, would extinguish both man and his world. Yet […] need without value would render all endeavor and striving unworthy […] Only in response to the need that is at the heart of all meanings and value does man fulfil his destiny.

Differently from conceiving ethics as strictly deontological, Berkovits grounds ethics in the realm of human neediness. Such portrayal, which is advocating the heuristic theological value of world-creation, is at the same time a key for appreciating the act of giving. This giving is not one-sided but carries the wish for reciprocity.43 The role of give and take was emphasized by David Nirenberg who highlights the linkage in the Hebrew Bible (as well as in its neighboring Near Eastern cultures) and in the etymology of the Hebrew language, between love, giving, and transactions: “the most common word for love and friendship in the Hebrew Bible, ahabah, is related to the triliteral root y-h-b, associated with gifts and giving.” (Nirenberg 2008: 493). In this vein, there is in post-biblical Judaism a pragmatic recognition of societal transactions. Financial transactions and the market are important places where such give-and-take happens. Here is another interesting etymological fact: The tannaitic Hebrew44 phrase for give-and-take (masa u-matan) is translated in the Aramaic  See Numbers 6:1–21, and Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, “Hilkhot De‘ot” 3:1.  For a discussion of the talmudic economic ethos as open to the future and as aiming to avoid the eschatological (non-economic) future, as different from the early Christian quest to replace the mundane economy with divine grace, see Brezis 2018: 59–103. As Brezis remarks (82 ff.), however, a worldly inclination is found in Christianity as well. 44  Namely, the register of the Hebrew used by the Tannaim (plural form of Tanna), the early Sages. 42 43

98

N. S. Berman

language used in the Babylonian Talmud as shaqla ve-taria.45 This term initially denotes the giving of reasons, and the subsequent receiving of feedback or critique.46 Individual needs entail the reaching out to others and engaging in (hopefully) constructive verbal bargaining and discussion. The very term for denoting the talmudic discourse, then, draws on economic metaphor. If PI is vital in Jewish tradition, this etymology is more than a coincidence. The Talmud (particularly tractate Bava Metzia) dedicates many chapters to defining the realms of legitimate or fair transactions. But market-transactions cannot take place absent of acknowledging the role of free individuals who sell and buy in a consented manner.47 As Allan L. Mittleman (2008, 133) comments, “Although a concern for the common good and social welfare pervade the texts, Jewish law does acknowledge and protect private property, competition and relatively free markets”. In accordance with Berkovits’s above assertion, the freedom of trade cannot function where might is right, and where individuals fail to appreciate the common good and universal ethical norms. Values such as justice, equity, decency, and compassion are indispensable to how talmudic law views financial transactions of the kind we associate here with PI.

6.3.3 The Value of Compromise and the Possibility of Substitute Monetary Compensation The role of economic interests brings to the front the need to achieve a greater good, and this is often dependent upon the willingness of humans to compromise. In this regard, partiality is a virtue rather than a vice, because with impartial or maximalist conceptions, conciliation often seems out of reach. In order to reach a compromise, the Sages went as far as uprooting a Mosaic law, as we see in the case of the sabbatical year,48 law or mitzvah. One of its laws is the debt relief (as mandated by Deut 15:1–3) once in seven years. The Torah, however, understood the mental mechanism of the creditor who figured that the seventh year is approaching, and would refrain from lending to the poor (Deut 15:9).49  See for example Babylonian Talmud [hereafter: BT), tractate Bava Metzia 64a.  That one ought, and should, expose oneself to the arguments of others is far from trivial. See the critique of Harry Frankfurt by Menachem Fisch and Yitzhak Benbaji (2011). 47  In the talmudic period, slavery was a legitimate social institution. Yet the Sages stress the religious value of freedom, which is a condition for a voluntary performance of God’s law. To the Sages, this is why the Bible determines that a slave who wishes to remain enslaved after six years, “his master shall bore his ear through with an awl” (Exodus 21:6): human beings are God’s servants, and not servants of servants (see BT, tractate Kiddushin 22b). 48  In Hebrew, the word sheva means seven. Accordingly, the seventh year (shemitah, or the sabbatical year) is called shevi‘it. 49  “Beware lest you harbor the base thought, ‘The seventh year, the year of remission, is approaching’, so that you are mean to your needy kinsman and give [loan] him nothing. He will cry out to the Lord against you, and you will incur guilt”. 45 46

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

99

As legal scholars, the Sages could simply ignore the aforementioned pressing social problem of the sabbatical year, and ‘let the law prevail at all costs’ (yikov ha-­ din et ha-har),50 regardless of the consequences; they nevertheless chose to consider them. The prozbul enactment, which was legislated by Hillel the elderly and detailed in Mishnah Shevi‘it,51 practically annulled the biblical canceling of debts in the sabbatical year, and the corresponding prohibition of charging usury. From a fundamentalist or literalist point of view – be it the legal hermeneutics of ancient Dead Sea Sect, Karaite Judaism, or Luther’s Sola Scriptura – the prozbul is a hermeneutical bankruptcy. The justification for this innovative legal flexibility, however, lies in a combination of sensitivity for the needy and in realpolitik, as Pinhas Shifman, my father-in-law, suggested (Shifman 1991). The prozbul is but one example for how the needs of individuals and society are prudentially prioritized over a particular Mosaic instruction, in a way that maintains the course of ordinary economic life. What is the theological ground of this “legal economism”? What is predicating the Sages’ assumption that the Torah is attentive to social needs? A basic premise of how public affairs are viewed in Jewish law is the notion that “The Torah has mercy on the money [or resources more broadly] of Jews”.52 This saying, contra Marx, does not mean a fetishistic capitalism, nor does it exclude the well-being of non-Jews from the moral calculus. It rather acknowledges that life-preserving resources are not fully-separable from the human lives it sustains. For in the talmudic worldview, as Rabbi El‘azar claimed, preserving human life depends on acquiring the resources for its sustaining: “If there is no flour [kemaḥ], there is no Torah; [and] if there is no Torah, there is not flour” (Mishnah Avot 3:17). This is a non-trivial and indeed striking statement, which testifies for the proto-pragmatist vision of the Sages. This PI obviously stands in some contrast with DI as defined above (Sects. 6.1 and 6.2). The principal value of compromise in Judaism is illuminated by David Brezis’s portrayal of the mythological or typological roots of the pragmatist talmudic character, in the context of Judah son of Jacob. Judah marries Tamar, who is a Canaanite. The Canaanites are described in early Jewish commentaries as merchants, or “pragmutatim”,53 and Judah joins this club. Then, facing the horrific incident with Joseph in the pit, Judah is willing to sell (in a mercantile fashion) his brother to the Ishmaelites, in order to save Joseph’s life. Selling one’s brother doesn’t feel very moral, but there is a context here to be considered. Some of Joseph’s brothers wanted to murder him, while Judah’s non-ideal compromise indeed saved his life.

 Literally: ‘pierce the mountain’. The origin of this phrase is Tosefta tractate Sanhedrin 1:3 (Tosefta is an early talmudic compilation, which runs parallel to the sequence of the six orders of the Mishnah). 51  Chapter 10:3 of Mishnah Shevi‘it reads: “[A loan secured by] a prozbul is not cancelled. This was one of the things enacted by Hillel the elder”. 52  See BT Rosh HaShanah 27a; BT Yoma 39a, and other instances, and the numerous commentaries on this principle by the medieval sages (rishonim) and post-medieval sages (aḥaronim). 53  See the rabbinic commentary on Genesis, Genesis Rabbah 76:8. 50

100

N. S. Berman

This life-seeking substitute reveals, according to Brezis something profound about the early Jewish or Judaic ethos: The root B.Ẓ.‘A is used in the Talmud as a term in monetary law, indicating a compromise between the parties. Hence the positive role ascribed to Judah in the selling of Joseph. The quest for compromise54 is what gives his [Judah’s] initiative its justification. As an a­ lternative to killing, the selling of Joseph marks a turn from blood [dam] to money [damim], from jealous maneuver of life-sacrificing to economical move, implying, as with the sacrifice, a turn to the substitute. […] By that, he [Judah] incorporates a kind of economic-pragmatist logic, as distinguished from Josephian radicalism […] Judah is identified with a pragmatist attitude that does not clash with the world but rather aims to create an open relationship of co-existence with it. (Brezis 2015: 39–40)

This openness to the world is inherent to the idea of PI. In talmudic Hebrew, non-­ surprisingly, prakmatia – which is etymologically proximal to the Greek pragma – means merchandise and commerce.55 The willingness to compromise, and to prefer the partial monetary fulfilment over a lethal and irreversible violence, reflects a recognition of the economic side of life. This aspect which is implicit in the Bible, and becomes explicit in talmudic literature. A key example for assessing this transformation is found in biblical tort law which determines that the punishment for injuring or causing death is capital punishment (Exodus 21:22–24; see also Genesis 9:6). This legislation predicates the logic of lex talionis – “eye for an eye” – strict justice, and no mercy or exemption is possible. The Sages, as they aimed to provide a fair compensation to the victims, knew that the practical damage to person’s organ depends on their profession and income, which determines their monetary loss.56 The Sages thus interpreted these biblical laws as to allow the possibility of financial compensation.57 From a literalist point of view this is a hermeneutical scandal.58 The intention of the Sages, however, seems to be an attempt to ameliorate, or in talmudic jargon: to promote tiqqun olam (see Mor 2011), namely to amend the world. This brings us to the fourth question of the status of economic considerations within Jewish law, which sheds light on the nature of PI and its place in Jewish tradition.

 In Tosefta Sanhedrin (1:3), the sages disagree whether Judah’s deal was morally acceptable. Rabbi Eli‘ezer and R. Meir’s opinion is negative, whereas R. Yehoshua ben Korḥah views juridical compromise positively. See Brezis 2015: 182–218. 55  As Joseph Manirav comments, the Greek word πραγματεια (prakmatia) was adopted into the Hebrew by talmudic sources: “This phrase [prakmatia] has three meanings: The first […] commerce. The second reference […] is merchandise. […] [and the third meaning is] the merchants themselves” (Manirav 2009: 247). See also Jastrwo 1989: 1214–1215. 56  See Mishnah Bava Kama Chap. 8 and its vast commentaries in the Babylonian- and Jerusalem-Talmud. 57  BT Bava Kama 83b-84a. 58  From a strict agapic stance, on the other side, it is not clear how can humans repair anything, in a world governed by grace alone. It is perhaps due to this reason, that Martin Luther ultimately undermined the merit of deeds vis-à-vis graced intention. Compare Linda Ross-Meyer, “Agape, Humility, and Chaotic Good: The Challenge and Risk of Allowing Agape a Role in the Law”, in: Cochran and Calo 2017, 57–74. 54

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

101

6.3.4 Trust, Responsibility, and the Role of Economic Considerations Talmudic culture views the market as a realm of voluntary exchange (as said above in Sect. 6.3.3) and ascribes a certain religious value to financial resources. The Sages, however, had no illusions about the self-sufficiency of the market. It can function if and only if it is occupied by responsible individuals and sufficient framework rules. At the same time, the Sages had no utopian view of human nature, and thus established these and other regulative institutions  – most famously the agoranomos, or the official market-inspector, who was in charge of verifying the standardization of weights and measures of goods, their basic quality, reasonable pricing, and so on.59 Such regulation was meant to protect the public and costumers more specifically from frauds. As Jonathan Sacks wrote, even the biblical legislation had already noticed “that an equitable distribution will not emerge naturally from the free working of the market alone” (Sacks 2003: 222–223). Another vital resource of the market was, and still is, interhuman trust, which is a prerequisite for any democratic or humane economy (as in any other societal activity). Trust is the beating heart of the public sphere. As Eliezer Berkovits asserted, the public sphere and the market are the prototypical space where civic human life happens, and therefore no worthy religious piousness can easily abandon the market as a concrete realm and as a discursive metaphor.60 The market is metonymic to the real-world, to the trans-subjective and concrete reality.61 Human life must then be committed to the public sphere and to its dialogical, interactive character. Strikingly, the very idea of measuring various and often conflicting religious commitments (an idea which is not trivial in religious traditions),62 is formulated in Jewish tradition in an economic jargon. In allusion to the early eighteenth century R. Moses Hayyim Luzzatto, author of Messilat Yesharim, Aaron Levine had succinctly termed such calculation as “weighing saintliness”63 (Levine 2012: 3).

 On regulative bodies in talmudic period, see the work of Daniel Sperber (1992: 26–47).  “One might give a definition of authentic Judaism by referring to a Talmudic saying. Commenting on the verse in Psalms ‘I shall walk before the Lord in the lands of living’ [Psalms 116:9], Rabbi Yehudah expounded: ‘The lands of the living? These are the marketplaces’ [BT Yoma 71a]. What is authentic Judaism? It is the application of Torah to the marketplaces of our existence, to the historic reality and uniqueness of our contemporary situation. This is the very essence of Halakhah. There is no other way to walk before God in the lands of the living” (Berkovits 1970: 76). 61  Contemporary markets are conducted online as well, yet the realistic metaphor prevails. 62  Since weighing divine instruction entails that humans are capable of understanding God’s Word, at least partially, various religious thinkers deny the idea of weighing divine commandments. See Sagi and Statman 1995. 63  In Hebrew: mishqal ha-ḥasidut. 59 60

102

N. S. Berman

Economizing religion and religionizing economy thus apply, on such integrative religious approach, to both the holy and the secular.64 Economic considerations thus play a significant role in Jewish tradition. They help in mediating or softening legal rigidity, or the stringency of Mosaic law, as we saw in the example of the prozbul. There are many other examples which demonstrate how monetary elements enable flexibility in Jewish law about otherwise rigid or irreversible conceptions and arrangements.65 How is PI connected to that? The answer is that the legal subject of Jewish law is a participant and is conceived within the religious covenant with God as a partner, rather than mere subject to whom the law one-sidedly dictates (see Zarsky and Berman, forthcoming). As such, human beings are expected to act voluntarily, and to be motivated. Nourishing and constantly attuning and redirecting this moral motivation is thus at the core of Jewish ethics (Berkovits 2004: 87–136). In the economic context, this is where charity (ẓedaqah) and loving-kindness (gemilut ḥasadim, which abbreviates as GeMaḤ) play a role.66 For PI, in and by itself, does not ensure that every member of society is capable of making a living, or that there would be no market failures. This is where the support for the poor by welfare authorities and charity funds becomes crucial (entering into the debate between Libertarians, Communitarians, and State welfarists exceeds the present discussion,67 but PI is probably a vital resource for the success of either models). A final comment revolves the relationship between PI and indebtedness. How can one appropriate the phenomenon of a person being obligated, financially, to another human being? Individualists (e.g., Cartesians) would protest against such a world, which seems to be the kind of world that we happen to inhabit. Yonatan Sagiv, in reflecting on the role of indebtedness in the works of the renown Israeli (Nobel-winning) author Shmuel Yosef Agnon, makes the following observation: “Defined by people’s belief in its value, money’s value is relational. To be in time, to be evaluated by history, necessarily means taking part in monetary circulation

 This approach is often referred to in contemporary scholarship of Jewish thought as “Catholic”, in the sense of a quest for integration between individual and society. See Sagi 1999. 65  An interesting example is the halakhah that “A woman is acquired in three ways and acquires herself in two: She is acquired by money, by document, or by intercourse” (Mishnah Kiddushin 1:1). The intuitive reaction for the idea that money can procedurally “buy love” (to paraphrase the famous song by the Beatles) would be negative. However, once we recall that many religions and cultures consider the marital bond to be irreversible (think of the early Catholic marriage model, as in Matthew 19:4, and in the Judaean Desert texts), the idea of divorce, which is conducted in Jewish law through economic mechanism – the man pays the woman, his former wife, the financial sum of the ketubah (divorce writ) – is revolutionary. See the discussion by Adiel Schremer (2015). 66  On the shift from the centralized ‘top-down’ model which underlies the biblical welfare legislation, to the talmudic world, which is communal-based, see comprehensively in the works of Yeal Wilfand Ben-Shalom (2014) and Benjamin Porat (2019). 67  See, from a Jewish perspective, the discussion by Moshe Hellinger (2010). Porat (2019, ch. 2) claims that biblical law mediates between what we view today as right- and left-wing economy. 64

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

103

and exchange”68 (Sagiv 2016: 163, emphasis in original). As we saw in this section, in Jewish tradition there is similar notion about the possible accordance between commerce and trust, where the former is perceived as inherently dependent upon the latter. This notion is captured by the etymological connection between the Hebrew word kessef (lit. money, or silver ingot) and kissufim – which denotes the yearnings of the soul. In the same token (to use a relevant metaphor), the market is never merely a physical space – it is where human beings interact and where surprising things can happen, as Ruth Calderon (2001) points out when analyzing talmudic tales which take place (inter alia) at the marketplace. Economic considerations, to conclude this section, play essential role in Jewish law. It is hard, if not impossible, to extract economic considerations from Jewish law because it is holistically entangled with considerations of morality, spirituality, and feasibility (Berkovits 1970). This pragmatism is predicated on an axiological holism, namely the dependency of values on facts and vice versa, which was discussed by Hilary Putnam (Putnam 2002), who objected the idea of formalistic- or positivistic-economic theory on the one hand, and the idea that valuation is unbothered by empirical facts. PI is part of this holistic recognition that neither materialism nor spiritualism provide an adequate working model. Rather, the middle-road signified by PI can be termed as SPIRITERIALISM  – a pragmatist middle road between spiritualism and materialism, or a view of the two as holistically entangled. Worldly economic considerations are never “merely” economic. This brings us to the ending of this chapter, and to the relevance of PI to conscious capitalism more broadly.

6.4 Can Pragmatic Interestedness Contribute to the Idea of Conscious Capitalism? In this chapter I proposed that PI, and classical American pragmatism more broadly, are helpful for thinking about economic morality. CAP was special in its opposition to the dominant Cartesian paradigm, which bracketed the human creature from her fellow humans, and from nature.69 As the ‘bracketing’ model is still dominant in Western culture, PI and CAP are still vital for challenging some disinterestedness (DI) trajectories which are found in modernist cultures.

 The fact that S. Y. Agnon’s figure is printed on Israel’s 50 NIS (sheqqel) bill, marks – ironically, in some ways – the dependency of even great authors on “the vicissitudes of value, determined by economic, social, and cultural demand” (Sagiv 2016: 163). 69  For this reason, the association between CAP (e.g. William James), and between European Existentialism, as proposed by John J. Stuhr (2016: 207–221, chapter 10: “Absurd Pragmatism”), seems to stretch pragmatism beyond its relational and teleological tendencies. 68

104

N. S. Berman

One of the peculiarly modern predicaments is the deification of the very suffix ISM. Once an ideology ends with Ism, it is all too often becoming monolithic (or “phallocentric”, in Derrida’s terms), loses its pluralistic and dynamic commitments, and most importantly its obligation to account for flesh and blood human beings. The same concern applies to Pragmatism, obviously, and also to Capitalism. Both are often hypostasized and fixated, sometimes as pejorative attempt to make them into a strawman. No doubt, there are some inherent problems with modern and late Capitalism: the rise of industrialism, urbanism and mass media resulted in alienation and societal fragmentation.70 Certain economic forces surely contributed to that, but financial interactions, in themselves, do not entail human corruption. Questions of distributive justice are also distinct from the issue of the market. To keep guard of the danger of Isming, then, advocates of Capitalism (and of Conscious Capitalism) should be critical of economic injustices, and to be able to say what are the moral boundaries of markets.71 An understanding of the inescapable connections between interhuman trust and the economy is found in both Aristotle and in CAP. Aristotle had famously claimed that the monetary system was created in order to allow people to have a shared common denominator for trade.72 William James, for his part, used finance a means for portraying the pragmatist notion of truth as interaction: Truth lives, in fact, for the most part on a credit system. Our thoughts and beliefs ‘pass’, so long as nothing challenges them, just as bank-notes pass so long as nobody refuses them. But this all points to direct face-to-face verifications somewhere, without which the fabric of truth collapses like a financial system with no cash-basis whatever. You accept my verification of one thing, I yours of another. We trade on each other’s truth. But beliefs verified concretely by somebody are the posts of the whole superstructure. (James 1974: 138)

According to James, truth is in some ways relational, transactional, and interpersonal, rather than narrowly propositional. People work hard to earn money in order to secure means for surviving and fulfilling their needs. Once it becomes clear that money, in itself, is not the source of evil, but how justly and properly it is earned, used, and distributed, then a more productive societal discussion can take place about the ways for advancing human flourishing and fair society. Do Aristotle and James have much in common with Jewish PI as it was explored above? It is for the reader to decide.

 On the need to consider the covenantal commitments more thoroughly than Max Weber did, see Stackhouse 2014. 71  On the moral limits of markets, or what money cannot (or ought not) buy, see the work of Michael Sandel (2012). 72  “This is why all things that are exchanged must be somehow comparable. It is for this end that money was introduced. […] for it measures all things […] For if this be not so, there will be not exchange and no intercourse” (Nicomachean Ethics 5:5 [Aristotle 2009: 89]). 70

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

105

6.5 Conclusion To sum up, this chapter proposed that pragmatic interestedness (PI) is a possible axiological middle way between particularity-blind universalism (agapic, Communist, Sentientist, or else) and between egoism. In contrast with disinterestedness (DI), PI functions in Jewish tradition, and in classical American pragmatism (CAP) as a moral sensitivity which is pro-social, melioristic, and realistic. For these reasons, pragmatic interestedness may inspire those who seek a more conscious, humane capitalism.

References Aquinas, T. 2016. Questions on Love and Charity: Summa Theologiae, Secunda Secundae, Questions. Ed. and Trans. R. Miner, 23–46. Yale University Press. Arendt, H. 1962.The Origins of Totalitarianism. Cleveland and NY: Meridian. Aristotle. 2009. The Nicomachean Ethics. Trans. D. Ross. New York: Oxford University Press. Avineri, S., ed. 1977. Varieties of Marxism. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Baron, S.W. 1952. A Social and Religious History of the Jews. Vol. 2. New  York: Columbia University Press. Bell, D.A., and W. Pei. 2020. Just Hierarchy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Ben-Sasson, M., ed. 1995. Religion and Economy: Connections and Interactions. [in Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Z. Shazar. Berkovits, E. 1970. The Role of Halakhah: Authentic Judaism and Halakhah. Judaism 19 (1): 66–76. ———. 2004. God, Man and History. Jerusalem: Shalem Press. Berman, J.A. 2008. Created Equal: How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Berman, N.S. forthcoming-a. Peculiarly Interesting Disinterestedness: A Pragmatist Reading of Mishnah Avot 5:16. The Journal of Jewish Ethics (forthcoming 2022). Berman, N.S. forthcoming-b. The Application of the ‘Pragmatic Maxim’ in Jewish Tradition: The Case of R. Ḥayyim Hirschensohn. The Journal of Religion (forthcoming 2022). Boyarin, D. 1994. A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity. Berkeley: UCLA Press. ———. 2018. Judaism: The Genealogy of a Modern Notion. Rutgers University Press. Brezis, D. 2015. Between Zealotry and Grace: Anti-Zealotry Trends in Talmudic Literature [in Hebrew]. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University. ———. 2018. The Sages and their Hidden Debate with Christianity [in Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Carmel. Calderon, R. 2001. The Market, The Home, The Heart: Talmudic Legends [in Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Keter. Camosy, C.C. 2012. Peter Singer and Christian Ethics: Beyond Polarization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Casanova, J. 1994. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chesterton, G.K. 1908. Orthodoxy. New York: Garden City. Cochran, R.F., Jr., and Z.R. Calo, eds. 2017. Agape, Justice, and Law: How Might Christian Love Shape Law? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Drašček, M., A. Rejc Buhovac, and D. Mesner Andolšek. 2021. Moral Pragmatism as a Bridge Between Duty, Utility, and Virtue in Managers’ Ethical Decision-Making. Journal of Business Ethics 172 (4): 803–819.

106

N. S. Berman

Fisch, M., and Y.  Benbaji. 2011. The View from Within: Normativity and the Limits of Self-­ Criticism. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press. Fleischacker, S. 2004. On Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Fromm, E. 1941. Escape from Freedom. New York: Rinehart. Gaston, S. 2005. Derrida and Disinterest. London: Continuum. Goldberg, C.A. 2017. Modernity and the Jews in Western Social Thought. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Graeber, D. 2014. Debt: The First 5,000 Years. New York: Melville House. Haidt, J., and G. Lukianoff. 2017. The Coddling of the American Mind. New York: Penguin. Halbertal, M. 2015. On Sacrifice. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Hazony, Y. 2020. The Challenge of Marxism. Quillette (August 16, 2020, available online). Hellinger, M. 2010. The Contribution of Jewish Halakhic Tradition to Social Justice [in Hebrew]. In Jewish Political Tradition Throughout the Ages, ed. M.  Hellinger, 525–552. Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press. James, W. 1974. Pragmatism and Four Essays from The Meaning of Truth. New  York: New American Library. Jastrow, M., ed. 1989. A Dictionary of the Targumim, The Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, vols. 1–2. New York: The Judaica Press. Kagan, S. 2019. How to Count Animals, More or Less. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kotsko, A. 2018. Neoliberalism’s Demons: On the Political Theology of Late Capital. Stanford University Press. Leibowitz, U.D. 2016. Moral Deliberation and Ad Hominem Fallacies. Journal of Moral Philosophy 13 (5): 507–529. Levine, A. 2012. Economic Morality and Jewish Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. MacIntyre, A. 1968. Marxism and Christianity. University of Notre Dame Press. Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Manirav, J. 2009. Prakmatia: The Marketing System in the Jewish Community in Palestine During the Mishna and Talmud Era [in Hebrew]. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press. Marx, K. 1977. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, vol. 1. Trans. B. Fowkes. New York: Penguin. ———. 2002. On the Jewish Question. In Marx on Religion, ed. J. Raines, 45–69. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. May, S. 2019. Love: A New Understanding of an Ancient Emotion. UK: Oxford University Press. Mell, J.L. 2017. The Myth of the Medieval Jewish Moneylender. Vol. 1. New York: Palgrave. Mittleman, A.L. 2008. Capitalism in Religious Zionist Theory. In Markets, Morals, and Religion, ed. J.B. Imber, 131–139. New York: Routledge. Mor, S. 2011. Tiqqun Olam (Repairing the World) in the Mishnah: From Populating the World to Building a Community. Journal of Jewish Studies 62: 284–310. Muller, J. 2002. The Mind and the Market: Capitalism in Western Thought. New York: Anchor. Navon, Ch. 2018. Brotherhood and Responsibility: A Jewish Perspective on Free Market [in Hebrew]. HaShiloaḥ 10: 109–128. Nelson, E. 2019. The Theology of Liberalism: Political Philosophy and the Justice of God. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Nirenberg, D. 2008. The Politics of Love and Its Enemies. In Religion: Beyond a Concept, ed. H. de Vries, 491–512. New York: Fordham University Press. Nussbaum, M.C. 1986. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nygren, A. 1953. Agape and Eros. Trans. P. S. Watson. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. Pava, M.L. 2009. Jewish Ethics as Dialogue: Using Spiritual Language to Reimagine a Better World. New York: Palgrave McMillan. Penslar, D.J. 2001. Shylock’s Children: Economics and Jewish Identity in Modern Europe. Berkeley: University of California Press.

6  Interest, Disinterestedness, and Pragmatic Interestedness: Jewish Contributions…

107

Porat, B. 2019. Justice to the Poor: The Principles of Welfare Regulation from Biblical Law to Rabbinic Literature [in Hebrew]. Ẓafririm: Nevo. Putnam, H. 2002. The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and other Essays. Boston: Harvard University Press. Ramon, E. 2007. A New Life: Religion, Motherhood, and Supreme Love in the Works of Aharon David Gordon [in Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Carmel. Ricoeur, P. 1970. Freud and Philosophy, trans. D. Savage: Yale University Press. Rorty, R. 1994. Religion as a Conversation Stopper. Common Knowledge 3: 1–6. Rosenthal, S.B., and R.A. Buchholtz. 2000. Rethinking Business Ethics: A Pragmatic Approach. New York: Oxford University Press. Sacks, J. 2003. Global Covenant: A Jewish Perspective on Globalization. In Making Globalization Good: The Moral Challenges of Global Capitalism, ed. J. Dunning, 110–131. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sagi, A. 1999. Are We Still Jewish [in Hebrew]. Theory and Criticism 12–13: 79–87. ———. 2002. Albert Camus and the Philosophy of the Absurd. Trans. B. Stein. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Sagi, A., and D. Statman. 1995. Divine Command Morality and Jewish Tradition. The Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (1): 39–67. Sagiv, Y. 2016. Indebted: Capitalism and Religion in the Writings of S.  Y. Agnon. HUC Press, Cincinnati. Sandel, M. 2012. What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux. Schmitt, C. 2005. In Political Theology, ed. trans. G. Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Schremer, A. 2015. ‘What God has Joined Together’: Predestination, Ontology, and the Nature of the Marital Bond in Early Rabbinic Discourse. Diné Israel 30: 139–161. Shifman, P. 1991. Pruzbul and Legal Fiction. S’vara 2: 63–65. Singer, P. 2009. Animal Liberation. New York: Penguin. ———. 2011. The Expanding Circle: Ethics, Evolution, and Moral Progress. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Smith, A. 2002. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. K. Haakonssen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sombart, W. 2001. The Jews and Modern Capitalism. Trans. M. Epstein. Batoche. Sperber, D. 1992. The City in Roman Palestine. New York: Oxford University Press. Stackhouse, M.L. 2014. Weber, Theology, and Economics. In Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics, ed. P. Oslington. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stuhr, J.J. 2016. Pragmatic Fashions: Pluralism, Democracy, Relativism, and the Absurd. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Walzer, M. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books Weber, M. 1950. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Trans. T. Parsons. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Welborn, L.L. 2017. Marxism and Capitalism in Pauline Studies. In Paul and Economics, ed. T.R. Blanton, 361–396. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Wilfand Ben-Shalom, Y. 2014. Poverty, Charity and the Image of the Poor in Rabbinic Texts from the Land of Israel. Phoenix Press. Wohlman, A. 2005. Loving God: Christian Love, Theology and Philosophy in Thomas Aquinas [in Hebrew]. Tel-Aviv: Resling. Yuval, I.J. 2010. Christianity in Talmud and Midrash: Parallelomania or Parallelophobia? In Transforming Relations, ed. F.T. Harkins, 50–74. University of Notre Dame Press. Zarsky, T.Z., and N.S. Berman. forthcoming. How Is the Silicon Valley Juxtaposed with Mt. Sinai? Covenantal Principles and the Conceptualization of Platform-User Relations, Journal of Law and Religion (forthcoming).

108

N. S. Berman

Nadav S.  Berman is a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Jewish Thought, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, and a research fellow in the Faculty of Law, University of Haifa (Israel). He was previously a visiting fellow at the Center for Jewish Studies (Harvard University) and a postdoctoral associate in the Department of Philosophy and Judaic Studies (Yale University). His doctoral dissertation (Hebrew University, 2018) investigated philosophical links between twentieth-­century Jewish thought and classical American pragmatism.  

Chapter 7

Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous Consumption Daniel Ross Goodman

7.1 Introduction Leisure—what is it good for? Well, based upon the astounding record of human accomplishments during non-working hours, the answer is absolutely everything: the most important works of Jewish and secular scholarship were not written during work hours, but during leisure time. Maimonides wrote the Mishneh Torah—the foundational text of modern Jewish law—and Moreh Nevuchim [The Guide for the Perplexed], perhaps the foundational text of modern Jewish philosophy—during his non-working hours.1 Isaac Newton wrote Principia Mathematica, the foundational work for all modern math and science, during his leisure time. According to legend, the Greek mathematician Archimedes had his famous “Eureka!” moment while taking a bath, and Einstein conceived of the Theory of Relativity while riding a bike.2 The Greeks said that leisure was necessary for the soul.3 In explaining how civilization was created during leisure hours—the wheel, the arts, and everything that we cherish was created when our minds were free to be preoccupied with things  Rabbi Avraham Danzing (1748–1820), a businessman by trade, also wrote two important books of Jewish law—the Chayei Adam and Chochmat Adam —during his non-working hours. Legend has it that the Vilna Gaon used the scant amount of time per day in which he was not involved with his occupation—intensive Torah study—to write a treatise on mathematics. 2  See Dennis Overbye, “Brace Yourself! Here Comes Einstein’s Year,” New York Times, January 25, 2005, www.nytimes.com/2005/01/25/science/25eins.html. Cited in Brigid Schulte, Overwhelmed: Work, Love, and Play When No One Has the Time (New York: Sarah Crichton, 2014), 331. 3  See Benjamin Kline Hunnicutt, “Leisure and Play in Plato’s Teaching and Philosophy of Learning,” Leisure Sciences 12 (1990): 211–27, cited in ibid. 1

D. R. Goodman (*) Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York City, NY, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_7

109

110

D. R. Goodman

other than the drudgery of what it took to survive—Bertrand Russell stated that “[l]eisure is essential to civilization.”4 But before Bertrand Russell recognized the critical importance of leisure hours in which our minds—and not only our bodies—would be free to engage in the non-­ work pursuits that we cherish, machshavah [Jewish thought], mussar [Jewish ethical and devotional literature], and even the Tanakh [Hebrew Bible] all advocated freedom of the mind as an ethical and religious imperative. Mussar emphasizes that freedom of the mind is an ethical and religious imperative by equating mental drudgery with the Jewish slavery in Egypt and by associating mental freedom with Yetziyat Mitzrayim [the Exodus from Egypt]. And before the Greeks recognized the necessity of leisure, the Torah, in commanding Jews to observe the Sabbath once a week and to observe a Sabbatical year once every seven years, mandated leisure as a religious precept. Jewish thought and mussar literature later expounded upon the Jewish ethic of necessary leisure by illuminating the ways in which this ethic is embedded in the mitzvot of Shabbat and Shemitah. This paper will explore the nature of the Jewish ethic of leisure, and will examine how the classic works of mussar and Jewish thought articulated the Jewish ethic of necessary leisure. Additionally, this paper will seek to address the following questions: What are the ethical implications of a Jewish ethic of leisure? What other sources can we turn to for an articulation of this ethic? Is there a theology undergirding this ethic (and if so, what is it)? And how can a Jewish ethic of necessary leisure inform our understanding of conscious capitalism?

7.2 The Jewish Ethic of Necessary Leisure If the value in human beings lies in the work they do and in the things they produce, why would the Torah ever command that we rest? Why not work as much as possible—why ever take time off? Long before contemporary sociologists, journalists, and Bertrand Russell noted the importance of leisure—and even before the Greeks stated that leisure was necessary for the soul—the Torah recognized that leisure is just as integral to what it means to be human as is work. The Torah not only indicates that leisure is desirable, but goes so far as to say that it is mandatory: we are commanded to observe one day of rest every seven days— the Shabbat [Sabbath]—and one year of rest every seven years—the Shemitah [Sabbatical]. It has long been recognized that it is necessary for human beings to have times of leisure; according to a midrash, when Moses first came before Pharaoh, Moses requested that the Jewish slaves be given the Shabbat as a day of  Bertrand Russell, In Praise of Idleness and Other Essays (Crows Nest, New South Wales: George Allen and Unwin, 1935; republished by Routledge Classics, 2004); the essay is available as an online PDF at https: //libcom.org/files/Bertrand%20Russell%20-%20In%20Praise%20of%20 Idleness.pdf 4

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

111

rest. This conceptual association between Sabbath and freedom from slavery is made explicit by the liturgical refrain that refers to Shabbat as a day that recalls the liberation from Egypt [“zekher litziyat mitzrayim”]. In a society in which the weekend is an integral part of the week, we are accustomed to thinking about necessary leisure times in terms of days; what is radical, if not downright revolutionary, about the institution of the Shemitah is its explicit message that necessary leisure must also encompass certain years. That the Torah goes so far as to mandate an entire year of necessary leisure strongly suggests that we ponder the importance of leisure: why we need it, how to achieve it, and what society would look like if the ethic of necessary leisure were widely respected.

7.3 The Necessity of an Ethic of Necessary Leisure One of the essential components of what it means to be human is complete conscientiousness.5 The human being is the one creature capable of self-awareness, self-­ consciousness, and introspective reflection.6 What makes a human being a “human  N.B.: the terms “conscientiousness,” “conscientious,” and “conscientious awareness” here and throughout this essay refer not merely to a quality of thoughtfulness but to a mental state of alertness that is akin to a higher (or more complex) form of consciousness in which one is acutely cognizant of one’s actions, sensations, and thoughts. On introspection, see Hovot HaLevavot, “Gate of Accounting of the Soul” (“Heshbon hanefesh”); the entire concept of heshbon hanefesh is premised upon the imperative to develop conscientious awareness in every sphere of life. Ibn Pakudah’s prooftext for the principle that one must always analyze one’s actions and render an ‘accounting for his soul’ is Psalms 32:9 (“one should not be like a horse or mule that does not understand”), ibid., ch. 1. The concept of heshboh hanefesh is also discussed in Rabbi Israel Salanter’s Iggeret HaMussar, and an entire work of mussar is devoted to an exploration of the concept: Heshbon ha’Nefesh, by Rabbi Menachem Mendel Lefin (1809). On conscientiousness and self-awareness as essential aspects of the human being, cf. Harold Bloom, Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human (New York: Riverhead Books, 1998). In creating, Hamlet, Falstaff, and other characters who, in their capacity for self-reflection— “overhearing themselves”—seem “more real than living men and women” (ibid., 314), Shakespeare “invented the human,” or “at least changed our ways of presenting human nature” (ibid., 418). 6  For general treatments of the Mussar movement, see Zalman F. Ury, The Musar Movement (New York, 1970), and Lester S. Eckman, The History of the Musar Movement (New York, 1975). Mussar ‘s emphasis upon self-awareness, conscientiousness, and introspective reflection has talmudic roots; see b. Rosh Hashanah 28b: “[the performance of] commandments require intent” (“mitzvot tz’rikhot kavanah”), cited by Rabbeinu Bahya ibn Pakudah in Hovot HaLevavot, “Gate of Accounting of the Soul,” ch. 3, discussing the concepts of “wholeness of heart” (“yihud haLev”/“lev shalem”). (Citations from Hovot Halevavot are from the two-volume Lieberman, Jerusalem edition, 1990; translations from the Hebrew are my own.) According to Luzzatto, any lapse in conscious awareness (“hesah hada’at”) can result in unanalyzed actions, and unanalyzed actions detract from the fear of God. Mesillat Yesharim, ch. 25, 125. Cf. Alan Morinis, Climbing Jacob’s Ladder: One Man’s Journey to Rediscover a Jewish Spiritual Tradition (Trumpeter: Boston, 2007), 123, discussing how the type of conscientious awareness of all thought and action urged by mussar can make life more meaningful. 5

112

D. R. Goodman

being”— what makes us distinctive, says the Torah, is that we are created in the image of God. According to Rashi, being created b’tzelem Elokim [in the image of God] means that man was created ‘to understand and to be intellectually creative.’ Rashi thus interprets tzelem Elokim as a descriptive term that connotes heightened intellectual capacity.7 Similarly, according to Rabbi Irving Greenberg’s expansion upon Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik’s interpretation of “tzelem Elokim,” being in the image of God means that that we possess some of the capacities of God. One of these primary capacities is heightened consciousness: just as God is the universe’s omniscient Supreme Consciousness, so too, human beings are endowed with the capacity for self-awareness and self-consciousness.8 Indeed, some Jewish thinkers have gone so far as to suggest, a la Socrates, that reflection is part in parcel of being human: When we engage in and develop our reflective, introspective, and conscientious capacities, we imitate God; when we leave our reflective, introspective, and conscientious capacities fallow for too long, we distance ourselves from our inner Godliness. Behavioral sciences have enriched our knowledge of psychological, biological, and sociological facts and patterns of behavior by observation and description. However, we must not forget that in contrast to animals, man is a being who not only behaves but also reflects upon how he behaves. Sensitivity to one’s own behavior…is an essential quality of being human.9

The animal being acts and reacts; the human being acts, reacts, and reflects; without reflection—and without mandated times of necessary leisure during which our reflective capacities can be cultivated—we forfeit an essential component of our

 Rashi, commentary on Gen. 1:26.  See, e.g., Rabbi Irving Greenberg, For the Sake of Heaven and Earth (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2004), 10, 147; and idem, “Cloud of Smoke, Pillar of Fire: Judaism, Christianity, and Modernity after the Holocaust,” in Auschwitz: Beginning of a New Era? (ed. Eva Fleischner; New  York: Ktav, 1977), 7–55, 441–446, repr. in Wrestling With God: Jewish Theological Responses during and after the Holocaust (ed. Steven T.  Katz, Shlomo Biderman, Gershon Greenberg; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 499–523, at 500 (citations according to the 2007 pagination). For Rabbi Soloveitchik’s interpretation of tzelem Elokim, see R.  Joseph B.  Soloveitchik, “Agency [Sh’liḥut],” in Yemei Zikaron (Aliner Library; WZO, Dept. of Torah Education and Culture; Jerusalem: Orot, 1986), 9–28. I am indebted to Rabbi Greenberg for this citation. The literary critic Harold Bloom likewise relates the human intellectual and creative capacities to godliness itself; Bloom posits that someone endowed with creative genius possesses aspects of God’s own genius. Bloom, Genius: A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds (Warner Books, New  York: 2002), xii. Cf. ibid., 11 (for Ralph Waldo Emerson, “genius was the God within”). 9  Abraham J. Heschel, Who Is Man? (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1965), 9 (emphasis added). Cf. ibid., 53 (“Disregard of the ultimate dimension of human existence is a possible state of mind as long as man finds tranquility in his dedication to partial objectives. But strange things happen at times to disturb his favorite unawareness”—the Sabbath day, and the Sabbatical year, are precisely those ‘strange happenings’ which the Torah has instituted in order to ‘disturb our unawareness’), 62 (on the importance of “surveying one’s inner life”), and 81 (“[t]hinking is living”). 7 8

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

113

humanity. And when we do not exercise all of our distinctive human capacities, we fail to reach our potential as individuals created in the image of God. In a perfect, messianic world, we would all have the means and the ability to engage in reflective, introspective, and conscientious activities all day long. But in our not-yet perfect world, we must perform many tasks that may diminish our self-­ awareness and that prevent us from engaging in introspection. The Shabbat—one day a week in which we model a perfect, messianic world10—and the Shemitah— one year every seven years in which we model a perfect, liberated world—provide us with the opportunities to engage in the type of reflective, introspective, and conscientious activities we would be able to constantly engage in were the world to be perfected. In the island of holiness in time that is created during the Shabbat, “the human being shifts from unexamined life to examined life, from the instinctual existence to conscious being.”11 The Shabbat is that one day per week—and Shemitah is the ideal one-year per seven-year-cycle—when we can be fully human12: Just as Shabbat is a day of being, so is the sabbatical a year of being. Self-development and relationship are placed at the center of life. The messianic fantasy is acted out for a whole year. … Coming every seven years, the sabbatical allows the compromising ways of the world to function but prevents them from becoming entrenched.13

The Sabbath day and the Sabbatical year are the Torah’s mandatory days and years of necessary leisure. The fact that the Torah prescribes these obligatory cessations from productivity conveys the unmistakable message that leisure is an indispensible component of life: we need leisure, because without leisure we cannot properly reflect. As Judith Shulevitz has observed, “the Sabbath…implies that time has an ethical dimension.”14

 Rabbi Irving Greenberg, The Jewish Way: Living the Holidays (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988), 127, and 128: “The Shabbat day is Judaism’s central attempt to inject the dream [of a perfect world] into life while preventing its negative side effects,” 129, “Stepping outside the here and now, the community creates a world of perfection. Through total immersion in the Shabbat experience, Jews live the dream now… .The Shabbat is the foretaste of the messianic redemption….” (emphasis in original), 132, “on every Shabbat, Jews preenact the coming of messianic restoration,” and 133: “someday, when we make the earth a paradise, all will be on a permanent sabbatical so they can spend their lives creating rather than earning.” 11  Ibid., 148. See also ibid., at 178. 12  Cf. ibid., at 138: “Shabbat….is a proclamation, ‘I am, not I do.’ If I could do nothing, I would still be me, a person of value. Thus, the individual reasserts the primacy of human value and the principle of the intrinsic worth of human existence, ‘unjustified’ by productivity.” See also ibid., at 162. Cf. Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Sabbath (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1951), 3: “To have more does not mean to be more. … There is happiness in the love of labor, there is misery in the love of gain.” 13  Ibid, at 153. 14  Judith Shulevitz, The Sabbath World: Glimpses of a Different Order of Time (New York: Random House, 2010), 24. 10

114

D. R. Goodman

And, as Rabbi Irving Greenberg explains, without reflection, we cannot create, we cannot relate to others in meaningful ways, and we cannot be ourselves. In short, without reflection—and without mandatory, set-aside times of necessary leisure that provide time and space for such reflection—we cannot be fully human: Shabbat [provides] the necessary leisure to be one’s self and to enter into deeper relationships.15 Rest is more than leisure from work, it is a state of inner discovery, tranquility, and unfolding.… The Sabbath commandment is not just to stop working, it is actively to achieve menuchah (rest) through self-expression, transformation, and renewal. On this day humans are freed to explore themselves and their relationships until they attain the fullness of being.16 [The Shabbat’s] focus remains the enrichment of personal life. In passing over from weekday to Shabbat, the individual enters a different world. The burdens of the world roll off one’s back. In the phrase of the zemirah (Sabbath table song): “Anxiety and sighing flee.” In the absence of business and work pressure, parents suddenly can listen better to children. In the absence of school and extra-curricular pressures, children can hear their parents. Being is itself transformed. The state of inner well-being expands. As the Sabbath eve service text states: “The Lord…blesses the seventh day and [thereby] bestows holy serenity on a people satiated with delight.” The ability to reflect is set free. Creative thoughts long forgotten come back to mind. One’s patience with life increases. The individual’s capacity to cope is renewed.17

A society in which the ethic of necessary leisure—in the terminology of the siddur [prayer-book], ‘holy serenity,’ or, in Judith Shulevitz’s term, the recognition of the “social morality” of time, or “sacred time.”18 In addition to the horrors of physical pain, among slavery’s great evils are the spiritual, intellectual, and psychological pains it wreaks upon the person. The spiritual indignities inflicted by slavery are portrayed in great works of literary fiction. In Edward P. Jones’s novel The Known World, a powerful slave narrative and the recipient of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, we are given a glimpse of what it means to live with a “slavery mentality.” Not only is a slave’s freedom of physical movement stymied, but at a certain point during servitude, even a slave’s mental freedom to think, feel, and desire is stifled as well. This acknowledgment of what slavery takes away from an individual is articulated when Augustus seeks to explain the meaning of freedom to the recently liberated Henry: —is not respected is a society that degrades the human being and, consequently, mitigates the image of God. This is why the Torah, and the ba’alei mussar [authors of ethical-devotional literature (lit., ‘masters of ethics’)] in tow, fiercely advocated for the absolute, inviolable necessity for periods of leisure during which we would once again be able to be self-reflective and thereby rejuvenate our inner image of God.

 Ibid., 125 (emphasis added).  Ibid., 139–40. 17  Ibid., 123. 18  Shulevitz, The Sabbath World, xx, xxviii–xxix. 15 16

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

115

“You feelin any different?” “Bout what?” Henry said. He was holding the reins to the mules. “Bout bein free? Bout bein nobody’s slave?” “No, sir, I don’t reckon I do.” He wanted to know if he was supposed to, but he did not know how to ask that. …. “Not that you need to feel any different. You can just feel whatever you want to feel. …. You don’t have to ask anybody how to feel. You can just go on and do whatever it is you want to feel. Feel sad, go on and feel sad. Feel happy, you go on and feel happy.” “I reckon,” Henry said. “Oh, yes,” Augustus said. “I know so. I’ve had a little experience with this freedom situation. It’s big and little, yes and no, up and down, all at the same time.”19

Slavery, be it mental or physical slavery, prevents us from feeling freely and thinking independently.20 When we are freed from physical slavery, and when we are freed from mental slavery during Sabbath days and sabbatical years, we once again become free to think, feel, and desire what we want: we regain complete freedom. That the Torah mandates an institution of freedom as radical as the Shemitah implies that there is an ethic of leisure—that leisure is desirable for the freedom that necessary times of rest give us to once again become free to think and feel independently—and that cultivating a sabbatical consciousness (defined here as the cognizance that full physical and psychological freedom is a desideratum) is an ethical ideal. The Torah’s ethic of leisure thus entails a striving for psychological, intellectual, and emotional freedom: not only freedom from externally imposed physical labor, but freedom from externally imposed emotions as well. Shemitah consciousness implies an acknowledgment that human beings need freedom to feel; as the newly freed slaves in The Known World recognize, full freedom entails not only “doing what they want to do,” but the freedom to feel how they want to feel, when they want to feel, and what they want to feel. Where does the Torah first articulate the ethic of necessary leisure? Where do we first learn about the imperative of cultivating a sabbatical consciousness? In Mesillat Yesharim [Path of the Just], perhaps the foremost work of mussar in the Jewish canon, Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto points to a passage in the beginning of the book of Exodus. At the end of Parshat Shemot, Pharaoh becomes incensed at Moses for providing the Jewish slaves with an inkling of hope that they would be freed; in order to stamp out any possible thoughts of impending freedom that they may be entertaining, Pharaoh decrees that their workload be doubled: ‫ׁעּו†ּבדבִ ְרֵי†שָ ׁקֶ ר‬ ְ ‫ל†יש‬ ְִ ַ‫נשׁים†ויְ ֲעַׂשּו†בָ ּה†וְ א‬ ָ ִ ‫ֲבדה†עַל†ה ָ ֲא‬ ֹ ָ ‫תּכְ בַ ּד†הָ ע‬. ִ

 Edward P. Jones, The Known World (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), 49.  Prisoners in slave labor camps such as Natan Sharansky and Alexander Solzhenitsyn who heroically preserved their independence of thought and freedom of spirit amidst conditions of slavery are notable exceptions that prove this rule. 19 20

116

D. R. Goodman

Let there more work be laid upon the men, that they may labour therein; and let them not regard vain words.21 Once their workload has been multiplied to this extent, Pharaoh understands, their ability to concentrate upon and be aware of anything other than what they need to do to meet their daily quota of bricks will have been reduced to next to nil. Outside of certain extraordinary people, the human capacity for conscientiousness cannot bear such great burdens; overload it, and it crushes under the weight of other thoughts, stresses, and obligations. Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto calls attention to this very passage during his discussion of the trait of zehirut [awareness]. This biblical passage, writes Rabbi Luzzatto, presents a perfect articulation of what it means for a person to have the means for conscientiousness and awareness coopted: Pharaoh intended not only to not leave [the Hebrew slaves] any opportunity to conceive of plotting against him, but by placing a relentless, never-ending workload upon them, he also was attempting to distract their hearts from any introspection.22

This verse thus serves as a stark admonition against physical slavery, for without freedom, we are deprived of the mental liberty that is necessary for constant self-­ awareness and full consciousness—and without being fully conscious, we cannot maximize our inner image of God. But this verse, as Rabbi Luzzatto indicates, also inveighs against intellectual, spiritual, intellectual, and psychological slavery: it is very easy to become spiritually and intellectually enslaved to activities which diminish our ability for full self-­ awareness and complete consciousness. Moreover, merely being in the world and existing in an imperfect society on a day-to-day basis, with all of the routine tasks and dull pursuits that daily existence entails, can psychologically and spiritually “enslave” us, Rabbi Luzzatto writes. This is why we must develop our capacity for zehirut, he writes, and this is why we must always be on the watch for those moments when our conscientiousness is being trampled upon by an incessant stampede of routinized behavior and unconscientious actions. We must always be wary and watchful lest we act “as horses riding roughshod into battle without thinking”23:  Exodus 5:9 KJV.  Compare the God’s Word translation, which almost perfectly captures the Mesillat Yesharim’s reading of this verse: “Make the work harder for these people so that they will be too busy to listen to lies” (emphasis added). Cf. Rashi, loc. cit ., s.v. “v’al yish’u b’divrei shaker”: Pharaoh increased their [physical] workload in order that ‘they not contemplate and speak of spiritual matters’ (translation mine; emphasis added). Viz., the physical affects the spiritual: too much physical work, and a lack of necessary physical leisure, can lead to too little spiritual reflection, and a lack of mental, intellectual, and emotional conscientiousness: too much physical work has a deleterious effect upon spiritual wellbeing. 22  Luzzatto, Mesillat Yesharim (Amsterdam: 1738; Jerusalem: Eshkol, 1978), 15 (citations follow the 1978 text; translations are my own). 23  Jeremiah 8:6 (translation mine). Cf. Gustave Flaubert, Madame Bovary (1856; New  York: Random House, 1957), 11: “How I blindly followed her as if I were a mill-horse treading blindfolded in a circle, utterly unaware of what I was grinding.” Cf. Heschel, Who is Man?, 76: “This seems to be the malady of man: His normal consciousness is a state of oblivion, a state of suspended sensitivity.… We do not understand what we do; we do not see what we face” (emphasis in original). 21

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

117

The principal of awareness is that man should be aware of his actions and manners; that is to say, he should analyze and investigate his actions and manners…and should not walk along the path of his habits as a blind person in the dark. For this is a matter that man’s intellect compels: once man has been endowed with an intellectual capacity…how could it be possible for him to wish to close his eyes from conscientiousness? One who acts thusly is lower than the beasts and the animals.24

And this, according to this article, is why we need to revivify the ethic of necessary leisure. Without strongly stating that it is an ethical obligation—on the part of individuals, communities, and societies—to provide ourselves and others with certain periods of time in which we do not have to deal with the daily drudgery that can blind us to our behavior, we may not have the opportunity to engage in the uniquely human activity of reflecting upon our actions. And without times of mandated leisure during which we can reengage with our conscientious capacities in order to become more self-aware, we run the risk of living in a society in which we are all “as horses” running roughshod over the image of God in ourselves and in others. Without stating that leisure is ethically normative, we are in danger of existing in perpetual bondage to the mass-culture gods of the economic market, whipped by the merciless taskmasters of commerce, without respite from the midcult cretins of conspicuous consumption. The later ba’alei mussar elaborated upon the concept of “spiritual slavery.” In his book B’er Yosef, Rabbi Yosef Zundel of Salant states that the Egyptian bondage comprised two forms of slavery: a physical slavery [shi’bud gashmi], and a spiritual slavery [shi’bud ruchni].25 As a prooftext for his notion that Egyptian slavery constituted a dual bondage, Rabbi Salant cites the phrase “pakod yifkod Elokim etchem” [God shall surely redeem you] (Exodus 13:19, and 3:16 [“pakod pakad’ti etchem”]). The phrase “pakod yifkod” [shall surely redeem] seems redundant. Why, asks Rabbi Salant, does the verse employ a “double lashon,” an apparently redundant expression? It does so, he answers, because the verse teaches that when the Jews were enslaved in Egypt, they were doubly enslaved in the bonds of “sh’nei shi’budim” [two enslavements]: the Egyptian bondage comprised a shibud haguf (or ‘shibud gashmi’) [a physical slavery], and a shi’bud hanefesh (or ‘shi’bud ruchni’)[a spiritual slavery]. Rabbi Salant uses the notion of “sh’nei shi’budim” to explain Rav and Shmuel’s machloket [disagreement] in the Talmud (Mishnah, Pesakhim 10:2) concerning the collective memories that one should recall during the Passover Seder. The Talmud says that during the Seder, we should “begin with the bad, and  Luzzatto, Mesillat Yesharim, 14.  Rabbi Yosef Zundel of Salant, Be’er Yosef, “Parshas Va’eira,” 6:6-7. I am indebted to R. Eliakim Koenigsberg for pointing me to this teaching of R. Salant. On the concept of shi’bud ruchni— spiritual, intellectual, and psychological slavery, and on the importance of achieving “inner liberty,” cf. Heschel, The Sabbath, 89, 90: “Nothing is as hard to suppress as the will to be a slave to one’s own pettiness.… Inner liberty as well depends upon being exempt from domination of things as well as from domination of people.… only a very few are not enslaved to things. This is our constant problem…how to live with things and remain independent.… Outer liberty was given to [man] by God…[but man] himself must achieve his inner freedom.” 24 25

118

D. R. Goodman

end with the good”: “matchil bignut um’sayem b’shevach.” What does it mean to tell the Passover story by “beginning with the bad and ending with the good?” Rav and Shmuel disagreed as to whether this refers to the Jews’ progression from physical bondage to physical freedom (“bitchilah avadim hayinu lefar’oh b’mitzrayim” [Deut. 6:20], “vayotzi’einu Hashem Elokeinu b’yad chazakah uvizro’ah netuya”), or whether it refers to the Jews’ progression from spiritual bondage to spiritual freedom (“bitchilah ovdei avodah zarah hayu avoteinu, v’achshav kirveinu haMakom la’avodato”). Their disagreement, according to Rabbi Salant, was whether, when commemorating our freedom during the Passover Seder, we should be focusing on our physical freedom—our liberation from the shi’bud gashmi—or whether we should be focusing on our spiritual freedom—our liberation from the shi’bud ruchni. That we posken [hold] like both opinions—that the halakhic decisors rule that we should mention both forms of slavery—is indicative of the fact that there were two forms of slavery. But even acknowledging the two forms of slavery still leaves an important question unanswered: which form of freedom is more significant? Which form of slavery is more serious? Does the fact that we begin the Seder with “avadim ha’yinu” [we were slaves]—the shi’bud gashmi, the physical slavery—imply that it is the physical form of slavery that is more grave? According to Rabbi Salant, the type of slavery we first commemorate in the Seder does not imply a value judgment concerning which form of slavery is worse; rather, it conveys a realistic assessment regarding which form of slavery is most apparent to the naked eye. The Passover Seder begins by discussing the shi’bud haguf because the shi’bud haguf was nikar [recognizable], whereas the shi’bud hanefesh was eino nikar [non-recognizable]. It is clear when we’re physically enslaved. It is not as clear when we’re spiritually enslaved. This is why insisting upon an ethic of necessary leisure is all the more important in societies without physical slavery. Because of how difficult it is to realize when we are spiritually, intellectually, and psychologically enslaved, we need mandated periods of rest—days of rest during the week, and years of rest during seven-year cycles—in order to repossess the awareness that we need to recognize when we are locked in states of spiritual bondage, and in order to regain our independence from this insidious form of enslavement. And this, Rabbi Salant explains, is the difference between the two mentions of “sivlot” [travails, or slavery-bonds] in the following two verses (Exodus 6:6–7): “v’hotzeiti etchem mitachat sivlot mitzrayim….vidaytem ki ani Hashem hamotzi etchem mitachat sivlot mitzraym” [and I shall take you out from under the bonds of Egypt…and you shall know that I am the Lord who takes you out from under the bonds of Egypt]. Why, Rabbi Salant asks, is the verse’s first mention of “sivlot” [bonds] spelled chaser—written without the letter ‘vav’—while the second mention of “sivlot” is spelled maleh—spelled with the letter ‘vav’? The answer, he writes, is that the verse is referring to the two forms of slavery, the sh’nei shi’budim: first, God promises to redeem the Jews from the sh’ibud haguf, the obvious, recognizable, physical bondage—God first promises the Jews that they will no longer have to serve the Egyptian taskmasters. Then, God promises the Jews “v’ga’alti etchem” [I shall redeem you]: God promises to redeem the Jews from shi’bud hanefesh

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

119

[spiritual slavery] by giving them the Torah and by making them a spiritual people. Then, and only then—only when they gain spiritual freedom—will they be able to recognize that they had in fact been spiritually enslaved. Embedded in this verse in the Torah is a profound psychological insight: we don’t even recognize when we’ve been spiritually, intellectually, and psychologically enslaved until we’ve been redeemed from this invisible form of slavery. And this, Rabbi Salant explains, is why the ba’al haHagadah [the one who narrates the story of the Exodus during the Passover Seder] starts with “avadim hayinu lephar’oh” [we were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt]. The ikar shi’bud [the principal form of slavery] is the one that is nikar [recognizable]: physical bondage is obvious. But ultimately, it is the ge’ulah ruchnit [the spiritual redemption] that we eventually focus on; we don’t initially perceive spiritual, intellectual, and psychological slavery, but as soon as we do, we realize that true, complete freedom entails redemption from this less obvious, but equally pernicious, state of suppression. If total freedom is the goal, then a total redemption—an all-encompassing, physical and spiritual redemption—must be achieved. The notion that we can be spiritually, intellectually, and psychologically enslaved is highly resonant in the American age of marginalized leisure. Those of us fortunate enough to be living in societies in which we do not face the depredations of sexual slavery—a scourge which still afflicts various parts of our world and which lurks as an ever-present stain upon the human race—no longer have to endure physical slavery. Jews who are fortunate to be living in this moment of history are by and large no longer subject to the more historically familiar form of bondage—the various shi’budei haguf [physical persecutions] which our people have had to endure. But even those of us fortunate enough to not have to endure physical threats must still endure spiritual, psychological, and intellectual threats; we do live in a world in which the concept of shi’bud hanefesh [spiritual slavery] is very real and very strong. Yet it is this second form of slavery—spiritual slavery—that is all the more dangerous precisely because of how difficult it is to diagnose a state of spiritual slavery. In many respects, the worst fears of Aldous Huxley in Brave New World and Ray Bradbury in Fahrenheit 451 have come to life. The soma of Brave New World—the government-mandated drugs which remove New World State citizens’ abilities to think and feel deeply—and the “wall-screens” of Fahrenheit 451—the wall-to-wall television screens in homes which replaced books in Bradbury’s stultifyingly nightmarish world—have their contemporary correlatives in the (largely) vast wasteland of modern television, the internet, the infotainment industry, and in the never-­ending data-streams to which our ubiquitous electronic devices subject us.26 The entertainment, infotainment, and data-consumption culture constitute the soma and wall-­ screens of our time, and they cohere into mental chains that bind us to their will.  Cf. Elizabeth Cohen, “Do You Obsessively Check Your Smartphone?” CNN, July 28, 2011, www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/07/28/ep.smartphone.obsessed.cohen/index.html, and Jennifer Soong, “When Technology Addiction Takes Over Your Life,” WebMD, June 6, 2008, www.webmd. com/mental-health/features/when-technology-addiction-takes-over-your-life. Cited in Schulte, Overwhelmed, 294-5. 26

120

D. R. Goodman

When we are under their sway, we forfeit our capacity for independent thought and freedom of feeling; with too much “box-watching,”27 The Shemitah, with its embedded ethic of leisure and its call to cultivate a sabbatical consciousness, beckons us to shape ourselves and our societies in ways wherein we will regain the ability to think independently, to feel freely, and to cogitate conscientiously. We do realize when we’re physically enslaved, but most of us cannot realize when we’re spiritually enslaved; oftentimes, we don’t realize that we’ve been missing something—in this case, that we’ve been missing a crucial, non-negotiable component of freedom—until we actually regain it. we fall under the weight of extraneous intellectual and psychological forces, and we lose the capacity for full self-awareness and complete consciousness that is constitutive of a tzelem Elokim—a human being created in the image of God. This is what we regain when we recognize the ethic of necessary leisure, and this is what we repossess when we cultivate a sabbatical consciousness.28

 Salman Rushdie, The Satanic Verses (New York: Viking, 1989), 406.  I am indebted to Dr. Moses Pava, Professor of Business Ethics and Dean of the Sy Syms School of Business at Yeshiva University, for introducing me to the concept of “Sabbath consciousness.” Sabbath consciousness is, among other things, the awareness that there are other, equally valuable ways of being in the world other than ways that are economically productive—e.g., the way of being that Heschel termed “appreciation.” Observing the Shabbat and the Shemitah should ideally lead us to realize the inherent value of non-economically productive, non-utilitarian (or, in Heschel’s term, non-“manipulative”) ways of relating to the world. See Heschel, Who is Man?, 82. And cultivating Sabbath and Sabbatical consciousness means cultivating non-utilitarian attitudes toward nature, toward other people, and toward ourselves: the Shabbat and the Shemitah teach us that we are inherently valuable even when we are not productive in a quantifiable way. The ethic of necessary leisure that is embedded in the mitzvot of Shabbat and Shemitah stand for the principle that leisure can be just as—if not more—valuable than work. It is beyond the scope of this article to adjudicate the philosophical question of whether leisure is inherently valuable; for an argument that leisure is valuable only insofar as it provides the mental renewal that allows for a refreshed intellect—and that a refreshed intellect is valuable insofar as it enables a reinvigorated study of Torah—see Rabbi David Stav, Bein Hazemanim [Heb.] (Yediot Aharonot, 2012); for a critique of Stav’s book, see Dr. Roni Shweka’s review, “Pilpul Lish’at Hap’nai,” published in Makor Rishon, 8/10/2012 (rejecting Stav’s premise), available in Hebrew at http://musaf-shabbat. com/2012/08/10/ ‫פלפול‬- ‫לשעת‬- ‫הפנאי‬- ‫רוני‬- ‫ †שויקה‬/. I am grateful to Rabbi Ysoscher Katz for bringing this book and this article to my attention. On the possibility of an independent, inherent value in leisure—or rest, “menuha” —itself, see the countervailing position of Heschel, The Sabbath, 14: “The Sabbath is a day for the sake of life. Man is not a beast of burden, and the Sabbath is not for the purpose of enhancing the efficiency of his work.… The Sabbath is not for the sake of the weekdays; the weekdays are for the sake of the Sabbath. It is not an interlude but the climax of living”; and 22–23: “Menuha is not a negative concept but something real and intrinsically positive. This must have been the view of the ancient rabbis if they believed that it took a special act of creation to bring it into being, that the universe would be incomplete without it.… The essence of good life is menuha. … In later times menuha became a synonym for the life in the world to come, for eternal life.” According to other sifrei mussar, the purpose of Sabbath leisure is to provide opportunities for individuals to develop a greater recognition of and enhanced closeness with God. See, e.g., R. Shimshon Dovid Pincus, Shabbat Malk’ta (Hebrew) (2000), 21. In traditional rabbinic thought, as R. Pincus observes, the purpose of Shabbat is also to provide rest times in which people who are normally preoccupied with work during the week can engage in Torah study; ibid., 22 (quoting the 27 28

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

121

The pauses we take from our regularly scheduled programming during Shabbat and Shemitah allow us to recognize whether we’ve been living in states of spiritual slavery. And if we do find ourselves in such an unfortunate condition, Sabbath days and Sabbatical years enable us to free ourselves not only from physical bondage but from spiritual, intellectual, and psychological bondage as well: The inability to stop work is not always imposed by an outside oppressor; it may reflect a psychological enslavement of the individual. Workaholics abound who cannot ever relinquish work …. The ability to stop working is, therefore, an assertion of an inner freedom. In turn, the capacity for distancing enables one to resist absolute demands, even at work.29

The Shabbat and the Shemitah are those days and years of necessary leisure—the days and years of rest mandated by Torah—during which, by freeing ourselves from the bonds of the modern mass-market mentality, we can recognize the extent to which we daily, weekly, and yearly toil under the bondage of the entertainment, infotainment, and commercial culture. In our day and age, we not only need a Sabbath and a sabbatical; we need a supplementary sabbatical consciousness as well. Yet, at the same time, we must be wary of the distractions that just as easily stem from an excess of leisure. We are living in age of distractions, and we need shabbatot [Sabbaths] and sh’mittot from the distracting idle pursuits in which our phones and mobile devices engulf us. Just as we need sh’mittot because of a lack of leisure, we need mandated rest-days and rest-years to remedy the problem of an excess of leisure: an excess of entertainment, pleasure, and fun is just as distracting from serious self-reflection, genuine self-awareness, and complete conscientiousness as is an excess of work, sweat, and toil. The distractions of entertainment and infotainment can lead us to neglect the contemplation of “higher things,” much as Pharaoh’s slavery (“tichbad ha’avodah al ha’anashim”) was designed to prevent the Jews from contemplating God’s promise of freedom. Later powerful rulers and kings similarly distracted their people—if not with forced labor, then with insidious forms of distracting entertainment—in order to keep their populace and their challengers in check. King Louis XIV of France cleverly employed the pleasurable distractions of entertainment in order to distract the French nobility and parlement (the powerful Paris law court) from challenging his power. He created a lavish court culture at his palace in Versailles in order to allow the nobility to wallow in the court’s idle pleasures so much that they would never wish to risk forfeiting their ostentatious lifestyles by challenging the Sun King’s absolute monarchy.30 Wading through the massive detritus that the modern infotainment industry has heaped upon us—the vast vacuous wasteland of television, the torturous tawdriness

midrash that states, “lo nit’nah haShabbat ela l’talmud torah [the Sabbath was given for nothing else other than for Torah study]”). 29  Rabbi Irving Greenberg, The Jewish Way, 138. 30  John Stanley, Classical Music (Hong Kong: Reed International, 1994), 73. But see Vincent Cronin, Louis XIV (London: Harvill, 1996), 220.

122

D. R. Goodman

of interminable Internet infotainment, malaise-inducing mass-market books, crude cookie-cutter music, meretricious movies that pander to the lowest common denominator, and the mordant monotony of mobile phone games and addling applications—has created a virtual Versailles court of dull, insipid, and dangerously distracting indolent leisure. The doldrums that we sink into when we wallow in these forms of distraction without self-awareness and without mandated respites from this menagerie of distractions is just as mentally taxing in its coopting of our conscientiousness as the endless laying of bricks is physically taxing—both of these forms of “anesthesia of the everyday”31—numb our senses, make us less capable of contemplating higher things (such as the ways in which “[t]he universe” is “a place of wonders”32), and distract us from our task of improving the world. Our mass media of mindless infotainment has animated the menacing monsters of Fahrenheit 451’s wall-screens and Brave New World’s soma and has made these nascent nightmares a terrifying reality. A Shemitah ethic, and a Shemitah—or Sabbatical—consciousness, dictates that we need consistent respites from such “soma.” If we are constantly distracted by mindless TV, how can we develop a capacity—and when will we have the time—to protest against the inequities of our society and to take positive measures to ameliorate our society’s (and our own) faults? Cultivating a Sabbatical consciousness entails recognizing when we are suffering from a surfeit of unnecessary leisure as much as it entails recognizing when we are suffering from a lack of necessary leisure.

 Salman Rushdie, The Satanic Verses (New York: Viking, 1989), 302.  Ibid. Cf. John Updike, Couples (New York: Ballantine, 1968), 107: “We all rather live under wraps, don’t we? We hardly ever really open ourselves to the loveliness around us. Yet there it is, every day, going on and on, whether we look at it or not.” As Neil DeGrasse Tyson wondered in the recent revival of the “Cosmos” (2014) television series (originally created and narrated by Carl Sagan), why is it that so few people in our society know of the accomplishments of Giordano Bruno and Edwin Hubble, but so many people know the names of “reality-TV” celebrities and the names of mass-murderers? As Salman Rushdie answered 25 years ago, “[m]odern mass-murderers, lacking this heroic dimension, are no more than sick, damaged beings…driven, perhaps, by the nonentity’s longing to be noticed, to rise out of the ruck and become, for a moment, a star.” (The Satanic Verses, 456) Unfortunately, our crassly commercial infotainment culture continues to fulfill the attention-seeking longings of these malicious miscreants at the expense of informing the populace about science, public policy, and other matters of vital interest that a citizenry needs to be kept abreast of in order for it to function as a wellinformed self-governing society. As Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen writes, “[t]here has been a serious failure in communicating the results of scientific analysis and in involving the general public in informed ethical reasoning, especially the United States.… Better communication and a more active and a better informed media can enhance our awareness of the need for environment-oriented thinking.” Sen, “Energy, Environment, and Freedom: Why we must think about more than climate change,” The New Republic, August 25, 2014, 35–39, at 37, 38. 31 32

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

123

7.4 The Ethical Implications of a Jewish Ethic of Leisure Judaism believes in the vision of universal redemption. Judaism envisions a world in which the Exodus paradigm of freedom that began with the Jews will eventually encompass all peoples.33 In Western societies such as the United States, and in societies in which the Protestant work ethic has been embraced as the predominant socio-economic ethical norm, incorporating the necessary leisure ethic would provide a critical contrapuntal corrective to our tendency to overindulge in productivity. Many of us in the United States are accustomed to believing what Bertrand Russell once believed: In striving to work towards a world of maximal freedom, the Jewish ethic of necessary leisure carries profound ethical implications. What is implied by a Jewish leisure ethic is an ethical imperative to strive to shape a society in which the necessary leisure ethic is recognized, valued, and upheld. Like most of my generation, I was brought up on the saying: ‘Satan finds some mischief for idle hands to do.’ Being a highly virtuous child, I believed all that I was told, and acquired a conscience which has kept me working hard down to the present moment….

But new findings about the nature of work, rest, and productivity urge us to consider the non-vacuous virtues of idleness and leisure: I want to say, in all seriousness, that a great deal of harm is being done in the modern world by belief in the virtuousness of work, and that the road to happiness and prosperity lies in an organized diminution of work.… The modern man thinks that everything ought to be done for the sake of something else, and never for its own sake.… The notion that the desirable activities are those that bring a profit has made everything topsy-turvy.… It is this divorce between the individual and the social purpose of production that makes it so difficult for men to think clearly in a world in which profit-making is the incentive to industry. We think too much of production, and too little of consumption. One result is that we attach too little importance to enjoyment and simple happiness.34

But, after reflecting upon the sources that portray leisure as a prime Jewish ethic, we, like Russell, may also be poised to undergo an intellectual and ethical revolution in our orientation towards work and leisure: But although my conscience has controlled my actions, my opinions have undergone a revolution. I think that there is far too much work done in the world, that immense harm is caused by the belief that work is virtuous, and that what needs to be preached in modern industrial countries is quite different from what always has been preached. Everyone knows the story of the traveler in Naples who saw twelve beggars lying in the sun (it was before the days of Mussolini), and offered a lira to the laziest of them. Eleven of them jumped up to claim it, so he gave it to the twelfth. This traveler was on the right lines.35

 Greenberg, The Jewish Way, 34, 35: “The freeing of the slaves testified that human beings are meant to be free. History will not be finished until all are free.” (Emphasis in original) 34  Russell, “In Praise of Idleness,” In Praise of Idleness and Other Essays (London: George Allen and Untwin, 1935; New  York: Routledge, 2004), 1–15; citations according to the unpaginated online PDF: https://libcom.org/files/Bertrand%20Russell%20-%20In%20Praise%20of%20 Idleness.pdf 35  Ibid. 33

124

D. R. Goodman

Lacking leisure and deprived of necessary idleness—which should not be conflated with indolence—we may become “cut off from many of the best things”: we may not only become cut off from art, literature, music, and culture, but we may also become cut off from spirituality, religion, our fellows, and our own souls. A Jewish ethic of leisure mandates that we work towards the creation of a society in which “the bulk of the population” no longer suffers “this deprivation; only a foolish asceticism, usually vicarious, makes us continue to insist on work in excessive quantities now that the need no longer exists.”36 What would a society in which the leisure ethic is upheld look like? It would perhaps not look too different from the one envisioned by Russell: a society in which “four hours’ work a day should entitle a man to the necessities and elementary comforts of life, and that the rest of his time should be his to use as he might see fit.”37 We can quibble about the number of hours, but the principle stands: in a society in which the capacity for productivity has been exponentially increased by industrialization, mechanization, and technological advances, the number of hours per day that most people should work should be proportionally decreased. And to those who would say that “if most people are granted this amount of leisure time, they would not know how to use this time,” the appropriate reply is that the reason people don’t know how to use their leisure time is because our social and educational system has not adequately assisted us in cultivating tastes (e.g., art appreciation) “which would enable a man to use leisure intelligently.”38 Or, as Heschel articulated this dilemma, “we know what to do with space but do not know what to do about time.”39 We still live in a society in want of necessary leisure. Quite simply, we work too much, and we do not rest enough. Contemporary journalists continue to document the excessive work-hours logged by most Americans. And social scientists have found that American parents have the longest average workdays of any parents in the industrialized world.40 In Overwhelmed: Work, Love, and Play When No One

 Ibid.  Ibid. 38  Ibid. “I am not thinking mainly of the sort of things that would be considered ‘highbrow,’” Russell explains: “Peasant dances have died out except in remote rural areas, but the impulses which caused them to be cultivated must still exist in human nature. The pleasures of urban populations have become mainly passive: seeing cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on. This results from the fact that their active energies are fully taken up with work; if they had more leisure, they would again enjoy pleasures in which they took an active part.” 39  Heschel, The Sabbath, 5 (somewhat ironically citing Russell in ibid., n. 2). This dilemma, Heschel says, results from the fact that time, unlike space, has no “thinginess,” and we have great difficulty dealing with dimensions such as “time, which, being thingless and insubstantial, appears to us as if it had no reality.” Ibid. Cf. http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/63ite2/theword%2D%2D-truthiness and http://www.merriam-webster.com/info/06words.htm 40  Australian parents also tend to have very long workdays. See M. Bianchi, John P. Robinson, and Melissa A.  Milkie, Changing Rhythms of American Family Life (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2006); Lyn Craig, “Parenthood, Gender and Work-Family Time in the United States, Australia, Italy, France, and Denmark,” Journal of Marriage and Family 72:5 (October 2010): 36 37

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

125

Has the Time,41 Brigid Schulte addresses a profoundly “American” dilemma—in a world in which we are overworked, overwhelmed, and overburdened, “Torah mah t’hei aleihah [what will become of our knowledge of Torah]?”,42 so to speak? American society tends to place a premium on work and productivity. Yet, as Sophie McBain has written, if we think that by simply working more hours, we will be more productive, we are mistaken: so to speak? Where will we find the leisure time that is necessary to engage in Torah study, or in artistic creativity, or in the “difficult pleasures” of literary reading? In short, in a world in which we work too much, will we ever again be able to appreciate the virtues of play? There’s no hard and fast link between working hours and productivity…. Generally, it does seem that reducing the number of hours worked increases productivity: Greeks, for instance, work the longest average hours in Europe, putting in an average of 2,032 hours a year, but they are the 8th least productive workers. After Greece, Poland and Hungary work the second- and third-longest average hours respectively, but Poland’s workforce is the least productive in the OECD, followed by Hungary. The five countries that work the fewest hours (Netherlands, Germany, Norway, France and Denmark respectively) are all in the top ten most productive OECD countries.43

Even activities like play, which are often regarded as “frivolous” froth, can have surprising benefits. If we have the leisure time to play—or to enjoy the type of art and literature that exhibits the quintessentially Shakespearean jeux d’esprit—we may even become more productive: There is a kind of magic in play. What might seem like a frivolous or even childish pursuit is ultimately beneficial. It’s paradoxical that a little bit of

1344–61, doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00769.x; Almudena Sevilla-Sanz, José Ignacio GiménezNadal, and Jonathan Gershuny, “Leisure Inequality in the U.S.: 1965–2003” (working paper, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, 2011), www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/documents/working-papers/2010/swp101.pdf; Magali Rheault, “In U.S., 3 in 10 Working Adults Are Strapped for Time,” Gallup, July 20, 2011, www.gallup.com/poll/148583/poll/Working-Adults-Strapped-Time. aspx; “Americans Stressed-Out; 75% Too Busy for Vacation,” Odyssey Media Group, September 14, 2010, www.odysseymediagroup.com/nan/Editorial-Hotels-And-Resorts. asp?ReportID=418924. Cited in Brigid Schulte, Overwhelmed: Work, Love, and Play When No One Has the Time (New York: Sarah Crichton, 2014), 290–94. 41  Cf. John P. Robinson and Geoffrey Godbey, Time for Life; The Surprising Ways Americans Use Their Time (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997). 42  b. Berakhot 35b. 43  “Why We Should All be Working Less, by Sophie McBain, The New Republic, April 11, 2014, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117334/frances-labor-laws-why-we-should-all-be-workingl e s s ? a a n d u t m _ c a m p a i g n = t n r- d a i l y - n ew s l e t t e r a n d u t m _ s o u r c e = h s _ e m a i l a n d u t m _ medium=emailandutm_content=12476556. See also Steven Greenhouse, “Americans’ International Lead in Hours Worked Grew in 90’s, Report Shows,” New  York Times, www. nytimes.com/2001/09/01/us/americans-international-lead-in-hours-worked-grew-in-90-s-reportshows.html, as cited in Schulte, Overwhelmed, 290: “Greenhouse reports that the International Labor Organization found that Americans worked 137 hours more a year than Japanese workers, 260 hours more than British workers, and nearly 500 hours more than German workers.”

126

D. R. Goodman

‘nonproductive’ activity can make one enormously more productive and invigorated in other aspects of life.44 Positing necessary leisure as a normative ethic implies that it is our responsibility, in whatever capacity we possess, to lobby for larger levels of leisure. If we happen to be in politics, or if it is in our capacity to make the case to our Congress persons and governmental representatives, the ethical value of necessary leisure and the cultivation of Sabbatical consciousness may entail advocating for a policy that is similar to the one which France is poised to adopt: “Labor unions and corporate representatives in France have agreed on an ‘obligation to disconnect from remote communications tools’” for a set amount of time per day. The French Labor Ministry is considering a bill that “would require that employers verify that the 11 hours of daily rest time to which all workers are legally entitled be spent uninterrupted.”45 In addition, it may entail, as Judith Shulevitz suggests in The Sabbath World, adopting “European Union vacation polices (a minimum of four weeks), shorter work-weeks (35 hours, say), paid parental leave, and limits on overtime. We could emulate Germany and the Netherlands and give workers the right to reduce their hours and their pay, unless companies can prove that this would constitute a hardship.”46 With their 35 hour work-week and with their generous vacation allotments, the French appear to have shaped a society based (knowingly or not) upon the ethic of leisure; in this regard, France and Sweden currently possess a greater degree of Sabbatical consciousness than does the United States. But, just as the Torah realizes that Shabbat and Shemitah have to be enforced—many people will not simply cease being productive unless this cessation from work is enforced through external mechanisms—the French and the Swedish realize that these rest hours have to be enforced. One might think, ‘what need would there be to mandate a rest-period and to enact a measure to enforce it? Wouldn’t people naturally want to rest, relax, and have free time?’ Not necessarily, from what we know of human nature and human

 Stuart Brown, Play: How It Shapes the Brain, Opens the Imagination, and Invigorates the Soul (New York: Avery, 2009), 11, as cited in Schulte, Overwhelmed, 327. Cf. Judy Martin, “Employee Brain on Stress Can Quash Creativity and Competitive Edge,” Forbes, September 5, 2012, www. forbes.com/sites/work-in-progress/2012/09/05/employee-brain-on-stress-can-quash-creativitycompetitive/edge/; Nicky Phillips, “Taking a Break Is Secret to Success,” Sydney Morning Herald, August 16, 2012, www.smh.com/au/national/education/taking-a-break-is-secret-to-success-20120815-24951.html; John Tierney, “Discovering the Virtues of a Wandering Mind,” New  York Times, June 28, 2010, www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/science/29tier. html?pagewanted=all. Cited in Schulte, Overwhelmed, 331. 45  “Deal Seeks A Respite From Email: French May Limit Contact With Work,” by Scott Sayare, New York Times, April 12, 2014, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/12/world/europe/in-france-amove-to-limit-off-the-clock-work-emails.html?_r=0. See also Derek Thompson, “The Only Advanced Country Without a National Vacation Policy? It’s the U.S.,” The Atlantic, July 2, 2012, www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/07/the-only-advanced-country-without-a-nationalvacation-policy-its-the-us/2559317. Cited in Schulte, Overwhelmed, 290. 46  Shulevitz, The Sabbath World, 210. 44

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

127

history. The human drive to be productive, to work in order to accrue economic rewards, and to create is such a potent corrective to the human proclivity for inertia that both the Torah and, much later, the French and Swedish governments, realized that the work ethic can overpower the leisure ethic if the work ethic is left unregulated. Thus, to correct the tendency to overwork and to provide a space for reflection, the Torah, and later, the French and Swedish governments, concluded that if human beings are not compelled to rest, we may become imprisoned in the perpetual pursuit of profit and may never rest at all. The Sabbath, the Sabbatical, and the 11 hours of daily rest time, all bespeak an ethic of necessary leisure: To walk away from production and live the Sabbath is to renounce the absoluteness of the profit motive; it is intended to psychologically free the individual to impose moral values on his or her work as well. There is grave danger in idolatry of wealth…..A society that worships wealth usually degrades the value of the poor or perhaps all humans. Net worth is confused with intrinsic worth.47

Finally, as human involvement in work deepens, the labor in itself can become a form of slavery. The test of stopping short of servitude is the ability to stop working, to assert mastery over the work instead of succumbing to its lures and demands. This is the central function of Shabbat: “Six days [a week] you work/create; on the seventh day you rest/stop” (Exodus 34:21).48 Or, in the inimitable words of Heschel: He who wants to enter the holiness of the day must first lay down the profanity of clattering commerce, of being yoked to toil. He must go away from the screech of dissonant days, from the nervousness and fury of acquisitiveness and the betrayal in embezzling his own life. … Six days a week we wrestle with the world, wringing profit from the earth; on the Sabbath we especially care for the seed of eternity planted in the soul. … Six days a week we seek to dominate the world, on the seventh day we try to dominate the self.49 [T]he seventh day is a mine where spirit’s precious metal can be found with which to construct the palace of time, a dimension of time in which the human…aspire[s] to approach the likeness of the divine. … The art of keeping the seventh day is the art of painting on the canvas of time the mysterious grandeur of the climax of creation: as He sanctified the seventh day, so shall we.50

 Rabbi Irving Greenberg, The Jewish Way, 138.  Ibid., 139 (emphasis added). See also Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Sabbath (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1951). Cf. Shulevitz, The Sabbath World (discussing the relevance of, and need for, a Sabbath in a society marked by relentless consumerism and incessant technological stimulation), esp. 204, referencing the concept of a “technology Sabbath”—set-aside periods of time where ‘technological Sabbatarians’ disengage from e-mail, cellphones, and the Internet. 49  Heschel, The Sabbath, 13. 50  Ibid., 16. 47 48

128

D. R. Goodman

As Maimonides writes, the central function of Shemitah—a heightened, maximalized Shabbat51—is that it allows us to free ourselves from the bonds of work: The laws of the Sabbatical and the Jubilee are given in compassion for man and provide space [har’hava (viz., leisure)] for all of humanity.52

Shemitah and Shabbat provide us with the leisure that is necessary in order for us to reassert control over our lives. During Sabbath days and sabbatical years, we can tune out the befuddling bruit of the banal infotainment industry and become attuned to the bravura Beethovian bisbigliando of our own souls. But in order for leisure to truly be effective—in order for us to truly gain the time and mental space we need for self-awareness, reflection, and conscientiousness—these hours, days, and years of leisure must be made mandatory; otherwise, the lure of profit and the demand of work can prove too great a burden to overcome. The Torah thus mandates the Sabbath and the Sabbatical; a society with a Sabbatical consciousness, and a society that upholds the ethic of necessary leisure, would mandate necessary times of leisure as well.53

7.5 The Underlying Theology Implicit in the Ethic of Necessary Leisure While it is beyond the scope of this article to fully explore the theology undergirding the ethic of leisure, perhaps we can proffer the following position: God, as some Jewish thinkers and theologians have stated, is “free”—that is, in addition to the divine capacities (e.g., infinite consciousness, omniscience, and beneficence) and attributes (e.g., loving, merciful, and gracious) that theologians have traditionally ascribed to God, God is also characterized as being free: as Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks writes,  Though the link between Shabbat and Shemitah —the Sabbath and the Sabbatical—is self-evident from the Torah (see Leviticus 25:2-7—“the land shall observe a sabbath [sic] of the Lord…. in the seventh year the land shall have a sabbath of complete rest…” JPS), from their linguistic similarities, and from their conceptual parallels, the Talmud makes this link explicit through a g’zeirah shavah in b. Moed Katan, 4a. See also Mishnah, Shevi’it 1:4 (Shabbat as a binyan av. for Sh’vi’it). 52  Maimonides, Moreh Nevuchim [Guide], part III ch. 39 (translation mine). On additional conceptual linkages between Shabbat and Shemitah as elucidated by classical and medieval Jewish commentaries, see Ramban [Nachmanides] Commentary on the Torah, commentary to Leviticus 25:2, s.v. “Shabbat LaShem,” and Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, Shabbat Ha’aretz, introduction, 8. I am grateful to Eugene Rabina for pointing me to the interpretations of the Ramban and R. Kook. 53  Applying a sabbatical consciousness and integrating the ethic of leisure into governmental policy-making could significantly improve citizens’ work-life balance by, e.g., limiting the number of hours per day and per week that people can work; by crafting a national vacation policy; by placing limits on the number of days per year people can work; and perhaps even by marshaling economic resources to ensure that citizens enjoy at least one sabbatical year during their working careers. 51

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

129

From the outset, the Hebrew Bible speaks of a free God, not constrained by nature, who, creating man in his own image, grants him that same freedom, commanding him, not programming him, to do good. The entire biblical project, from beginning to end, is about how to honor that freedom…. Biblical morality is the morality of freedom, its politics are the politics of freedom, and its theology is the theology of freedom.54

“Abrahamic monotheism,” continues Rabbi Sacks, “tells a story about the power of human freedom, lifted by its encounter with the ultimate source of freedom.”55 God, as described in the Bible, is “free from nature,” in stark contrast to the pagan gods which were bound to and embedded in nature. Nothing binds God, and God is bound to no thing, person, or entity—God is radically free.56 If we are called upon to imitate God, as Deuteronomy (28:9, 5:33, 8:6, 11:22, 13:5) teaches us—“v’halakhta bid’rakhav [and you shall walk in his ways]”—and, as the rabbinic sources teach, if we are called upon to imitate God by acting like God,57 then we are also called upon to imitate God’s freedom by striving for more freedom for ourselves and by seeking to move society along the path of greater freedom.

 Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, The Great Partnership: Science, Religion, and the Search for Meaning (New York: Schocken, 2011), 124 (emphasis added); cf. ibid., 71 (“[t]he Hebrew Bible is entirely about this drama of human freedom.”). On the “free God” theology, cf. Paul Tillich, The Construction of the History of Religion in Schelling’s Positive Philosophy: Its Presuppositions and Principles (Victor Nuovo, trans.; London: Associated University Presses, 1974), 137–8 (asserting that divine revelation is premised upon divine freedom); Jon D.  Levenson, Sinai and Zion: An Entry Into the Jewish Bible (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1985), 22: “the [biblical] deity is like his worshippers: mobile, rootless and unpredictable. ‘I shall be where I shall be’ (3:14)—nothing more definite can be said. This is a God who is free, unconfined by the boundaries that man erects”; and Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: HarperCollins, 1981), 106–7: “Paganism, with its notion that divine powers can be manipulated by a caste of professionals through a set of carefully prescribed procedures, is trapped in the reflexes of a mechanistic worldview while from the biblical perspective reality is in fact controlled by the will of an omnipotent God beyond all human manipulation.” 55  Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, The Great Partnership, 290 (emphasis added); cf. ibid., 69, 113, 124, 126 (“It is no accident that freedom occupies a central place in the Hebrew Bible”), and 245. 56  Nahum M.  Sarna, Understanding Genesis: The World of the Bible in the Light of History (Schocken: New  York, 1970), 11–12. Elaborating upon this concept, Rabbi Sacks writes that “[u]nlike the gods of myth, God is not part of nature. He is the author of nature which he created by a free act of will. By conferring his image on humankind, God gives us freedom of the will…. Rejecting myth, the Bible discovers freedom.” Sacks, The Great Partnership, 68–9. Cf. Greenberg, The Jewish Way, 35, and 145: “God is unique because God is truly free. The Divine is not programmed.” 57  See b. Shab. 133b, Sotah 14a, and Sifrei on Deut. 11:22; cf. Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, “Laws of Character Traits” 1:5–6, and idem, Guide of the Perplexed i. 54; cf. Norman Lamm, “Some Notes on the Concept of Imitatio Dei,” in Rabbi Joseph H. Lookstein Memorial Volume (ed. Leo Landman; Hoboken, NJ: KTAV, 1980) 217–29; and Leon Roth, “Imitatio Dei and the Idea of Holiness,” in Is There a Jewish Philosophy?: Rethinking Fundamentals (London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 1999), 22–3. 54

130

D. R. Goodman

By creating us in His image, the free God endowed us with an inkling of His capacity for total, complete, and radical freedom; to imitate God is to strive for greater freedom on behalf of as many people as possible and in as many manners as possible, for [O]ur freedom and creativity are what connect us to the divine …. one of the driving themes of the Hebrew Bible is that it is precisely in our freedom that the human person most resembles God.58

“Abrahamic monotheism,” Rabbi Sacks further states, “is based upon the idea that the free God desires the free worship of free human beings.”59 God desires that we all become free, because God is free; thus, we are instructed to imitate the free God by seeking more freedom for ourselves, for others—physical, intellectual, and spiritual freedom—and by striving to construct a world in which more people can achieve more varieties of freedom. On the Sabbath day and during the Sabbatical year, we are free from our labors and, in ancient times when the institution of slavery was still extant, slaves were free during Sabbaths and Sabbaticals as well; the prohibition against working a slave on the Sabbath, and the command to free slaves during the Sabbatical year, is reflective of the ultimate goal that Judaism envisions for humanity—complete and total freedom.60 At the heart of the Shabbat and the Shemitah is one of the central teachings of Judaism: the crucial, non-negotiable, inviolable principle that every human being deserves to be free. The institutions of the Sabbath and Sabbatical proclaim a ringing message of freedom: they teach that liberty should fill the earth as water fills the seas. They cry out to a psychologically enslaved society to release humanity from its intellectual bonds; they cry out to an overworked world to uphold the ethic of necessary leisure; and they cry out to an overwhelmed world to allow the free human being to imitate the free God by achieving complete freedom.61 Judaism, as Rabbi Irving Greenberg teaches, believes that redemption starts with the Jews, but doesn’t end with the Jews: Judaism envisions freedom for everyone.62 In the perfect messianic world, every individual will have achieved this state of complete and total freedom; when we act out our vision for a perfect world during Sabbath days and Sabbatical years, we rehearse this messianic state of complete freedom—a freedom that will allow us to more closely imitate the free God, thereby bringing us closer to realizing our potentials as beings created in the image of God.

 Sacks, The Great Partnership, 113.  Ibid., 132. 60  Cf. ibid., 228 (the command that, on “the Sabbath…even slaves are free,” guides slave-masters to “eventually learn that no human should enslave another”). 61  On further conceptual (and pragmatic) associations between Shabbat, Shemitah, and freedom, see, e.g., Greenberg, The Jewish Way, 149–153. 62  Ibid., 149, 153. 58 59

7  Sabbatical Consciousness: The Jewish Leisure Ethic as an Antidote to Conspicuous…

131

True leisure is “that place in which we realize our humanity,”63 and Sabbath days and Sabbatical years are the mandated times of leisure “in which we abandon our plebeian pursuits and reclaim our authentic state.”62 In a society whose extended work-hours and overriding emphasis on economic productivity make it extremely difficult to realize our humanity, the Shabbat day and the Shemitah year are potent antidotes to the poison of overwhelming work. The Sabbath and the Sabbatical are not only ritualistic precepts; they are also ethical institutions which, by their very existence—and through the power of their observance—lodge ethical protests against the indignity inflicted upon overworked individuals. During the Sabbath and the Sabbatical, we attain the reflective time we ought to have, and we regain the opportunity to realize our humanity. In an overwhelmed, overburdened, and overworked society, the Sabbath and the Sabbatical sonorously state that a reinvigorated societal ethic of leisure is absolutely necessary.64

7.6 Necessary Leisure and Conscious Capitalism Finally, we turn to the question of what the Jewish ethic of necessary leisure can teach us about the subject of conscious capitalism. Put simply, it is that the principle that there are days and times in which God not only suggests but mandates rest should act as a regulatory standard for how we should engage with one another as economic agents and for how we should conduct ourselves within capitalist economies more broadly. Whereas capitalism (at least in unregulated forms) tends to adhere to a value system according to which productivity and the profit motive is king and all else must bend its knee toward it, the ethic of necessary leisure would say that there are higher, more important values than profit and productivity— namely, intellectual and psychological development and the cultivation of the spirit. According to the ethic of necessary leisure, we should give ourselves—and the economy more broadly—regular periods of rest so that we can partake of the types of intellectual and spiritual pursuits we cannot normally attend to while we our preoccupied with profits and productivity. The ethic of necessary leisure informs us that essential to making capitalism conscious is to remember that there are higher, more vital values than capitalism itself, and that the way of recalling and reinforcing these values is through allotting ourselves regular periods of rest—such as Sabbath days and Sabbatical years—during which we can more fully care for our minds and nurture our spirits.  Leisure Studies Department, University of Iowa, as referenced in Schulte, Overwhelmed, inside flap. Cf. Shulevitz, The Sabbath World, 202: In 1948…German Catholic philosopher Josef Pieper wrote a book on leisure in which he begged his readers not to succumb to the ethos of “total work” and forget the ancient understanding of leisure as the highest good, the point of life that which makes possible the achievements of the human spirit, philosophy and music. “Leisure,” wrote Pieper, “is a form of silence, of that silence which is the prerequisite of the apprehension of reality.” In 1962, the American political philosopher Sebastian de Grazia defended leisure in the name of Aristotle, who thought that a citizen could not be free without leisure and the ability to use it well. 64  Heschel, The Sabbath, 30. 63

132

D. R. Goodman

Daniel Ross Goodman is a writer, rabbi, and scholar (PhD, Jewish Theological Seminary of America). He is the author of Somewhere over the Rainbow: Wonder and Religion in American Cinema (Hamilton Books, 2020) and Soloveitchik’s Children: Irving Greenberg, David Hartman, Jonathan Sacks, and the Future of Jewish Theology in America (University of Alabama Press, 2023). His scholarly articles have appeared in the Journal of Jewish Ethics, Religious Studies Review, Journal of Religion & Film, and the Harvard Theological Review.  

Chapter 8

The Sabbatical Paradigm Shift Jeremy Benstein

Only connect! Only connect the prose and the passion, and both will be exalted… E. M. Forster

8.1 Introduction: Connecting Normative and Narrative Part of the genius of Judaism is its creative synthesis of halacha and aggada, rules and stories, law and lore, normative and narrative. Or as Forster puts it, “prose and passion.”1 One paradigmatic example of this is the seventh day, Shabbat (the sabbath). Defined by a raft of regulations (literally hundreds of do’s and don’ts), aggadically speaking, Shabbat is both woven into the Creation cycle (Gen. 1,2), and also signifies zecher leyitziyat Mitzrayim, a remembrance of the Exodus from bondage in Egypt. Thus the regulations themselves connect us both to our place in Creation, and to notions of freedom from different sorts of slavery in our lives. Another cycle of seven(s), the seven-week Omer period that links Pesach/ Passover and Shavuot/Pentecost ties together both the historical side of Exodus, freedom and the reception of the Torah, with the agricultural side of the wheat and barley harvests, culminating in the thanksgiving of the bikurim, the first fruits and  While we think of dry halacha as being more prosaic as opposed to often ‘juicy’ aggadot, it is aggada that is literally prose, and any student of halacha will tell you that there is much passion there as well. 1

This essay has been inspired in part by teachings of many, in particular, study with Rabbis Nina Beth Cardin and Micha Odenheimer (founder of Tevel B’Tzedek). See also Odenheimer’s article “A Jewish Response to Globalization” in Righteous Indignation: a Jewish Call for Justice, edited by Or Rose, Jo Ellen Green Keiser, and Margie Klein (Jewish Lights, 2008). J. Benstein (*) The Heschel Center for Sustainability, Tel Aviv, Israel © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_8

133

134

J. Benstein

their offering, part of the Shavuot celebration. The maturation of the recently enslaved people and their acceptance of a social and spiritual framework of civilization, and the growth of the grain that is the staff – and stuff – of life, the foundation of material civilization, parallel and mirror each other. Part of the largest cycle of seven years, the shmita year (literally, “year of release”) does indeed possess a wealth of legislation which creates a yearlong Sabbath: releasing the land from cultivation, the poor from debts, and in general promoting social solidarity in getting through a year of a lower material standard of living together. Property rights are suspended: equal access to the land and all its bounty is the rule of the day for all, human beings and the beasts of the field alike. As Odenheimer writes: Shmita must be understood, first and foremost, as part of a cluster of commandments that unite both the narrative of the Torah and its normative economic and social commandments. They include the Sabbath, the Jubilee year in which land and thus wealth are redistributed, the amnesty on debt, and the prohibition against interest (given in the Torah within the context of the Jubilee) and much more. The thrust of these commandments is to insure that the accumulation of wealth is balanced and held within a larger vision of society in which the needs of each human being for security, work, nutrition and wellbeing trump any notion of property as an absolute right. Every seven years we are reminded that in a deep sense, the earth belongs to everyone equally. Every 50 years, during the jubilee, we learn that the land and resources cannot truly be sold or owned: “For mine is the whole earth, you are strangers and sojourners with me.”2

However, the collection of commandments together known as shmita lack an overarching narrative, a mythic “back-story” that ties it in to the larger historical experiences and themes that inform the rest of Jewish existence. In that respect, shmita seems to exist in glorious isolation from the rest of our Jewish lives, and that, coupled with the trenchant critique that shmita embodies of our economy and society – makes it more of a “hard-sell” in our world. I would like to explore some deeper connections that can help us understand a broader frame of shmita, and how it fits in to larger questions of Jewish being in the world.

8.2 Why Seven? The seven-year cyclicity of shmita is so basic that another name of shmita is shvi’it, “the seventh [year].” But what is the real significance of the shmita cycle being seven years? The number seven is so ubiquitous in Jewish tradition that we might miss some less explicit underlying connections. While the idea of a seven-day week

 Micha Odenheimer, https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/shmita-judaisms-next-gift-to-humankind/

2

8  The Sabbatical Paradigm Shift

135

seems fundamental,3 the idea of an agriculturally related cycle of seven years is less obvious. Here is where the important role of literary context and allusion comes in, to give us a back-story and a frame for a wider understanding. Where else in the Biblical narrative is there the idea of agriculture and crop yields being connected to a seven-year period? While Jacob working for Laban for seven years in order to win the hand of Rachel suggest itself4 – the more relevant parallel is with Pharaoh’s dreams of cows and stalks, and Joseph’s interpretations of them as signifying seven fat years of abundance followed by seven lean ones of drought and famine (see Gen. 41). With divine aid, Joseph interprets Pharaoh’s dreams, but then goes one further and becomes development consultant to the Crown. He makes this charged proposal: Let Pharaoh …appoint overseers over the land, and organize the land of Egypt in the seven years of plenty. And let them gather all the food of these good years that come, and lay up grain under the hand of Pharaoh for food to be stored in the cities. And the food shall be for a store to the land against the seven years of famine, which shall come upon the land of Egypt, so that the land may not perish in the famine (Gen 41:34–36).

This of course sounds like the epitome of foresight and good management, and is indeed roundly understood as another of the many examples of Joseph’s perspicacity and shrewd character.5 It also drives the narrative forward, for the vast stores of food in Egypt, collected and centrally administered by the State, are what bring the brothers down to Egypt, providing the setting and the setup for the confrontation there with Joseph, and subsequent reconciliation.

8.3 Bad Years After Good But the end is well known: after the seven good years, where surplus yields are collected by the state apparatus, overseen by Joseph, come the lean years, where the people’s food is sold back to them by the State. It doesn’t seem to raise an eyebrow

 But not without its own story: see The Seven-Day Circle: The History and Meaning of the Week (New York: Free Press, 1985), Israeli-born sociologist Evyatar Zerubavel’s seminal book on the origin of the seven-day week in Western civilization. While of course the Bible was instrumental in promulgating the idea of a sevenday week via the cosmogony of Genesis 1, this almost certainly goes back to older astrological beliefs connected to Sun, Moon and the five visible planets, as evidenced by the names of the days in scores of cultures, listed there. 4  And seems almost shmita-like in its image of years of labor crowned in the seventh by cessation and the attainment of love and the enjoyment of a home… 5  See eg, Nahum Sarna The JPS Torah Commentary – Genesis (JPS, 1989): “[This section] has been included here because it provides examples of Joseph’s wisdom and leadership capabilities. It also supplies an explanation for the extraordinary contrast between the Egyptian system, which concentrated land ownership in the hands of the state, and the Israelite ideal of private ownership of property.” (p. 321, at 13–26). The irony of this comment is of course that it is “Joseph’s wisdom” that creates the “Egyptian system” that contrasts with the “Israelite ideal.” 3

136

J. Benstein

that widespread disaster relief is not freely given, that all the vast stores collected precisely for this purpose are monetized and that the royals here engage in the meanest form of profiteering. At first, of course, flush from the successes of the fat years, the system probably didn’t evince much of a problem. After such a long winning streak, the people would have some savings set aside for the occasional setback – given the fear of drought, a non-rainy day, as it were. Likewise, each bad harvest is probably also initially perceived as temporary. No farmer has planned for seven years of famine. It is not coincidental that in this hierarchical system of command and control, there is also no transparency: Joseph, and through him Pharaoh, are privy to the divine prognostication that has allowed them to corner the grain markets, and make ruthless use of their monopoly. The crucial information of the changing yields and availability of grain has been withheld from the citizens, preventing them from making rationally strategic economic and other decisions. Space does not permit quoting in full the complete dismantlement of Egyptian society that is the direct result of Joseph’s wisdom and shrewdness (see Gen. 47:13–26). But it is catastrophic and total: first all the money, the hard-earned savings of the people, runs out, so they pay with their livestock (including draught animals). After that, with nothing left, they enter into complete subjugation – “buy us and our land for bread” (47:19) – allowing for the complete nationalization of the land, the removal of rural populations, and a grain tax in perpetuity.6 Is it any wonder that this is the society that later on enslaved the Israelites? In fact, their slavery was intimately bound up with the regime of accumulation that so characterized post-Joseph Egypt: according to the Biblical narrative, it was not the pyramids that the children of Israel built, but the great store cities – ‘arei miskanot – of Pithom and Raamses (Ex. 1:11). In sum, the Bible documents the first boom and bust business cycle –and what happens when a canny tycoon is given both insider info and the keys to the kingdom. While the resulting hyper-feudal system is far from capitalism, the regime of amassing and hoarding is a precursor of Karl Marx’s famous dictum: “Accumulate, accumulate! This is Moses and the Prophets!” (Capital, vol. 1). Or given the fact that both capital and the means of production were appropriated here, shall we say: ‘This is Joseph and the Pharaohs?’ This then is the ur-image of a seven-year plan connected to agricultural fertility, property regime, decentralized versus concentrated wealth, and dealing with abundance and scarcity. This is what they are leaving in the Exodus from Egypt. This is the anti-model, the negative idea that the Torah’s vision of a compassionate society is meant to negate. But before we can completely understand that other vision of an established, sustainable society, with its alternative idea of a seven-year cycle, there is an important intermediate link, just as there is a transitional period that needs to be lived through to get from the House of Bondage to the Land of Milk and Honey.  The oppression of this entire plan did not completely escape traditional commentators – see e.g. Rashbam on 47:21 where Joseph’s actions are compared to those of the evil conqueror and dictator, Sennacharib. 6

8  The Sabbatical Paradigm Shift

137

8.4 The Antidote to Egypt What does it mean to leave this Egypt? “This Egypt” isn’t a place, it’s a pattern of thought, a system of beliefs, a conceptual framework. In short, a paradigm. For Israel to leave “this Egypt,” they need new patterns of thought, a different system of beliefs, another conceptual framework – a paradigm shift. What can lead to a complete paradigm shift among a newly liberated people, who has only known slavery and dependence, and a single response to fear and scarcity: stockpile, hoard, concentrate and oppress? What would represent and symbolize the opposite: anti-­ accumulation, anti-control, anti-Egypt? It would essentially have to change their entire experience of their day to day sustenance, of what it is and how it is gotten. It would have to reinforce the idea that food is a gift freely given, to be enjoyed equally by all, that it shouldn’t be stockpiled or owned, or even bought and sold. That it is exists to fulfill need, not greed. This sounds like a pretty tall order, like it would take a miracle, an amazing surprising wonderful boon – like manna from heaven. And indeed, it is that miraculous, mythical manna that is the ultimate contradiction to Egypt and all that it represents. As told in Exodus 16, manna is given by God to feed the people in the desert. It falls every day, and crucially – it can’t be hoarded: neither over-collected (v. 17–18), nor stored (v. 19–20). Everybody gets exactly what they need, no more no less, and those who don’t trust the system, and try to salt some away – get only stench and maggots. Significantly, manna is implicitly contrasted with slavery in the description of its collection in Exodus 16:4, “and the people shall go out and gather each day that day’s portion, “ laktu devar yom beyomo. For only a few chapters earlier, in Exodus 5:13, the Egyptian taskmasters cruelly insist on the Israelite’s fulfillment of their daily quota of bricks, even though they are now to be given no straw  – kalu ma’aseichem devar yom beyomo.7 For slavery, the daily quota was a minimum to be produced and served up to the overlords, for the manna – the daily portion is a maximum, limiting personal acquisition and consumption. The only time a double portion is given is on Friday, for the Shabbat – to obviate work on the day of rest. That is, ‘setting aside’ is allowed for the sake of spiritual regeneration, but not for amassing wealth. A halacha that came from this aggada is that one of the reasons for Jews having two challot, loaves of bread, on the Shabbat table is exactly to remember this doubling, the lechem mishneh, of the manna of Shabbat (16:22). As we shall see, this linkage of manna and Shabbat is highly significant in the understanding of the deeper narrative context of shmita.

 I’m indebted to Odenheimer, op. cit., for this connection, and other points regarding the significance of the manna in the narrative progression. 7

138

J. Benstein

8.5 From Gathering to Ingathering: Shmita, Shabbat – And the Memory of Manna The manna was unique to that time of wandering in the desert, which itself was sui generis. What replaced the manna? What could replace it? According to the Book of Joshua, the manna ceased when the Israelites tasted of the bounty of the Land of Israel: “On that same day when they ate of the produce of the land, the manna ceased. The Israelites got no more manna; that year they ate of the yield of the land of Canaan” (Joshua 5:12). Joshua provides one angle of the story of the entrance to the land. Another is provided by Leviticus 25, the chapter that introduces the idea of shmita. There it states explicitly that immediately upon entering the land, the Israelite nation is meant to observe shmita: “When you enter the land that I assign to you, the land shall observe a sabbath of the Lord” (25:2). Putting the two together you get a whole nation going straight from being manna-eaters to being shmita-observers. But even without that direct implied contiguity – shmita is a direct continuation of the manna paradigm. However, instead of being applicable day in and day out (yom be’yomo), it is deemed doable one year in seven; back to that seven-year plan idea. If you are forbidden from tilling the land and commercializing what grows of itself, then you are thrown back willy-nilly into a veritable gatherer economy. Add to that the laws against stockpiling shmita produce, even fencing in property, not to mention forgiving loans and getting people out of debt – and you get a year-long anti-Egypt, that the manna was really only a foretaste of. In Egypt the regime centralized production and distribution and sunk people hopelessly into debt  – the shmita paradigm does the exact opposite on all counts. There is a key insight that connects the weekly Shabbat cycle with the seven-­ yearly shmita cycle. Each of them is a cycle, and so it’s hard to know where the loop begins. Most people probably assume that the Shabbat day comes at the end of the cycle: you work all week, and then you need to rest up, to be able to go back to that daily grind. Indeed, the Western economical-rational approach would say just that – rest in order to work. Rest should be R&R – recover and recuperate, a means for the sake of the end of productive labor. That would be thinking like an Egyptian, and significantly, it is false. A wonderful midrash (B. Sanhedrin 38a) asks the simple question: why was adam created last in the order of creation? One answer is so that they enter immediately into a mitzvah, i.e., Shabbat. Imagine: freshly made in the dewy, week-old Creation, and the first thing the human beings have to do is get ready for Shabbes. Boil the water, light the candles! But why go directly into Shabbat? Clearly, they needed no rest; the batteries were fresh from the divine shop, they needed no recharging. Shabbat, then, is not rest rationally defined, a means to be able to work more productively, but a spiritual ideal to be obtained. It is not the end of the week, but its ends. This stands the labor/leisure ratio (or work/life balance) on its head. It implies ‘being’ over ‘doing,’ and certainly over ‘having.’ And that is the connection with

8  The Sabbatical Paradigm Shift

139

shmita, for as we have seen above, the Land gets its Shabbat immediately upon the entrance of the Israelites.8 They don’t need to work it for six years first. Just like Shabbat, shmita begins the cycle, and is its end goal.

8.6 Shavuot, Manna, Torah and Shmita: Tying It All Together And now to the third member of the triad we opened with. Between the seven-day cycle and the seven-year cycle is a seven week cycle. It is sefirat ha’omer, the counting of the days between Pesach – leaving Egypt, servitude, the command and control civilization of slavery to things and to political power  – to Shavuot, and the receiving of the Torah, which is also chag habikurim, the holiday of the first fruits, and the gratitude for entering the Land (see e.g., Deut. 26). There are intriguing connections here as well. When the new grain offering is brought, at the end of the counting of the omer – it is accompanied by two loaves of bread (Lev. 23:17), echoing the two portions of manna. Even more strikingly, there is the connection between manna and the Torah. For what was placed in the Ark of the Covenant, as the most sacred of sacred mementos of the desert encounter with the divine? There were of course the tablets of the Law,9 but also, crucially, a jar of manna. How much manna? An omer (Ex. 16:32–34), which we are informed is the measure of human need (v. 16), devar yom beyomo. And that is what we are to count, day in and day out, for 49 days – to get us to the Mountain, and to the Teaching. The connections, though, are not just ritual ones. The first fruits can only be brought and the holiday celebrated once the poor have had their share – a full tithe of the bounty (Deut. 26:12). Likewise, in Leviticus 23, after the description of the holiday’s Temple rituals (verses 15–21), the text repeats the commandments of peah and leket, to leave the corners of the fields and the unharvested gleanings of the crops for the poor. Why this ethical intrusion into a ritual calendar?  This can also be seen from the divine blessing given in Lev. 25:20–22. In answer to the question what they were going to eat in the seventh year, God responds saying that in the sixth year of the cycle the land will be fruitful enough to produce for three years – enough for the sixth, the seventh, and into the eighth, since they hadn’t sewn in the seventh. If the whole idea of shmita was regeneration for exhausted overused farmland, how could anyone expect heightened fertility exactly at its lowest point? The whole vision of a shmita-system agriculture requires a permaculture approach: that the regular tilling and tending add fertility to the soil, they don’t deplete it, and so the seventh year becomes the end goal of an abundance, where the land can indeed be at optimal fertility, and the human community can basically coast. I’m indebted to Talia Schneider for that striking insight. 9  Some sources say both tablets: ‫“ לוחות ושברי לוחות מונחות בארון‬the (whole) tablets and the broken tablets were placed in the ark” (Bavli Berachot 8b). Compare: “Rabbi Yehudah ben Ilai said that there were two arks – one with the first, broken tablets, the other with the second, whole ones” (Yerushalmi, Shekalim 6b). Picture that: the first tablets – divine but broken; the second tablets – whole but human. And next to them, a little jar of white flaky stuff. 8

140

J. Benstein

Pesach, with its unleavened bread and arduous dietary restrictions is clearly in some profound way about food. Sukkot, second only to Pesach in strenuous preparations, focuses on where, in what and how you live—it’s theme is shelter. Both mandate a form of enforced poverty – eating matzah, the bread of affliction; living in a shack, the most modest of dwellings. These holidays are great social equalizers: fulfilling their two central obligations make the wealthy more like the poor, and no one, rich or poor, is excluded by the celebrations. The Biblical Shavuot is different. The celebration focuses on the first fruits and newly harvested grain, and the main celebrants are the landowners, those who have grain and fruits to bring. As such this festival is “about” land, a basic element of civilization along with food and shelter. Perhaps ideally, everyone was supposed to be a landowner – but the Torah realizes that this was never going to be the case. The holiday, then, has the dangerous potential of splitting the people between landed and landless, and rather than being a ‘leveler’ like Pesach and Sukkot, bringing rich and poor together in a shared experience, it could reinforce the socio-economic gap. The unexpected verse about leaving parts of the harvest for the poor (reinforced aggadically in the story of Ruth) is a reminder of mutual obligation, that the land should be a source of justice and not division, that the holiday requires an ethic of care, and not just a celebration of wealth. This becomes a statement about holidays and celebration in general: gratitude for our bounteous harvests of various types is best expressed through compassion for those who have not been so blessed – not through closed, self-satisfied convocations of the favored. That sense of mutual obligation and care that stems from belonging (through the range of levels, from household via community to people) is a core value of shmita, and as such, a core social-economic teaching of the Jewish tradition: that a society based on Jewish ethics can’t tolerate endless accumulation and the concentration of wealth in a few hands, with a growing social gap to the grave detriment of large parts of the population. This must be a tenet of conscious capitalism in general. The practicalities that shmitah symbolizes and embodies, and the values they are based on are not a socialist agenda, but a way to allow all to retain an equal footing and to partake of a society of small free-holders responsible to one another and to society. So now we know not only what shmita has to do with Mt. Sinai,10 we can see how it fits into the larger narrative arc of the history of the Jewish people and our core values. Jewish tradition makes a huge deal of having been slaves in Egypt, and the Exodus out of slavery, not only in the centrality of Pesach and the Seder, but in the ubiquity of Shabbat, an ever-present reminder. We know what leaving Egypt means – but that is the going out, into the desert, the unknown. There we received the manna, and all that represents, which sustained us in our wanderings, and got us to the Land.

 Rashi’s classic question, based on Lev. 25:1,2, mentioning the mitzvah of shmita as the only one said to come directly from Sinai. 10

8  The Sabbatical Paradigm Shift

141

We make a much smaller deal (ritually, cultically) of having survived the desert and reached the Land. That is where the manna story leaves off, and where the shmita story begins: ki tavo’u el ha’aretz – when you come into the Land. But in our generation, with the existence of the State, as well as the wealth and power of Jews elsewhere, we can’t use the fact of the age-old Diaspora as an excuse anymore, for the Torah to be the “portable homeland”11 and not to come to grips with responsibility for land – whether this Land or any land, or the eretz, Earth, in general. As part of the renewed interest in the previous shmita year (2014–2015), there were a number of intriguing initiatives in Israel, from a moratorium on fishing in the Sea of Galilee to allow fish stocks to replenish, to the eradication of over 30 million NIS of debts for over 10,000 households in a creative arrangement whereby one-­ third of the debts was paid for by the families, one-third forgiven, and one-third covered by a special shmita fund that solicited contributions to the families as loans that were then forgiven in the spirit of the shmita year’s injunction to forgive debts.12

8.7 Where to from Here? Concluding Thoughts One takeaway from all this is to learn from shmita a reversal of priorities: for while there will be time for exerting control, whether in labor or in sitting under one’s vine and one’s fig tree, the first thing you need to do upon ‘entering the land’ is sh’mot (second person imperative of shmita)– let go, release. Do not – repeat do not – possess, do not own, do not lord yourselves and your needs over the land and its other inhabitants, citizen or foreigner, human or not. The deep message of shmita is how to train ourselves not only to build a society that is anti-Egypt in its commitment to compassion, collective well-being and social solidarity, but to actually want to build one. Biblical scholar Ellen Davis frames the contemporary challenge and meaning of these values nicely: Our own social world is clearly discontinuous with that of ancient Israel in multiple ways: economic organization under the domination of multinational corporations rather than under kings and empires, the extent of our technological domination of natural systems and the corresponding extent of their degradation (even though the ancients themselves experienced significant ecological degradation), the size of the human population, and the grow Heinrich Heine was the first to articulate this oft-quoted notion, in 1834, writing that the Jews rescued the Bible from the burning of the Second Temple and thereafter it served as a portative Vaterland (portable homeland) – H. Heine, Sämtliche Werke (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1887) 47. 12  See here: http://www.tevaivri.org.il/en/News-222-Projects-in-Action and here https:// en.toraland.org.il/beit-midrash/articles/shemitah/book-hilchot-shemitah/shemitah-chapter28-debt-cancelation-and-prozbul/. The sources reporting on this in depth are primarily in Hebrew: https://www.themarker.com/news/1.2338227, https://www.paamonim.org/he/news/ ‫ח‬-‫הסדרת‬-‫השמיטה‬-‫מצוות‬-‫של‬-‫החברתיות‬-‫הפנים‬ 11

142

J. Benstein

ing predominance of cities worldwide. Writing about the Bible as a resource for economic ethics, Norman Gottwald13 aptly observes “So we are left with the logically perplexing but morally empowering paradox that the Bible is both grossly irrelevant in direct application to current economic problems and incredibly relevant in vision and principle for grasping opportunities and obligations to make the whole earth and its bounty serve the welfare of the whole human family”14

Our globalized world, with its widening social gaps, more wealth concentrated in fewer hands, accompanied by grinding poverty, as well as fanatic ‘accumulationism, ‘which we call consumer culture, is looking more and like that Egypt every day. What is to be done? Instead of hoarding profits and stocks, businesses can break down some of the barriers and close some of the gap between capital and labor by sharing profits and stocks with workers. We can create community-based alternatives to consumer culture with forms of collective consumption, such as libraries of things. And we can devise ways in which society can make sure that our poorest members don’t fall below subsistence. One possibility is the idea of universal basic income (UBI) which is gaining increasing traction. While there is much to be said (and argued over) regarding UBI, just note that even the most ultra-capitalist game ever invented, Monopoly, had every player receive $200 every turn of the board: exactly UBI, to keep everyone in the game! Rightly understood, the values of Shabbat and shmita, with their deep critiques of our society and economy, are truly subversive. Implementing them on a large scale would truly be an act of Shabbatage.15 Jeremy Benstein is co-founder of the Heschel Center for Sustainability (in Tel Aviv), working on issues such as strengthening Israel’s civil society, improving environmental quality, and promoting progressive Jewish values, such as social justice and the common good. Dr. Benstein is now also a member of “929” – an Israeli project devoted to creating an inclusive, pluralistic Jewish discussion around the Bible as the central foundational cultural text. He is the editor of the website of 929-English. He is the author of two books. The first, The Way Into Judaism and the Environment (Jewish Lights, 2006), is an outgrowth of his work on Jewish studies and environmental issues. His most recent one, Hebrew Roots, Jewish Routes: A Tribal Language In a Global World (Behrman House, 2019), is a labor of love for and about the Hebrew language and its role in Jewish history, identity, and peoplehood.  

 Norman Gottwald, The Hebrew Bible in Its Social World and in Ours, Semeia Studies (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), p. 364. 14  Scripture, Culture, and Agriculture: An Agrarian Reading of the Bible (Cambridge 2009) p. 4. 15  I so wish I had coined that term, but I heard it first from friend and teacher, the brilliantly innovative Rabbi Amichai Lau-Lavi. 13

Chapter 9

Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens Gary E. Roberts

9.1 Introduction Historical and contemporary Christianity manifests a complex, nuanced and often conflictual relationships with capitalism (Chewning 2001). It is a humbling undertaking to access the compatibility of capitalism in general, or conscious capitalism (CC) in particular, with Christianity given the absence of a unified Christian theological worldview. This chapter analyzes the compatibility of CC from a Catholic Christian social justice perspective (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church 2005). The choice of the Catholic perspective is intentional given it possess the most comprehensive, consistent and well-developed theological Christian worldview on social justice. It is consistent as well with other major faith traditions with a s social justice orientation such as the Greek Orthodox Church (Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America 2020). We will begin with a summary of the Christian worldview on work and capitalism. A Summary of Christian Worldview on Work and Capitalism According to Chewning (2001), capitalism is defined as: 1. Private and/or corporate ownership of the means of production 2. Private decision-making regarding capital use 3. Pricing, production and distribution functions in a competitive, free market without any artificial restrictions or limitations on entrance and exit

G. E. Roberts (*) Robertson School of Government, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_9

143

144

G. E. Roberts

Adam Smith, in his works including the Theory of Moral Sentiments (Smith and Hanley 2009) and the Wealth of Nations (Smith 2002) provided the economic and philosophical foundations for modern capitalism linking the development of free markets to social morality, ethics, and education. Smith does not directly conclude that the operation of the “invisible hand” of self-interest requires a religious belief system, but from the totality of his writings he clearly embraces a moral foundation for capitalism (Fleischacker 2020). No nation, either historically or contemporaneously, manifests a pure form of capitalism. All nations are a balance of three sectors, government, business, and nonprofit. The key question is the relative size, scope, roles and power/influence of each sector within a specific nation state and cultural context to promote the common good. Hence, history is replete with political, economic, social and religious conflict over the appropriate dynamic sector equilibrium. We will begin the chapter with a general overview of capitalism and the church followed by a more in-depth discussion of the Christian worldview on business. The historical church has had complex, and a paradoxical view of the instruments of commerce, including money, capital, merchants and employees. The Reformation gave birth to the theological foundation of modern capitalism through the writings of Calvin and Reformed Theology as reflected in the Protestant Work Ethic with its emphasis on altruism, delaying gratification, and dedicating the profits (the fruit of the labor) to God. The works of Adam Smith as reflected in The Theory of Moral Sentiments and the Wealth of Nations reinforced that capitalism requires a strong societal foundation of morality, ethics and education. In contemporary times, the growth of the faith at work movements in their various permutations (workplace spirituality, Kingdom Business, etc.) emphasize the integration of spiritual and religious belief principles into the workplace rejecting secularization’s emphasis on faith as a private belief system isolated from other life domains (faith compartmentalization) (Benedict 2013; Dhiman et al. 2018). Capitalism in principle is consistent with Christian world view given its emphasis on free will decision making, the cultivation of individual and collective talents to promote the greater good, equality of opportunity and identity, and inequality of outcomes based upon merit. Concurrently, the paradox of money and capitalism from the church’s perspective centers on money’s corrupting influence on individual character and societal norms and values (hedonistic and materialistic worldviews) producing character flaws and sinful behavior based upon greed and the idolatrous love of money. These individual and societal values generate complex deleterious effects including market failure related to economic and environmental negative externalities, income inequity, and the host of economic, political, health and well-being negative outcomes. Chewning (2001) summarizes and expands upon Christianity’s critique of capitalism illustrating key negative attributes including: • Greed and the love of money produces ubiquitous sin, a refusal of man to seek reconciliation with God, and the refusal to honor the Great Commandment of Christianity to love the Lord thy God with all your heart, soul and mind and your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22:37–39)

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

145

• The success of capitalism leads to its own moral decay with accumulated wealth corrupting the foundational virtues of diligence, virtue, altruism and delaying gratification. Only a minority of capitalists embrace a philanthropic perspective to redistribute their wealth as exemplified by past and present generations of entrepreneurs (Carnegie, Rockefeller, Dupont, Gates, etc.) • Today’s business and capitalistic system emphasizes consumer capitalism utilizing high levels of debt at all levels (consumer, firm), short term consumption, planned product obsolescence, marketing by vanity and fear, which reinforces consumer character flaws of egoism and narcissism • Wealth accumulation produces a pride of self-achievement and entitlement based upon a flawed understanding of autonomy and sovereignty based upon a philosophy of atomistic individualism that deemphasizes the commons and the communitarian obligations related to wealth creation. Chewning (2001) summarizes Novak’s (1982) critique of capitalism further enhancing and supporting the Christian worldview analysis. Novak stated: • Modern capitalism integrates the hedonistic/materialistic worldview through the shaping of consumer preferences through marketing and advertising based on personal vanity, fear of aging and death, image management, linking health, wellbeing and happiness to materialistic lifestyles, labeling luxuries as necessities, and social comparison generating an ongoing need to not fall behind one’s neighbors in terms of possessions • Capitalism’s structural irresponsibility linked to “crony capitalism” and special interest influence • The creation of an ambitious adversarial class of capitalistic empire builders • A decline in the societal prestige of the traditional foundational occupations of academia, church leaders, and the artistic sector while elevating corporate leaders, athletes and entertainers producing a culture that devalues and resents elites and intellectuals (“dumbing down” society). Both Chewning and Novak share a general pessimism on the global and aggregate effects of capitalism, but neither attack its philosophical and worldview foundations. Hence, their critiques represent what is termed in program evaluation as “implementation failure” rather than flawed theory. In this next subsection, we will provide a more detailed assessment of the Christian worldview on work and capitalism.

9.2 Christian World View and Capitalism: The Nature of Work In the Christian theological worldview on the nature of work, it is a God-breathed and divinely oriented attribute as reflected in the Book of Genesis, Chaps. 1 and 2 (Chewing 2001). The original humans, Adam and Eve, are made in the image of

146

G. E. Roberts

God, and God is a creative worker and cultivator, and Adam was given the task of tending the Garden of Eden and naming the animals, using God-breathed reason and decision-making abilities. After the fall of man (Genesis 3) through disobedience in eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,1 God punished this disobedience by expelling Adam and Eve from the Garden changing the nature of work. Work became inherently stressful as Adam would cultivate grains with the “sweat of his brow, (Genesis 3:19)” and nature itself would resist cultivation. Hence, the Adamic fall into sin became a universal human inheritance, but this did not alter the foundational role and moral goodness of work and commerce. All of creation was labeled “good” by God, and the negative consequences of the fall are being ameliorated by the life, death and resurrection and return of Jesus Christ, hence the Christological and eschatological redemption of work reinforces that foundational role of work and commerce. Work enables man to create and provide for their families and the larger society and fulfill their individual callings using their unique talents becoming a participant in redeeming this fallen world in eternal love. From a Christian worldview, employees possess equality of identity, but manifest differential abilities, gifts and outcomes. The Christian theological worldview on work and business is consistent with its view on the role of workers. Business and commerce enable man to achieve his or her God-given purpose, calling and creative identity. As with individuals, there is equality of identity, but unique abilities and gifts that generate differential outcomes (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church 2005). Business is the means for workers to realize their God-given potential, exercising talents while concurrently providing the goods and services that benefit society and promote the greater good. Business and commerce are acts of creative synergy, in which one business produces the goods and services that enable other businesses to develop fully, and realize their respective purpose, calling and talents. From an existential theological view, all matter, animate and inanimate, human and animal, is a gift of God and owned by God (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church 2005). Private property is granted to individuals as a temporary fiduciary stewardship obligation and resource. Hence, business success is a symbiotic web of individual and collective virtue, a product of a synergetic community web of interconnected relationships. Profit is a means to a greater end of glorifying God, meeting the needs of the stakeholders, promoting the common good, and a resource to help the poor. Wealth is not “owned” by the capitalist/investor but reflects a collective good and resource used to invest in an eco-system of linked stakeholders. Both Orthodoxy and Catholicism embrace the God-ordained societal role of business and capitalism. However, there are fundamental moral and ethical attributes related to social justice that are contrary to the practices of modern capitalism. The foundational difference is that in a Christian worldview, business does not exist  The foundation of the disobedience was human pride in wanting to be “like God” and serve not the creator, but their own interests, hence, a similar criticism to modern capitalism’s focus on self over the greater good. 1

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

147

to simply make a profit for investors and owners. It rejects the Milton Friedman view of capitalism in which the goal of business is to produce profits and increase gross domestic product (GDP) through high levels of economic growth. In the Orthodox and Catholic view, business and capitalism should serve the common good and generate profits to promote the aggregate wellbeing of all stakeholders. The first principle relates to altruism. Business owners and investors are to live simply and possess a philanthropic orientation to help the poor and promote the common good through such practices as generous wages, eco-sustainability practices and raising others out of poverty through job programs. Hence, the Orthodox and Catholic view on profit is that it is an instrument (means) to a greater end. Profit is not simply the property of the capitalist, but a collective fruit to be reinvested into the broader community. Hence, capitalists are to live simply and give us much away as possible. In the Catholic Church’s Rerum Novarum, the social justice principles that govern capitalism are: (1) promoting the dignity of the human person, (2) engendering the common good (linked to the personal good of the firm), (3) the principle of subsidiarity in which the locus of authority should be devolved to the lowest level to reduce the corrupting influence of centralized authority and power, (4) the universal voice and participation of all key stakeholders in the business process (labor, capital, suppliers, the community, the poor), (5) the principle of solidarity, or the institutionalization of “golden rule” treatment principles, (6) the right of private property and (7) the universal destination of goods which means that all human beings have a unalienable human right to benefit and utilize the collective economic capital of society to enable each person to realize their God-given potential. (Frémeaux and Michelson 2017). One important element is the definition of the “common good.” Mele (2009) defines the common good as (1) the economic conditions that produce a reasonable level of well-being (2) organizational conditions that respect human freedom, justice, and solidarity; (3) sociocultural values shared in a community that embrace human rights and dignity; and (4) a healthy environment for current and future generations. Other key principles that influence the nature of capitalism is a long-term time horizon. This entails a belief that time is greater than space, or that the focus of social justice is the distal goal of society Mele (2009). In other words, the objective is a patient, long-term investment approach that produces maximum social benefit over short-term profits. Catholic social justice reduces the atomization and deterministic aspects of free-market capitalism through the embrace of: (1) the totality principle which states that the whole of society is greater and more important than the sum of its parts, (2) the unity principle that in this fallen and sinful world there is inherent evil, sin and oppression of the poor that creates inequity and social conflict that must be justly confronted, and not ignored, and (3) the reality principle that the objective nature of the human condition and its associated suffering is more important than theory and utopian ideas, hence humans cannot be viewed in an instrumental manner (Mele 2009).

148

G. E. Roberts

Other key elements of social justice from an Orthodox and Christian worldview is the importance of living wages to ensure a basic standard of human dignity. Secondly, given the inherent power inequalities between labor and capital, Catholic and Orthodox social justice supports the right of workers to organize and bargain collectively. Thirdly, the ubiquitous nature of market failure and the globalization of capital, production and labor markets produces exploitation and global inequities including labor and human trafficking, child labor, environmental degradation and the erosion of indigenous cultural values. Hence, the negative externalities of global capitalism. To address these weaknesses, both churches emphasis the importance of a comprehensive collaboration of regional and global governments, the United Nations, NGO’s and global business to produce effective regulatory policies that address the root cause of market failure and labor exploitation (Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America 2020; Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church 2005). As we move towards our assessment of CC and its compatibility with Christian world view, the next section provides an inventory of Christian worldview business practices.

9.3 Inventory of Christian Worldview Business Practices It is beyond the scope of this chapter to provide and exhaustive summary and analysis of biblical practices, but the following elements are foundational. The bible emphasizes consistently the obligation of business owners to promote fair and dignified treatment of all stakeholders. This entails attributes such as just wage practices including not delaying due compensation payments, not “gleaning the fields” (Leviticus 19:9–10) which refers to providing the poor with employment opportunities, providing general humanitarian assistance to the poor, the forgiving of debts of the poor during the Sabbath (every seventh) Years (Leviticus 25: 1–7) and the Years of Jubilee (every 50th year) (Leviticus: 25:8–13) to provide equality of opportunity, reduce societal inequality, and provide forgiveness and mercy for life circumstances that resulted in financial hardship, both those due to moral transgression as well as factors beyond the person’s control. In addition to the biblical practices associated with business, another vital element in CC and Christianity is servant leadership (Greenleaf 1977; Spears 1998; Roberts 2015). From a Christian worldview, servant leadership entails a long-term covenantal relationship between employer and employee that rests on mutual obligations to promote the common good (the mission) and other stakeholders. Servant leadership as modeled in the ministry of Jesus reinforces its paradoxical nature, with an inverted pyramid, in which subordinates are empowered to do “greater things”, a statement by Jesus to his disciples that they would be responsible for the great task of preaching the gospel (the “good news” doctrines of Christianity) to the world. Authentic leadership entails an identity of being a servant first. Hence, the goal is not self-interest, but “other” interest, as servant leaders promote the Great

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

149

Commandment (the greater good). As we will see in the section on the attributes of CC, there is a significant degree of consistency in the approaches of CC and servant leadership.

9.3.1 Introduction to Conscious Capitalism Conscious capitalism was birthed with the creation of Whole Foods and its chief executive John Mackey, with academic support and development from the CC Institute at Bentley University (Frémeaux and Michelson 2017). It is a spiritual, but not explicitly religious movement. It promotes a focus on generic immanence, or a focus on eternity (Sisodia 2011) along with a spirituality of transcendence (Aburdene 2005). Its foundational values posit that capitalism is inherently good producing goods and services that society values, is ethical based upon free-will decision making and exchange, is noble as it elevates human existence and dignity and is heroic as it combats poverty and produces prosperity (Mackey and Sisodia 2013). These foundational values are fully consistent with a Christian worldview as noted in the previous section. Mackey (2011) reinforces that CC’s essence is to achieve higher order purposes that transcend any single motivational factor such as profit. Secondly, Mackey states that business is existentially good and virtuous, and that its goodness and virtue is a necessary, but not sufficient attribute, of a fully developed conscious capitalism ethos (Mackey 2011). Mackey utilizes the Platonic and transcendentals framework of the good, true and beautiful to describe the essence of CC along with the heroic. Conscious capitalism is inherently good because it focuses on serving others, true because it seeks to discover and further human knowledge, beautiful in its aesthetical essence, and heroic given its emphasis to transform and change the world. Again, all these philosophical attributes are consistent with a Christian worldview. The specific attributes of CC range from 4 to 7 depending on the source. What follows is a summary of the main attributes (Frémeaux and Michelson 2017). The first is that CC promotes a higher purpose than simply profit, to promote the common good. The second is that CC is wholistic in a symbiotic, 360-degree collaborative relationship with its stakeholders to promote their best interests as represented with the acronym SPICE which stands for society, partners, investors, customers, and employees. Third, CC organizations reject all forms of exploitation in pricing, marketing, compensation, and environmentally (Wisler 2018). Fourth, CC strives to uplift all segments of society, including the poor. Fifth, CC organizations employ conscious servant leadership that emphasizes the collective “we.” Six, CC organizations are conscious cultures that are sentient learners employing the acronym TACTILE (Wang 2013) that stands for trust, authenticity, care, transparency, integrity, learning, and empowerment as well as collaboration and cooperation. Seventh, society and the environment are the ultimate stakeholders for CC organizations. The final attribute (eighth) is a company culture that is values, not profit driven.

150

G. E. Roberts

Again, from a conceptual standpoint, CC organizations and these eight attributes are fully consistent with a Christian worldview. Conscious capitalism proponents state that these attributes require ongoing and sustained, long-term developmental culture change an ongoing “becoming process” similar to the Christian understanding of spiritual development and sanctification as an evolving, life-long transformation (Mackey 2011). Conscious capitalism organizations learn to be creative and innovate rapidly, and hence can adapt to today’s rapidly changing business environment. Given that CC organizations treat employees and all stakeholders with respect, they manifest higher levels of trust, engagement and organizational citizenship behavior, when integrated with servant leadership and its focus on empowerment, employee training and development, generous compensation systems, and the existence of a learning organization, cultivates lower turnover levels and more effective employees. Superior employees produce exceptional quality goods and services and higher levels of customer loyalty increasing profit levels and stock value along with improved business efficiency metrics such as elevated gross margin2 and lower marketing costs due to greater customer loyalty (Mackey 2011). Before we engage in a more systematic critique of CC from a Christian worldview, let us review a concise critique of CC from a secular and empirical standpoint. The literature that addresses the effectiveness of CC manifests mixed and inconclusive results (O’Toole and Vogel 2011; Wang 2013; Schwartz 2013; Wisler 2018; Gregory and Chasomeris 2016). Studies vary in terms profit levels, stock market growth and marketing effectiveness and lower costs. One element that is consistently favorable is higher gross margins, but critics attribute this to the nature of most CC companies as market “niche” businesses that are dependent on wealthy consumers willing to pay a premium for ecofriendly goods such as local organic produce at Whole Foods (Simpson et al. 2013). O’Toole and Vogel (2011) offered a cogent critique of CC including the inability to sustain virtue over time, the plethora of competing business models that are equally effective, the demonstrated shortcomings of the stakeholder management approach of many CC organizations, and highly competitive markets limits the potential of firms “to do good” over longer time horizons. For example, a long-term analysis of Whole Foods demonstrated predatory pricing to eliminate competitors, voracious acquisitions of competitors and its active anti-union activities. When CC companies are under long-term stress, they revert back to traditional survival and self-interested capitalistic practices. Another key element is that CC organizations, like all culture-based change efforts, require ongoing leadership support, and are especially prone to leadership succession disruptions given that cultures are not self-replicating with intentionality (O’Toole and Vogel 2011). From a philosophical perspective, many of the critiques of CC are very consistent with Christian worldview analysis as will be highlighted in the next section. Some attack CC as being contrary to human nature and its default orientation of hedonistic self-interested behavior, with profit and personal gain being a powerful  Gross margin is the net sales revenue minus cost of goods sold.

2

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

151

foundational motivator that is resistant to change (Liedl 2013). In a similar manner, human experience demonstrates CC’s embrace of self-actualization as the primary motivator in human nature conflicts with empirical evidence as a large segment of the population is motivated by lower order needs focusing on self-interest and protecting their families (Liedl 2013). Fyke and Buzzanell (2013) presented a cogent critique of CC claims to consistent integration of higher order learning and reasoning given that it is difficult to be mindful and detached in a world of cognitive overload, complex and wicked ill-structured problems with unclear cause and effect relationships. The causal and sensory overloads generate paradoxes, or the existence of non-existent, mutually exclusive options generating cognitive dissonance, tension, contradiction and mutually opposed ideas that resist solutions. Paradoxes are more common in today’s business environment, making it more likely that CC companies will be making decisions under higher levels of stress and external pressures leading to decisions inconsistent with its principles. The next section will provide an analysis of CC from a Christian worldview.

9.3.2 Analysis of Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview This section will address the consistency of CC with the Christian Worldview. Table 9.1 summarizes the compatibility of the foundational principles of CC with Christian worldview. Conscious capitalism is fully consistent with seven of the eight principles and partially consistent with one principle. They are fully consistent with viewing profit as a means to greater and more noble end, promoting a values over a profit motivated culture, treating all stakeholders non-instrumentally and as valued ends, rejecting exploitation, striving to lift all aspects of society, leaders are servants first, and organizations should be conscious cultures learning and growing with care and transparency. The sole diversion is the nature of the ultimate stakeholder as both the environment and society are key stakeholders from a Christian worldview, but the ultimate stakeholder is the individual and aggregate obligation to serve and obey God (See Colossians 3:23–24). Hence, both also emphasize using profits for promoting social justice and impact and view the world as a sensitive “garden” that must be carefully and lovingly tended, hence the equivalent sustainability and eco focus. This section provides a more detailed Christian social justice worldview and principal critique of seven key biblical principles and their relationship to conscious capitalism. The first is the “gleaning of the fields,” or the practice of leaving produce in the fields to provide the poor with food and a source of income. This is stated in Leviticus 19:9–10 (NRSV): Leviticus 19:9-10 “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very edges of your field, or gather the gleanings of your harvest. You shall not strip your vineyard bare, or gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and the alien: I am the Lord your God.

152

G. E. Roberts

Table 9.1  Consistency of conscious capitalism’s eight foundational principles with Christian social justice worldview CC principal CC promotes a higher purpose than profit, to promote the common good CC organizations promote a company culture that is values, not profit driven CC collaborates in a symbiotic, 360-degree relationship with its stakeholders to promote their best interests as represented with the acronym SPICE which stands for society, partners, investors, customers, and employees. CC organizations reject all forms of market and stakeholder exploitation CC strives to uplift all segments of society, including the poor. CC organizations employ conscious servant leadership that emphasizes the collective “we.” CC organizations are conscious cultures that are sentient learners employing the acronym TACTILE that stands for trust, authenticity, care, transparency, integrity, learning, empowerment, collaboration and cooperation Society and the environment are the ultimate stakeholders for CC organizations.

Consistency with Christian social justice worldview Fully consistent with Christian worldview

Partially consistent. Clearly both the environment and society are key stakeholders from a Christian worldview, but the ultimate stakeholder is the obligation to serve and obey God (See Colossians 3:23–24)

In today’s modern economy, this principle entails such practices as hiring and development programs for the poor, and education and capital development for low wage and skilled workers to progress into higher paying positions, among others. It is an acknowledgement that God is the source of all resources, capital, financial and human, and that we need to dedicate a portion to help the poor. This practice is difficult to justify in today’s capitalistic system, even for conscious capitalism-oriented companies, given the primacy of more traditional means for meeting obligations to the poor such as charitable contributions. The second principle is fair wage practices, or providing fair, generous, and timely wages (a wage leader, not a lagger). Biblical principles clearly reinforce that it is moral obligation to pay fair wages to all workers. Selected scripture passages that reinforce these key points are presented below. Deuteronomy 24:15 You shall pay them their wages daily before sunset, because they are poor and their livelihood depends on them; otherwise they might cry to the Lord against you, and you would incur guilt; Jeremiah 22:13 Woe to him who builds his house by unrighteousness, and his upper rooms by injustice; who makes his neighbors work for nothing, and does not give them their wages; Matthew 20:1-16, parable of the workers in the field in which the landowner paid above average wages representing God’s heart to be generous to the wage earner.

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

153

Conscious capitalism organizations fully embrace fair wage practices including the living wage. This investment in employees reinforces the Christian obligation to be generous to employees, thereby improving the quality of work life, producing a greater economic benefit multiplier effect within the community including accentuating labor market competitive pressure for other firms to raise salaries. Principle 3 is the use of “honest weights and measures” in commerce as reflected in Proverbs 11:1 which states “A false balance is an abomination to the Lord, but an accurate weight is his delight.” The most proximate application of this Christian principle is the use of fair business practices in all aspects of the production, service, pricing, and legal process. Conscious Capitalism is fully consistent with honest business practices. However, a more encompassing embrace of this principle includes aspects of the leadership, management, and human resource management processes. This includes reliable and valid performance appraisal systems and honest and balanced performance feedback (Roberts 2015). This extension of Christian principles is practiced unevenly by all organizations, given the ubiquitous cognitive, attributional, and power/political relationships in organizations that contribute to bias and inequity. This level of application entails a very sustained commitment for introspection and learning that is challenging in any environment. Principle 4 is vital to promoting employee wellbeing and states that Christian workplace principles support providing employees with adequate workday rest and paid time off (Sabbath day) and a sustainable level of work effort (no overwork). The scriptural support includes the requirement of a sabbath day of rest each week avoiding overwork as seen in Exodus 23:12 and Psalm 127:2 respectively. Exodus 23:12 (NRSV),12 Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh day you shall rest, so that your ox and your donkey may have relief, and your homeborn slave and the resident alien may be refreshed. Psalm 127: 2, In vain you rise early and stay up late, toiling for food to eat— for he grants sleep to[a] those he loves.

Conscious capitalism companies clearly understand that employees require ongoing rest and paid time off including generous vacation, sick and personal time. Christian principles also emphasize the curbing the opposite spectrum temptation to embrace work as a personal idol leading to excessive work hours that diminished time and energy for other life domains. The formal recognition of the negative externalities of excessive work is generally accepted by CC organizations, but given the reality of competitive business pressures, and the internal conflation of identity with work performance, it is an ongoing struggle. Principle five is the embrace of the sabbath year, which is the requirement that every seven years that the land would be fallow and uncultivated, thereby permitting the poor to work and gather from the crops that remained as described in Leviticus 25:1–6. Leviticus 25: 1-6, The Lord spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, saying: 2 Speak to the people of Israel and say to them: When you enter the land that I am giving you, the land shall observe a sabbath for the Lord. 3 Six years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your vineyard, and gather in their yield; 4 but in the seventh year there shall be a sabbath of complete rest for the land, a sabbath for the Lord: you shall not sow your field or prune your vineyard. 5 You shall not reap the aftergrowth of your harvest or gather the grapes of your unpruned vine: it shall be a year of complete rest for the land.

154

G. E. Roberts

Principle five is closely related to principle 1, or not gleaning the fields. The principle is partially honored in CC organizations given the obvious differences between the agrarian origin of this practice and today’s modern economy. No business ceases operation for a year, but the principle is honored by businesses investing in employees through living wages and significant investments in higher education and capital development. Principle six is the Year of Jubilee which occurs every 50 years in which land that has been sold or mortgaged returns to its original owners and debts are forgiven. Leviticus 25:8–13, which is presented below, provides the scriptural description: Leviticus 25:8-13 8 You shall count off seven weeks[a] of years, seven times seven years, so that the period of seven weeks of years gives forty-nine years. 9 Then you shall have the trumpet sounded loud; on the tenth day of the seventh month—on the day of atonement— you shall have the trumpet sounded throughout all your land. 10 And you shall hallow the fiftieth year and you shall proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you: you shall return, every one of you, to your property and every one of you to your family. 11 That fiftieth year shall be a jubilee for you: you shall not sow, or reap the aftergrowth, or harvest the unpruned vines. 12 For it is a jubilee; it shall be holy to you: you shall eat only what the field itself produces. 13 In this year of jubilee you shall return, every one of you, to your property.

This practice reinforces the Christian commitment to social justice and reducing wealth inequity. This principle is clearly not implemented in today’s modern economy and would be viewed as a form of socialism or wealth redistribution that violates private property rights and capitalistic principles of competition as well as meritocratic principles. Any company that forgave debts would have difficulty justifying such action to owners, shareholders, or the board. However, CC organizations embrace an ethos for addressing the sources of income inequity through fair and living wages, community investment and philanthropic efforts, hence “mixed” support. Principle 7 is the communitarian emphasis in which believers share resources and engage in voluntary redistribution to address unmet needs in necessities. These principles are clearly reflected in passages such as 2 Corinthians 8:9–16, Acts 2:43–47 and Act 4: 32–36 which are presented below. 2 Corinthians 8:9-16 (NRSV) 9 For you know the generous act[a] of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich. 10 And in this matter I am giving my advice: it is appropriate for you who began last year not only to do something but even to desire to do something— 11 now finish doing it, so that your eagerness may be matched by completing it according to your means. 12 For if the eagerness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has—not according to what one does not have. 13 I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it is a question of a fair balance between 14 your present abundance and their need, so that their abundance may be for your need, in order that there may be a fair balance. 15 As it is written, “The one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little.”; Acts 2: 43-46 Life among the Believers43 Awe came upon everyone, because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles. 44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds[j] to all, as any had need. 46 Day by day, as they spent much time together

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

155

in the temple, they broke bread at home[k] and ate their food with glad and generous[l] hearts, 47 praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved. Acts 4: 32-36 32 Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. 33 With great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. 34 There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. 35 They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. 36

All three of these passages reinforce that the early church emphasized social justice and the reduction of income inequity among church members. It was a conscious recognition of interdependency of its members and the need for ongoing economic support to reduce the inherent variability of economic cycles. This communitarian emphasis of the early church has been altered by social and capitalistic economic system values that emphasize rugged individualism and nuclear or extended family support. However, conscious capitalism’s emphasis on community investment is fully consistent with the ethos of communitarian principles including the emphasis on building livable and sustainable communities with healthy social and family networks. In summary, there is a very impressive overlap between CC organizations and Christian worldview principles regarding social justice. Hopefully these practices in their modern-day equivalents will continue to diffuse and promote greater social equity and reduce inequality. This next section summarizes the consistency of CC leadership practices with the core Christian servant leader principles (Roberts 2015). The first is fair treatment by leadership, a moral principle fully consistent with CC principles. Leaders are “shepherds of the flock”, and their actions influence the quality of work life experienced by their subordinates. Biblical principles often use the example of slave and master relationships given its primacy in the culture in the Roman Empire, but with full extension to worker and leader relationships in that era as well as today. Four passages, Colossians 3:23–25, Ephesians 6: 5–9, Colossians 4:1 and Leviticus 25:23 illustrate the importance of fair treatment. Colossians 3:23-25 (NRSV) 23 Whatever your task, put yourselves into it, as done for the Lord and not for your masters,[a] 24 since you know that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward; you serve[b] the Lord Christ. 25 For the wrongdoer will be paid back for whatever wrong has been done, and there is no partiality; Ephesians 6: 5-9, 5 Slaves obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ; 6 not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7 Render service with enthusiasm, as to the Lord and not to men and women, 8 knowing that whatever good we do, we will receive the same again from the Lord, whether we are slaves or free. 9 And, masters, do the same to them. Stop threatening them, for you know that both of you have the same Master in heaven, and with him there is no partiality; Colossians 4:1, Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, for you know that you also have a Master in heaven; Leviticus 25:43 You shall not rule over him with severity but are to revere your God.

156

G. E. Roberts

A second element is character virtue. These servant leader character attributes include integrity, humility, perseverance, respect, followership, mission over self, and defining success in God’s terms (Roberts 2015, 2016) The first key element is integrity, the foundation of trust in relationships. From a Christian worldview, character virtue is a product of a surrendered life to God entailing ongoing communion (being connected to the vine, John 15: 1–7) and cultivating the relationship through spiritual disciplines such as prayer. Christian character virtue emphasizes being a “hearer and doer” (James 1:22–25) as competency without character corrupts and creates perceptions of hypocrisy if the leader is consciously violating ethical and moral principles. Leaders possess a higher degree of ethical and moral accountability given that hypocrisy “shipwrecks” the faith (1 Timothy 1:19) of employees and other key stakeholders when consciences are violated. These principles are fully consistent with CC emphasis on leadership integrity. The higher level of accountability for conscious violations of ethical principles is reflected in Luke 12:47–48 and 1 Timothy 1:19 presented below. Luke 12:47-48 47 That slave who knew what his master wanted, but did not prepare himself or do what was wanted, will receive a severe beating. 48 But the one who did not know and did what deserved a beating will receive a light beating. From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded; 1 Timothy 1:19: 19 having faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have suffered shipwreck in the faith;

From a Christian worldview, moral accountability is aided by ongoing prayer in which the Apostle Paul admonishes believers to “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thessalonians 5:17. The next character virtue, humility, entails a recognition that our knowledge base is incomplete and that we lack the moral ability to fully implement what we know and have learned. We learn from all life circumstances and individuals. Christians use Jesus as the standard, and given that only Jesus was sinless and prefect, we all fall short. The foundational scripture is Matthew 23:12 which states “All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted.” Perseverance is a character virtue that acknowledges we learn most in adversity and failure, but our character is tested most severely with success through the pride process. Servant leaders recognize that all success is a result of the collective team contributions. Hence, we must endure the cycles of success and failure trusting in “God to guide and protect us.” This is reflected in Matthew 24:13 which states that “ But the one who endures to the end will be saved.” The next character virtue of respect is also fully consistent with CC spiritual principles as is reflected in the Golden Rule in Matthew 7:12, “In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.” The character virtue of followership is the foundational DNA of servant leadership in both sacred and secular settings, including CC leadership. Leadership begins with the identity of followership, or the desire to serve other first. This virtue is portrayed in a multiplicity of passages in the New Testament including Matthew 20:26; Mathew 23:11; Luke 22:56; John 5:19; John 8:28; John 12:49 and Mark 10:43 and John 6:38 listed below.

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

157

Mark 10:43: 43 But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, John 6:38: For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me

The servant leader virtue of mission over self, promotes altruism and delaying gratification, or the orientation to be a long-term investor over a gambler seeking shortterm returns irrespective of the long-term costs is reflected consistently in CC organizations. The scriptural passages (Philippians 2:3, 1 Peter 2:24 and Hebrews 11:3) that reinforce these principles are presented below. Philippians 2:3: Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves; 1 Peter: 2:24: He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross,[a] so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds[b] you have been healed; Hebrews 11:13: All of these died in faith without having received the promises, but from a distance they saw and greeted them. They confessed that they were strangers and foreigners on the earth,

Clearly CC organizations embrace this ethos in developing long-term and stable relationships with all key stakeholders including employees and suppliers. The final servant leader character competency to be discussed is defining success in God’s terms through the standard of promoting agape (unconditional) love with integrity of means, ends, and motives in decision making. This is most clearly portrayed in the foundational 1 Corinthians 13 “love test” standard for motives, means and ends. 1 Corinthians 13: 1-3: If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast,[a] but do not have love, I gain nothing.

This character virtue is generally consistent with CC principles given its ongoing Golden Rule, self-reflection, and greater good focus. The next set of servant leader attributes relate to behavior. From a Christian worldview, leaders empower others in humility and joy based upon the example of the Trinity, as the Father empowers the Son and the Holy Spirit, and Jesus, in turn, empowered the disciples. Empowerment is a vital and foundational principle of CC consistent with the two scripture passages below that illustrate servant leadership empowerment, John 3:30 and John 14:12. John 3:30 He must increase, but I must decrease.”; John 14:12: Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact, will do greater works than these, because I am going to the Father.

The Christian worldview on empowerment assumes a long-term, patient view of employee development modeled by the example of Jesus who mentored His disciples gradually while forgiving and encouraging learning from mistakes, including the preeminent example of the failed test of Peter denying Jesus three times, and all the disciples falling asleep in the Garden of Gethsemane and abandoning Jesus as He was captured and crucified. These principles are partially consistent with CC spirituality principles for good-faith mistakes, but CC does not endorse forgiveness for integrity flaws as exemplified by the quote from Mackey’s and Sisodia’s (2013)

158

G. E. Roberts

book that “lapses in judgment are readily forgiven, lapses in integrity are not tolerated” (Whittington 2018; Mackey and Sisodia 2013: 219). See the two scriptural examples below in Mark 14:42 and Luke 22:34. Mark 14:42: 42 Get up, let us be going. See, my betrayer is at hand.”; Luke 22:34 Jesus[a] said, “I tell you, Peter, the cock will not crow this day, until you have denied three times that you know me.”

One other attribute of empowerment is driving fear from the workplace by cultivating a culture of forgiveness and redefining failure as learning opportunities that generate character growth and ultimate success. CC organizations understand that for creativity to lead to innovation, employees must be permitted to struggle and fail. This biblical principle is reflected in Matthew 18:21–22. Matthew 18:21-22: Then Peter came and said to him, “Lord, if another member of the church[a] sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven times?” 22 Jesus said to him, “Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven[b] times.

Another vital servant leader behavior is the need for courage in “speaking truth to power” by providing honest, clear, and helpful performance feedback. From a Christian worldview, this entails promoting love of man, not fear of man, which entails being supportive and forgiving, but concurrently setting high performance standards and providing “tough love” boundaries and feedback. Conscious capitalism organizations aspire to produce an environment that support honest problem solving. These “tough love principles are manifested in Proverbs 29:25 and Hebrews 12:6 provided below. Proverbs 29:25; The fear of others[a] lays a snare, but one who trusts in the Lord is secure; Hebrews: 12:6, for the Lord disciplines those whom he loves, and chastises every child whom he accepts.”

A vital servant leader behavior is to practice accountability in which the leader assumes full responsibility for mistakes and errors (remove the log from our own eye first, a practice fully consistent with CC principles). When leaders assess their own contributions first to a problem or conflict situation, it communicates good faith and a foundational level of humanity that reduces defensiveness. This principle is reflected scripturally in Matthew 7:5, “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s[a] eye. Another essential servant leader behavior is honoring authority, even when leadership is unjust. The great example of this in scripture is how David served Saul faithfully even when under personal attack (throwing a spear to kill David) as reflected in 1 Samuel 19:10–12. When servant leaders model this behavior, it sets a high standard of servant followership. This behavioral and character trait is not formally emphasized in CC writings. Another scriptural example is 1 Peter 2:18: “Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh.” Related to these principles of honoring authority under provocation, is the servant leader behavior of loving and serving with equal passion and effectiveness those who irritate, fail, and betray you, or the “sandpaper people” in our lives. This is a vital element in avoiding the

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

159

presence of cliques or “in-groups and out-groups” that create a defacto caste system. This principle is not formally emphasized in CC teaching but is consistent with its spirit of equal and dignified treatment. A clear scriptural example is in Luke 6:32–35 and is presented below. Luke 6:32-35: “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. 35 But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return.[a] Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.

One of the key elements in the learning process in servant leader led organizations is the concept of teachabilty, or the recognition and willingness to learn from any other human being irrespective of age and status differences. A humble attitude related to learning enhances communication, the breadth and depth of problem solving and reduces status differences. This behavior is fully consistent with CC spirituality principles. Two scriptural examples illustrate this in related to youth, 1 Timothy 4:12 and Proverbs 20:11 provided below. 1 Timothy 4:12: 12 Let no one despise your youth but set the believers an example in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. Proverbs 20:11 Even children make themselves known by their acts, by whether what they do is pure and right.

The final servant leader behavior to be discussed is the “ministry of interruptions,” or taking the time to listen to others no matter how busy. This practice reinforces a foundational care and compassion for others, and a deep commitment to promoting growth, learning and the wellbeing of employees or other stakeholders. This behavior is not formally emphasized in CC spirituality and leadership principles but is fully consistent with its ethos honoring the Golden Rule. This principle in action is clearly illustrated by how Jesus interrupted His schedule to assist those in need in Luke 8:42–48 when Jesus was walking through huge crowds on the way to raise the daughter of Jairus from the dead and a women with a bleeding problem interrupted his journey. Luke 8:42-48 43 Now there was a woman who had been suffering from hemorrhages for twelve years; and though she had spent all she had on physicians,[a] no one could cure her. 44 She came up behind him and touched the fringe of his clothes, and immediately her hemorrhage stopped. 45 Then Jesus asked, “Who touched me?” When all denied it, Peter[b] said, “Master, the crowds surround you and press in on you.” 46 But Jesus said, “Someone touched me; for I noticed that power had gone out from me.” 47 When the woman saw that she could not remain hidden, she came trembling; and falling down before him, she declared in the presence of all the people why she had touched him, and how she had been immediately healed. 48 He said to her, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace.”

In conclusion, there is a significant overlap between CC servant leader principles and Christian servant leadership, hence a basic consistency with Christian worldview. As noted above, the main inconsistency is the absence of a redemptive focus for the forgiveness of ethical and character flaws, which is a significant omission given the reality of the human condition.

160

G. E. Roberts

A very insightful critique of CC from a Christian worldview was provided by Liedl (2013). The ongoing loss of Judeo-Christian values and the rise of secularism contributes to an expanding moral vacuum, further corroding the moral foundation of capitalism. Adam Smith’s most influential work, Theory of Moral Sentiment, which articulates an altruistic view of human nature based upon the Golden Rule, and the writings of America’s founding fathers such as Adams, Washington and Jefferson, reinforces that in order to control the default self-interested and avarice aspects of human nature, we need a systematic, fully self-integrated society based upon morality and religion. Liedl (2013) argues that the moral foundation that is needed to promote CC is absent given the rise of secularism, and the compartmentalization of religion, hence, the overall culture that shapes CC will not consistently and enduringly reinforce its essential altruistic and ascetic, gratification delaying values. This entails that only the most committed and dedicated individuals will possess the enduring value and motivational orientation to persevere, even among self-identified Christians, given the cultural ethos of superficial “Cultural Christianity” that William Wilberforce (2006) attacked. Even if America maintained an authentic culturally Christian identity, it would not preclude “rebellious” individual business owners from following short-term profit maximization, given the enduring power of fallen human nature. The presence of weak forms of religious commitment is demonstrated by giving patterns of self-identified Christians as less than 5% tithe (Barna 2013) (give 10% of their income to the church or other church related institutions) with annual overall giving as a percentage of GDP at 2.1% (Charity Navigator n.d.). Hence, even in communities of faith, and the nation as a whole, the commitment to altruism is lacking. Liedl (2013) also insightfully notes that America’s culture of atomistic individualism and liberty, the Lockesian view, is embedded deeply in our political and economic systems, and our society is increasingly losing its dedication to communitarian ideals with lower levels of religious and civic engagement. Hence, the voluntary institutions that form and incentivize altruism and the delay of gratification, voluntary forms of ethical control, are less effective in reducing the default orientation of pure self-interest. Liedl (2013) observes that Mackey is a libertarian at heart, which places the seeds of its own destruction given the liberty and free-will choice of American society produces conflicting and variable ethical systems reinforcing self-interest. Hence, not everyone is altruistic, and there are many self-interested and self-serving members of society who care little about the commons and the greater good. Hence, the critique from a Christian worldview is that CC fails to grasp the inherent sinful nature of humanity, with no means to address the root cause of the propensity for self-interest, original sin (Chewing 2001). This erodes the ability of CC companies to resist the pressures of Darwinian competition and short-erm profit maximization of those businesses operating with a different world view. With the reality of ongoing business cycles pressures and market changes, the endemic competitive stresses will challenge the ability of CC organizations to maintain a long-term perspective and accept lower profit levels. Hence the CC companies will find it increasingly difficult to “fail with grace and patience,” reducing their time and space to solve long term problems (Roberts 2015).

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

161

Other critiques from a Christian worldview include CC’s rejection of worker’s rights to collective bargaining to address power inequities in the workplace (Aschoff 2017), an absence of a sustained, and explicit commitment on helping the poor through employment and self-development programs and charity contributions and its libertarian orientation resists governmental regulation to address the endemic market failures of our globalized economy. In addition, CC is not self-reflective on the full range of ethical and moral issues related to the Christian worldview and does not embrace lifestyle minimalism and promotes products and services that confuse luxuries with necessities. Conscious capitalism companies promote the “platinum rule” that reverses the Golden Rule’s focus by catering to how others want to be treated, even if the goods and services provided are not in their or society’s best interests such as luxury items. Conscious capitalism also does not explicitly integrate the religious friendly workplace and the need for a broad definition of diversity (Roberts 2015). In conclusion, to be fair in the final assessment, all modes of organization in a secular and fallen world fall far short of biblical standards, including the Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant and evangelical churches. In terms of businesses, CC organizations honor the “letter and spirit” of Christian worldview to a much greater extent than traditional capitalism, hence CC organizations are a marked improvement and have promoted concrete progress and concurrently afford hope for a fuller realization of the eternal biblical business standards. The final section will illustrate some of the consistencies and inconsistences of CC with Christian worldview with a set of mini-case studies that illustrate the challenges, progress and promise of CC organizations.

9.4 Case Study Examples of CC Attributes with Christian Worldview Commentary and Analysis The first example is Panera Cares, a CC consistent initiative of the Panera Corporation to help the poor and homeless in inner cities (Eckhardt and Dobscha 2019). Panera Cares provided a two-tier pricing system, one for regular customers, and a “pay what you are able” policy for the deserving poor. The program was a failure, however, given that the needy felt judged and stigmatized by the public and visible nature of the assessment process to qualify, and paying customers felt judged and stigmatized as well if they choose not to pay a premium to donate to the needy. Hence, this CC effort failed to guard the dignity of the poor, a clear conflict with Christian worldview. Whole Foods does possess an exemplary record and business model of honoring the principles of CC, but with a few notable exceptions. They were accused of predatory pricing and acquisition approaches with competitors, primarily the Wild Oats company (Cheretis and Mujtaba 2014). They also resisted health care and governmental regulation efforts contrary to Christian worldview principles and cut employee health benefits for part-time workers (Mackey 2009). Finally, Whole

162

G. E. Roberts

Foods reverted to traditional business models within their supply chain when under pressure and stopped buying local produce and contracted with national agricultural suppliers (Aschoff 2017). The Container Corporation is exemplary company in terms of high wage levels and outstanding investment in long term employee human capital development with well above average spending on training (Whittington 2018; Tindell 2014). However, the Container Corporation fails to provide “gleaning the field opportunities” for the poor and is a highly selective meritocracy with a selection rate of 3% (Whittington 2018; Tindell 2014). One of the most recent examples of a largely consistent exemplar of CC with Christian worldview is with an Indian company, Vyomini (Mishra et  al. 2020). Vyomini utilizes CC principles to empower and improve the menstrual health and hygiene of rural, poor women by developing a sustainable business ecosystem that lifted women out of poverty through financial inclusion and livelihood training. They provide simple and economical manufacturing techniques using local, biodegradable materials employing design thinking and a higher purpose. Hence, Vyomini reinforces the goal of solving poverty problems at their root cause, not simply treating its symptoms as they empower and train poor women through micro-enterprise. Consistent with the Christian worldview on social justice, they made “disciples” by developing independent entrepreneurs and accepted lower profit margins and market share for promoting the common good. They developed a more wholistic moral movement of reducing poverty and enhancing the health and wellbeing of society, not simply meeting consumer demands that enhance the greater good (Mishra et al. 2020). The final section concludes the chapter and provides an analysis of the future of CC from a Christian worldview.

9.5 Conclusions and Future of Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview This chapter has demonstrated the fundamental value and attributes consistency of CC with Christian worldview on social justice. However, like the church itself, there is variability in its implementation and effectiveness. However, the “letter and spirit” of CC is a major moral and ethical improvement over traditional capitalism. CC elevates ethicality by formally integrating and institutionalizing “Golden Rule” personal code of conduct standards in stakeholder relations and treatment while enhancing the moral compass by promoting behavior, decisions, products and services that enhance the common good, reduce negative externalities, and achieve a transcendent purpose. Given the emphasis on sustainability, and ethical and moral business practices, the role of CC will likely expand.

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

163

CC’s major discrepancies with Christian social justice world view is summarized below: • CC lacks consistent emphasis in helping the poor (gleaning the fields and sharing profit) • CC frequently lacks the degree of altruism to resist intense market pressures for profit maximization, and from a Christian worldview, it underestimates the enduring nature of original sin and the default position of self-interest • CC fails to provide the spiritual foundation for the great moral courage to resist the temptation of self-interested, self-preserving and Darwinian, survival of the fittest, financial practices when under stress • CC fails to embrace a full understanding of market failure and the need for governmental regulation and worker organizational efforts • CC fails to fully integrate moral reasoning to promote simple, minimalist lifestyle that maximizes profit for distribution to the commons and to avoid producing, marketing and selling products that define luxuries as necessities For CC to work more effectively from a Christian worldview, it will require a systematic cultural embrace and assimilation of the following principles: • Educate consumers of their moral and ethical obligation to move beyond simple price and quality and embrace a wholistic view of the common good and be willing to pay higher prices for greater societal benefits • For investors to embrace a more diverse portfolio of business success metrics form environmental sustainability, human rights adherence, poverty reduction, among others. In summary, there is a great need for more social investors • Board members will need to develop a long-term and sustainable focus and a socially diverse set of outcome metrics as noted with investors above • Will require a collaborative effort with business, nonprofit, and government • In a fallen world, reinforce the need for appropriate and limited governmental regulation In conclusion, conscious capitalism is a vital and necessary, but not sufficient, approach to more fully honor biblical social justice principles and the great Commandment of Jesus to love your neighbor as yourself as reflected in Matthew 25:35–40: For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ “The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’

164

G. E. Roberts

References Aburdene, P. 2005. Megatrends 2010: The rise of Conscious Capitalism. Charlottesville: Hampton Roads. Aschoff, N. 2017, May 29. Whole Foods Represents the Failures of ‘Conscious Capitalism’. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/29/whole-­foods-­failures-­conscious-­ capitalism#:~:text=Same%2Dstore%20sales%20have%20declined,away%20during%20 the%20same%20period. Barna. 2013, June 3. American Donor Trends. https://www.barna.com/research/ american-­donor-­trends/. Benedict, J. 2013. Mapping the Kingdom Business Movement: A Working Paper. https://regententrepreneur.org/wp-­content/uploads/2015/12/Mapping-­the-­Kingdom-­Business-­Movement.pdf. Charity Navigator. n.d.. Giving Statistics. https://www.charitynavigator.org/index. cfm?bay=content.viewandcpid=42. Cheretis, D., and B.G. Mujtaba. 2014. Maximizing Long-Term Value and Conscious Capitalism at Whole Foods. SAM Advanced Management Journal 79 (3): 4–16. Chewning, R.C. 2001. Capitalism: From its Genesis to its Eschatology its Compatibilities with Christianity; Its Insidious Challenges to Godliness. Journal of Biblical Integration in Business 13 (1). Retrieved September 10, 2020 from https://cbfa-­jbib.org/index.php/jbib/article/ view/191/191. Compendium of the social doctrine of the Church. 2005 Ottawa: Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops. Dhiman, S., G. Roberts, and J. Crossman. 2018. The Palgrave Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Eckhardt, G.M., and S.  Dobscha. 2019. The Consumer Experience of Responsibilization: The Case of Panera Cares. Journal of Business Ethics 159 (3): 651–663. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-­018-­3795-­4. Fleischacker, S. 2020, August 5. Adam Smith on Religion. https://www.adamsmithworks.org/ life_times/adam-­smith-­ob-­religion. Frémeaux, S., and G.  Michelson. 2017. The Common Good of the Firm and Humanistic Management: Conscious Capitalism and Economy of Communion. Journal of Business Ethics 145 (4): 701–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-­016-­3118-­6. Fyke, J.P., and P.M. Buzzanell. 2013. The Ethics of Conscious Capitalism: Wicked Problems in Leading Change and Changing Leaders. Human Relations 66 (12): 1619–1643. https://doi. org/10.1177/0018726713485306. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America (2020). For the Life of the World: Toward a Social Ethos of the Orthodox Church. https://www.goarch.org/social-­ethos. Greenleaf, R.K. 1977. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. New York: Paulist Press. Gregory, V., and M. Chasomeris. 2016. JSE Listed Companies in the Food and Drug Retail Sector: A Content Analysis of Financial Statements to Determine Their Primary Purpose. Journal of Economic and Financial Sciences 9 (3): 927–950. Liedl, J. 2013, April 10. The Merits and Limitations of “Conscious Capitalism.” Ethicka Plotika. thikapolitika.org/2013/04/10/the-­merits-­and-­limitations-­of-­conscious-­capitalism-­2. Mackey, J. 2009, August 11. The Whole Foods Alternative to Obama Care. https://www.wsj.com/ articles/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070. ———. 2011. What Conscious Capitalism Really Is: A Response to James O’Toole and David Vogel’s “Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism”. California Management Review 53 (3): 83–90. Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Melé, D. 2009. Integrating Personalism into Virtue-Based Business Ethics: The Personalist and the Common Good Principles. Journal of Business Ethics 88 (1): 227–244.

9  Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Worldview Lens

165

Mishra, O., R. Sharma, and B. Agrawal. 2020. Facilitating Women Prosperity with Higher Purpose at Vyomini. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases 9 (2): 198–207. https:// doi.org/10.1177/2277977920905820. Novak, M. 1982. The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism. New  York: An American Enterprise Institute/Simon and Schuster Publication. O’Toole, J., and D.  Vogel. 2011. Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism. California Management Review 53 (3): 60–76. Roberts, G. 2015. Christian Scripture and Human Resource Management: Building a Path to Servant Leadership Through Faith. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ———. 2016. Working with Christian servant leader spiritual intelligence: The foundation of God honoring vocational success. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Schwartz, T. 2013. Companies that Practice “Conscious Capitalism” Perform 10x Better. Harvard Business School Cases 1. Simpson, S., B.D.  Fischer, and M.  Rohde. 2013. The Conscious Capitalism Philosophy Pays Off: A Qualitative and Financial Analysis of Conscious Capitalism Corporations. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics 10 (4): 19–29. Sisodia, R. 2011. Conscious Capitalism, a Better Way to Win: A Response to James O’Toole and David Vogel’s ‘Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism’. California Management Review 53 (3): 98–108. Smith, A. 2002. The Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Bibliomania.com Ltd. [Web.] Smith, A., and R. P. Hanley. 2009. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, 250th anniversary, Ser. Penguin classics. Penguin Books. Spears, L. 1998. Insights on Leadership: Service, Stewardship, Spirit, and Servant Leadership. New York: Wiley. Tindell, K. 2014. Uncontainable: How Passion, Commitment, and Conscious Capitalism Built a Business Where Everyone Thrives. New York: Grand Central Publishing. Wang, C. 2013. Response to Commentary: On the Scientific Status of the Conscious Capitalism Theory. California Management Review 55 (3): 97–106. Whittington, J.L. 2018. Book Review. Academy of Management Learning and Education 17 (3): 391–393. Wilberforce, W. 2006. Real Christianity by (W. Bob Beltz). New York: Regal. Wisler, J.C. 2018. U.S.  CEOs of SBUs in Luxury Goods Organizations: A Mixed Methods Comparison of Ethical Decision-Making Profiles. Journal of Business Ethics 149 (2): 443–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-­016-­3069-­y. Gary E. Roberts is a Professor and Director of the Master of Public Administration Program in the Robertson School of Government, at Regent University (USA). His research interests include servant leadership within the human resource management system and the influence of spiritual intelligence on personal and organizational well-being. His latest books include Working the Christian Servant Leader Spiritual Intelligence : The Foundation of the Vocational Success (Palgrave Macmillan, 2016) and Servant Leader Human Resource Management: A Moral and Spiritual Perspective (Palgrave Macmillan, 2014). Professor Roberts is currently serving as coEditor for the Handbook of Servant Leadership and is a Series Editor for the Palgrave Studies in Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment. He is a member of St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church and Vineyard Community Church.  

Chapter 10

Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit of Conscious Capitalism Eva Witesman, Bradley R. Agle, and Brad Oates

10.1 Introduction: The Role of Economic Activity Like many of their traditional Christian counterparts, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (“the Church”) view the practice of ethical business, and the view of moral economic activity more generally, as rooted in Judeo-­ Christian values, the teachings of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Bible, and a sincere, religiously-motivated desire to serve humanity through all endeavors. However, the LDS perspective also includes essential doctrinal components that are distinct to the faith, and therefore uniquely affect the LDS development of thought around the role of business in society. The LDS ideal for a system of economic activity seeks to help individuals, families, and society to achieve their highest potential. This highest potential, known as “exaltation,” is a continuous and infinite increase of prosperity and flourishing for all members of the society. The ideal state of society is known among church members as “Zion,” a state to which they actively aspire. Members of the Church are taught approaches to production, trade, wealth management, resource management, and social structure that are meant to bring them into closer alignment with the LDS view of ideal economic activity. Such structures have evolved and varied over time, but have been viewed by scholars as a private welfare system that precedes public welfare systems as we know them today, at least in the United States (Rothbard 1978; Blumell 1979).

E. Witesman (*) · B. R. Agle Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA e-mail: [email protected] B. Oates Stone Advisors, Dallas, TX, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_10

167

168

E. Witesman et al.

The principles of this private welfare system are deeply intertwined not only with private charitable activity but also LDS conceptions about the role of business, the purpose of wealth, the nature of work, and the responsibility associated with stewardship over private resources. While these principles are primarily practiced within the church’s welfare system, where they “provide governance across the entire Church community, encouraging religious adherence and broad-based participation” (Goodman and Herzberg 2020), they also extend into the private business activity of individual church members. The LDS view also includes cautionary tales—canonized in scripture—about the ways in which economic activity can be a destructive, rather than constructive, force on society. Church doctrine warns of the deterioration of social structure that comes from social patterns that idealize wealth and forget God, a failure of moral leadership, and the presence of class divisions. These failings often follow booms in wealth and trade, when public and private errors cascade into social decline. Societies thus in decline are viewed as incarnations of “Babylon,” a metaphorical reference to the Biblical city that was destroyed because of its wickedness (Kimball 1976; Tolley 2003). While some civilizations recorded in the Church’s scripture, The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, decline to the point of extinction or assimilation, the scriptures suggest a cycle in which societies in decline can humble themselves in their deteriorating state, return to righteous principles, and begin to recover their prosperity. Known as the “pride cycle,” the pattern illustrated in scripture is that the deterioration of society often leads the people in society to remember their God, to find humility and contrition, to repent of their wealth deification, and then to discover a pathway back to prosperity through a remembrance of God’s commandments. In the LDS view, adherence to God’s commandments is a key to the maintenance of social order and the pursuit of exaltation. The two primary commandments are to (1) love God and (2) to love others. These core beliefs lead to behaviors that diminish a focus on individual material wealth and instead focus on the use of wealth to enhance the welfare of others. When endowed with the redemptive power of the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the power of covenants kept with Him, economic activity can be a tool for lifting individuals, families, and societies not only out of poverty, but into the glorious potential for growth and flourishing both during mortal life and in the eternities. In LDS theology, covenants are more than mere promises to keep God’s commandments; they are sacred commitments one makes with God to consecrate everything one has been blessed with (including material possessions, financial wealth, human talent, professional skills, etc.) to help others progress and flourish until a state of absolute and total equality and shared prosperity is achieved in society. This chapter explores the concepts of the LDS perspective on economic activity. First, we examine the “spirit of conscious capitalism.” In so doing, we examine the various theoretical perspectives that share this “spirit,” and discover various unique aspects of this “spirit.” We then examine some of the literature relating Christianity and business ethics, providing important normative undergirding for the ethicality

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

169

of the spirit of conscious capitalism. Next, we explore the LDS perspective on exaltation, viewed within the faith as the purpose of economic activity. Then, we explore the two archetypal social patterns in the Church’s doctrine: the pattern of growth and expansion typified by the Zion Society, and the pattern of decline and destruction known as Babylon (Tolley 2003). We then provide examples of how business practitioners who are members of the Church are seeking to live these principles in a world that is on a continuum somewhere between Zion and Babylon.

10.2 Zion Society in Context: A Review of the Spirit of Conscious Capitalism and Related Constructs While the current conception of conscious capitalism has existed for less than a decade, the spirit of conscious capitalism has been with us for centuries. While there have always been businesspeople who only focus on their own wealth, for as long as economic cooperation has been attempted, there have been those who have sought a conception of business that integrates economic activity with social well-­ being (see Husted 2015 for a history). Some prominent examples from history underscore the linkages between business and broader social goals, such as the New Lanark Mill (Gorb 1951) and Cadburys in the UK, and NCR in the U.S. (Soskis 2010). The study of conscious capitalism can arguably be traced to concepts published in Howard Bowen’s book, Social Responsibilities of the Businessman (Bowen 1953). These concepts have continued to develop over time. As illustrated in Table 10.1, those writing in the spirit of conscious capitalism developed the ideas of corporate social responsibility, corporate social performance, stakeholder capitalism, corporate citizenship, sustainability, and shared value creation. In 2013, Whole Foods CEO John Mackey published a practical primer on how to run a business using these concepts in a book entitled Conscious Capitalism, written with professor Raj Sisodia. Table 10.1 provides an overview of the spirit of conscious capitalism and the various definitions and unique ideas in each conception. While all of the definitions concern themselves in one way or another with a corporation having interactions and responsibilities with a broad range of stakeholders, they each provide unique insights into the phenomenon. The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) laid out four specific responsibilities of companies – economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic (Carroll 1979). Ed Freeman began the modern work in stakeholder management with his seminal book in 1984 (Freeman 1984), followed by subsequent work on stakeholder capitalism (Freeman et al. 2007). This latter work echoes earlier work by Hill and Jones (1992) and emphasizes the various agreements among the multitude of stakeholders that are required to run any modern corporation. Donna Wood (1991) provided a seminal article on corporate social performance that placed greater emphasis on the outcomes of CSR and also emphasized the

170

E. Witesman et al.

Table 10.1  Definitions of conscious capitalism and related constructs Term Conscious capitalism

Stakeholder capitalism

Corporate social responsibility

Corporate social performance

Corporate citizenship

Author(s) Year Mackey and Sisodia, 2013

Definition An evolving paradigm for business that simultaneously creates multiple kinds of value and well-being for all stakeholders: financial, intellectual, physical, ecological, social, cultural, emotional, ethical, and even spiritual (p. 32)

Stakeholder capitalism focuses on individuals voluntarily working together to create sustainable relationships in the pursuit of value creation. Each stakeholder should be protected within their voluntary agreements. Those individuals can decide to cooperate and obligate themselves to others through those voluntary agreements (p. 311) Carroll CSR involves the conduct of a 1991, 1999 business so that it is economically profitable, law abiding, ethical, and socially supportive. To be socially responsible… then means that profitability and obedience to the law are foremost conditions to discussing the firm’s ethics and the extent to which it supports the society in which it exists with contributions of money, time and talent. (1999, p. 286) Wood A business organization’s 1991 configuration of principles of social responsibility, processes of social responsiveness and policies, programs, and observable outcomes as they relate to the firm’s societal relationships. (p. 693) Minimum legal requirements. An Logsdon and Wood expectation to “give something back” to the community, a wide 2002 range of acceptable voluntary acts. (p. 160)

Freeman, Martin, and Parmar 2007

Unique Characteristics Practice-based, as opposed to theory-based, focus on serving all stakeholders. Four tenets: stakeholder integration, higher purpose and core values, conscious leadership, and conscious culture and management Focus on voluntary agreements and obligations among various stakeholders

Explicit acknowledgement of businesses’ economic, legal, ethical, and voluntary or philanthropic responsibilities

Focus on three dimensions of institutions and organizations: (1) principles, (2) processes and practices, and (3) outcomes

Explicit focus on the organization’s responsibility to its community

(continued)

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

171

Table 10.1 (continued) Term Sustainability

Shared value creation

Author(s) Year Dyllick and Hockerts 2002

Porter and Kramer 2011

Definition Meeting the needs of a firm’s direct and indirect stakeholders (such as shareholders, employees, clients, pressure groups, communities, etc.) without compromising its ability to meet the needs of future stakeholders as well. (p. 131) Corporate policies and practices that enhance the competitive advantage and profitability of the company while simultaneously advancing social and economic conditions in the communities in which it sells and operates (https://www.isc.hbs. edu/creating-­sharedvalue/Pages/ default.aspx)

Unique Characteristics Particular focus on an organization’s future stakeholders

Focus on gaining competitive advantage through advancement of the social and economic conditions of the larger community

existence of core corporate elements: principles, processes and practices, and outcomes. Logsdon and Wood (2002) developed the idea of corporate citizenship, building on the central ideas of citizenship, to define the responsibilities of a corporation to its national and local communities. The corporate sustainability perspective (Dyllick and Hockerts 2002) uniquely emphasized a company’s obligations to its future stakeholders. Finally, the concept of shared value creation (Porter and Kramer 2011), which echoes the ideas of instrumental stakeholder theory (e.g. Jones 1995), suggests that companies can be even more innovative and create sustained competitive advantage for greater financial wealth creation if they will examine ways in which they can simultaneously create value for their communities. At a symposium at the 2007 Academy of Management meeting, several of the scholars mentioned above discussed the evolution they anticipated from a shareholder-focused to a stakeholder-­ focused view of the firm (Agle et al. 2008).

10.3 Zion Society and the Spirit of Conscious Capitalism in a Christian Context Latter-day Saints view themselves very much as Christians (2 Nephi 25:26), followers of Jesus of Nazareth and his doctrines as found in the New Testament and other modern scriptures such as The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Thus, Latter-Day Saints share many of the common connections between the spirit of conscious capitalism and the teachings of Jesus Christ as discussed by other Christian writers in this book.

172

E. Witesman et al.

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Brad Agle worked together with Harry Van Buren and Gary Weaver to examine the relationship between business ethics and Christianity. In a series of papers, they looked at unique Christian beliefs that might affect how business practitioners think about business (Van Buren and Agle 1998), how Christian beliefs and practices affect attitudes toward corporate social responsibility (Agle and Van Buren 1999), and how religiosity in general and various dimensions of religious belief and practice could affect ethical business practice (Weaver and Agle 2002). In doing so, they found a rich body of literature that has examined Christianity and its relationship with business—a literature that has continued to blossom. Utilizing Biblical passages and academic research on Christian beliefs, Van Buren and Agle (1998) sought to identify Christian beliefs that were likely to affect managerial decision-making. The following beliefs had high levels of agreement among their sample of Christians: there is an afterlife, works done on earth make a difference in the hereafter, belief in a final judgment, and actions are a necessary part of religious faith. Beliefs that had a moderate level of agreement among their sample included the following: publicizing one’s works makes them less noble, we are our brother’s/sister’s keeper, one’s responsibility for others increase as our resources increase, and we have a responsibility to be good stewards of our resources. Christian beliefs that had a lower level of agreement included the following: egalitarian distribution of wealth, prosperity accrues to communities that are moral, and prosperity accrues to individuals that are moral. Agle and Van Buren (1999) then examined the relationship among religious upbringing, Christian beliefs, religious behavior, and attitudes toward corporate social responsibility utilizing a large sample of full-time and executive MBA students. To measure attitudes towards corporate social responsibility they developed a five-point Gutman scale with the following statements as weights on the two ends of the scale: I think that managers’ responsibility is to maximize owners’ wealth, while abiding by the law, and I think that managers’ responsibility is to make the world a better place, without worrying about owners’ wealth, and the midpoint statement as follows: I think that managers’ responsibility is to enhance the well-­ being of all stakeholders (e.g., owners, customers, employees, community, suppliers, environment). Their research discovered that attitudes regarding CSR were not correlated at all with religious upbringing, and had only weak and mixed correlations with religious practice and Christian beliefs. Weaver and Agle (2002) sought to understand the assortment of highly mixed positive, negative, and neutral research findings regarding the relationship between religion and business throughout the literature. Their analysis “indicates that religious role expectations, internalized as a religious self-identity, can influence ethical behavior. However, relationships of religious role expectations to behavior are moderated by religious identity salience and religious motivational orientation” (Weaver and Agle 2002, p. 77). There are several sources on Christian beliefs and the spirit of conscious capitalism that illustrate how those beliefs overlap with a Latter-day Saint (LDS) belief. As just one example, the Catholic document entitled Vocation of the Business Leader:

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

173

A Reflection (2018) is a combined effort of the Vatican and the University of St. Thomas, and is currently in its fifth edition. In the section on “Foundational Ethical Principles for Business: Human Dignity and the Common Good,” we find eight principles that could have easily been written by a Latter-Day Saint. In the next section we explore some uniquely LDS theology that may contribute new insights to the conception of socially conscious economic activity. This effort joins earlier attempts at understanding the relationship between LDS history, principles, and practices, and business ethics (e.g. Agle 2012, Brady and Woodworth 2001, and Lucas and Woodworth 1999).

10.4 Exaltation: The Hope of Heaven It is instructive to recognize that while many views of business activity center on economic principles derived either from a value maximization perspective (e.g. Jensen 2002) and/or expected utility theory (Von Neumann and Morgenstern 2007), such conceptions of business tend to focus on the well-being of individuals and societies in a way that is limited by the assumption of time and mortality. In other words, they focus on the goals of well-being during mortal life and do not conceive of life beyond death except, perhaps, in terms of the character and virtues individuals or corporations might possess due to their interactions with others (Moore 2005; Kotva 1996). Here, the LDS view diverges significantly from other perspectives. One essential component of LDS doctrine that shapes the life perspectives of members of the faith is the set of beliefs about post-mortal human existence and the nature of heaven and “exaltation.” This set of beliefs has a discernible effect on church members’ approaches to daily activities, including the development of business philosophies and practices. Specifically, the LDS doctrines about the nature of heaven and the potential for exaltation in post-mortality intensifies the traditional Christian view of the value of the individual, elevating the status of human beings to gods in embryo (Romney 1973; Hagen 2006) with infinite creative potential. This is extended by doctrines related to the eternal nature of the family, in which the family unit is the primary vehicle for the expression of eternal creative power, and social structures and relationships generally are expected to continue beyond the grave in glorified form (Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) 130:2). This concept of exaltation differs from many other views of heaven. The LDS view of life with God includes the possibility of endless increase as creators, both within family units that procreate in the eternities and as creators of worlds without end in a continually expanding universe. This idea of eternal increase, then, forms a social objective not only in the hereafter, but also on earth. The objective of markets—as with any institution or social structure—is to steward resources in a manner that promotes a continuous increase of resources without depletion and without creating class divisions. These two challenges—resource depletion and class divisions—are the key challenges that any society must overcome in order to reach an exultant state. Finding social unity (D&C 38:27) within LDS communities is one

174

E. Witesman et al.

important aspect of worship and religious practice, and complements individual spiritual growth and perfection. In addition to the doctrine of individual exaltation, members of the Church believe that families can remain intact in the eternities, and the culminating covenant ordinances in the religion pertain to this fact. Marriage between a man and a woman is viewed as a gateway to eternal creative power, regardless of whether or not married couples have children in mortality. The centrality of procreation in this view has drawn critics of the church, which does not solemnize same-sex marriages in its temples. One prominent business leader, Jeff Greene, reportedly left the church over this issue (Watson 2021). According to the LDS view, family relationships are bound—not only within marriages but also across generations—in a sacred chain that perpetuates family relationships beyond the grave. In this way, the entire human family is viewed as interconnected, and every individual is viewed as a vital part of a greater, eternal whole. With this view comes an increased concern for the well-being of future generations, as well as a sense of kinship with previous generations. Members of the human family, whether affiliated with the church or not, and whether currently living or not, are viewed as equally valuable. Latter-day Saints also believe in the possibility of creating idealized social structures within the community of faith. The idea of building a Zion Society is the goal of congregations and the worldwide church as a whole. In practice, this means that members strive to build literal “heaven on earth” by seeking to practice eternal institutions and live eternal laws in mortal life in a manner that reflects the ideal social structure in post-mortal experience. In other words, they strive to build social and economic structures that mirror the institutions they believe to be the foundation of heavenly social and economic life. This Zion Society is marked by a stewardship perspective that leads to eternal increase—through adherence to the laws of heaven, including careful and wise stewardship of natural resources—and thus the growth of human potential is viewed as literally boundless. While their most explicit Zion-­ building efforts are focused on church activity, many members also actively seek to incorporate these social principles and practices in their work life, political life, and other social interactions outside the faith. The practice of the LDS faith is highly collectivistic and utilitarian. The Church’s organizational structure is characterized by multiple and overlapping roles, stakeholder groups, and areas of responsibility. Members of the Church gather and make decisions in councils—often by unanimous rule—and are voluntarily organized into congregations in which virtually every member is assigned multiple interconnected roles with various ecclesiastical responsibilities. Though unpaid, these positions take on significant importance in the lives of church members, and are often viewed much like jobs. Significant administrative hierarchy and centralizing standardization exists within this church structure; however, the structure is primarily characterized by its active and collective involvement of every member in the shared objective of achieving a “Zion Society” and exaltation not only for individual members, but for everyone within their scope of reach. This approach is highly compatible with stewardship and stakeholder views of administrative practice.

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

175

The objective of building a Zion Society explains many of the contemporary structures of Latter-day Saint worship, which includes organizational structures for ministering to the needs of men, women, children, youth, and families; adapting to the unique needs of local, regional, and national peoples, and connecting the entirety of the church body to a centralized system of care, instruction, and guidance. This centralized organization is enhanced by highly decentralized and complex formal structures for connecting individuals in relationships of care and concern through “ministering” assignments whereby each church member is assigned a duty of care for other individuals and/or families within the congregation. The role of all social structures in the LDS view, then, is to achieve an ideal social state, through good stewardship and mutual care, for three purposes: 1 . The exaltation of individuals, who can live with God and receive creative powers 2. The exaltation of families, who can live together and enjoy the eternal connectedness of an ever-expanding intergenerational family, and 3. The exaltation of society, which can live in harmony in a state of perpetual growth due to stewardship of resources and mutual care. This is known as “Zion.” Within the LDS perspective, the role of markets, trade, and business (like all institutions) should share these three exaltative purposes. Thus, “good” economic activity ought to facilitate the personal moral growth of individual people; support and maintain the health, well-being, and social structure of families; and improve the quality of society as a whole, including stewardship of resources. Because the purpose of life for all humans is to gain experience necessary for continued learning and social association in the post-mortal world, an ideal business setting would also be one that, like the church setting, enhances interpersonal relationships in a way that allows for mutual care, personal growth, and the development of deeply meaningful relationships. Like members of other Christian faiths, members of the Church draw lessons for moral and ethical behavior from the Bible. However, the faith believes in continuing revelation and maintains an open canon. This canon includes The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, which contains cautionary tales about the accumulation of wealth and the pursuit of prosperity in society. Ideal scriptural scenarios exist to inspire Latter-day Saints to pursue prosperity in order to bless the lives of all people, to share wealth with the poor and needy (e.g. Jacob 2), and to seek to eliminate poverty, classism, racism, and other social ills. While members of the faith (as recorded in scripture as well as the present day) have consistently sought to create the idyllic Zion, they often fall short. In particular, a pattern known as the “pride cycle” in the Book of Mormon demonstrates how, in the absence of personal moral character and righteous leadership, prosperous social systems often lead to exactly the opposite of a Zion society—known metaphorically as “Babylon”—before such a society ultimately collapses. In the pride cycle, members of society forget the importance of the core moral tenets of personal righteousness and instead of caring for the poor, the needy, and each other, they begin to experience class divisions that ultimately lead to discord, war, and social destruction. These two idealized patterns will be further elucidated in the next sections of this chapter.

176

E. Witesman et al.

10.5 Zion The LDS view of an ideal economic system is best expressed in the concept of “Zion.” The model for a Zion society is scripturally captured in the story of the ascension of Enoch the prophet (as recorded in Genesis). In LDS scripture, which expands upon this account, “not only (was) Enoch…taken up alive into heaven, as the Genesis passage implies, but also that the entire city of Enoch was eventually received up into heaven as well” (Larsen 2014, p.  25). Zion, the city led by the prophet Enoch, embodied such individual and collective righteousness that the scriptures expound on the connection between this exalted social state and the creative powers associated with the godlike power of human potential: “They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things…Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God” (DandC 76:55–58). Scriptural accounts suggest that this power included power over the elements (Moses 6:34, JST Genesis 14:30–32). Since the time when the prophet Joseph Smith founded the Church in 1830, both the global church and local congregations regularly refer to this ideal of Zion, as they strive not only for personal goodness, but also social structures that create optimal love and support to every person within their reach (Olsen 1993). The objective of recreating Zion shapes every program of the church and, in the early days of the church’s settlements on their trek westward, shaped city planning and government initiatives as well as private business behavior both under Joseph Smith and his successor Brigham Young. Early members of the church tried to follow the prophetic and scriptural guidance about how to formally organize their society in a manner that would ensure continual increase of wealth, property, and expansion for the church, with the ultimate objective of being received—individually and collectively as in the case of Enoch and his holy city—by God himself. Several core values mark the characteristics of a Zion society. One of these is the principle of free will, (often referred to as agency—not to be confused with agency theory) by which individuals are free to act for themselves and are not compelled to generosity but do so of their own free will and choice. This principle finds resonance with the market, in which consumers and producers are viewed as free agents who make their own decisions regarding utility maximization (Kane 1998; Stigler 1950). This principle of voluntary exchange is also seen in Freeman et al.’s (2007) articulation of stakeholder capitalism. A second principle is that of stewardship, in which it is the responsibility of every person to take the resources she or he has been granted and to maximize their productivity through wise investment, diligent care, and appropriate replenishment. The concept of stewardship suggests that growth is not only possible but expected of saints. Jesus’ parable of the talents (see Matt. 25:28–29) suggests that risk, investment, and growth are important parts of the management of resources with which humankind has been entrusted. In other words, scripture encourages the view that resources should be managed in a way that causes them to grow and expand for the benefit of all, rather than stagnating, being depleted, or being merely preserved. Regardless of the size or nature of the stewardship, each person is expected to

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

177

maximize the wellbeing and productivity of that stewardship. This concept finds parallels in scholarship on stewardship theory of management, including the work of Davis et al. (1997), and the examination of the relationship between the natural environment and the practice of business (Welford and Gouldson 1993). As good stewardship would, under ideal circumstances, lead to an increase and eventual surplus of resources, a final concept of consecration provides guidance about the role and purpose of wealth in a Zion society. Consecration suggests that, because all resources are ultimately God’s (and humans are mere stewards of these resources), all surplus also belongs to God and should therefore be used for His purposes, which includes offering relief to the poor, equalizing social classes, and expanding by gathering others into the Zion society and embracing them in the fellowship of the society. In order to achieve this, adherents were said to have “had all things common” (Acts 2:44–45 and 4:32–35) and to “have no poor among them” (Moses 7:18) and to voluntarily offer all excess resources for the purposes of redistribution, capital projects, and social growth (e.g. DandC 119:1). The LDS approach to business thus includes a profit motive, but the purpose of capital is the exaltation, both individually and collectively, of humankind. As individuals use their agency to become increasingly profitable stewards, they grow in moral character and in capacity to manage and ultimately command the elements in a sustainable and expanding fashion. Sustainable growth, boundless due to the careful stewardship of resources and divinely inspired innovation, becomes a template for godliness. In the process, individual success becomes collective success through the process of consecration, in which all members of society feel valued and class divisions and the resulting strife are eliminated. In 2020, investment holdings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were estimated to be in the $80–100 Billion range, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal. These holdings exemplify the concept of careful stewardship with an eye toward increase. However, some felt that rather than save the money for future needs—as head of the investment fund Roger Clarke indicated was the fund’s purpose—the money should be spent immediately for care of the poor and needy (Lovett and Levy 2020). The church reports that it spends about $1billion annually in humanitarian aid (LDS Newsroom 2020). The growth of a Zion society can thus be described as a virtuous cycle that exhibits the following pattern: 1. Individuals have access to resources, either from God or from the consecration of others 2. Individuals exercise agency and personal choice as they manage their resources in stewardships, thus growing personal character and work ethic 3. Individuals and groups work as stewards of resources, maintaining and replenishing those resources while, ideally, also increasing those resources through wise investment, work, and growth. 4. Some stewardships produce in excess of that which is needed to maintain the livelihood of the stewards and their families

178

E. Witesman et al.

5. Stewards use their agency to consecrate excess resources (profit) to strengthen those less fortunate in society, whose stewardships were not so productive or who face poverty 6. Class divisions diminish and ultimately disappear as resources become more equally distributed and stewardships increase in productivity 7. Stewardships continue to produce excess, which is distributed equally in society and the standard of wealth and wellbeing increases 8. New members are invited into the society, which continues to experience growth 9. Cycle of growth and human flourishing is self-perpetuating and amplifying This cycle repeats until the personal and social excellence of the society reach a degree of flourishing so great that the next natural step is an evolution into the power of creation in an expanding universe. Other than the account of the City of Enoch, this level of social exaltation is rarely achieved. While scriptures in the Bible and Book of Mormon describe long periods of peace and prosperity and increasing wealth in societies striving to live the Zion society pattern, the presence of wealth and the need to voluntarily part with wealth are the key pitfalls that pull societies out of the virtuous cycle of prosperity and into a pattern of class divisions and deterioration. As Larsen (2014, p.  26) observes, “With Enoch’s Zion removed from the world, the “residue” of the people left behind continued to increase in wickedness—a downward spiral that ultimately ended with the coming of the Great Flood to cleanse the earth of their iniquity.” This second pattern, in which wealth leads to class wars and social deterioration, is what we will refer to in this chapter as a “Babylon” society.

10.6 Babylon Society Just as the LDS canon of scripture outlines the principles and characteristics of an ideal Zion society, it also describes the rise and fall of societies viewed as wicked and destructive: Babylon (see Nibley 2009, for further explication of Zion and Babylon). In a Babylon society, prosperity and wealth may originally derive from the same types of resources as in a Zion society. However, agency, stewardship and consecration are replaced with subjugation, depletion, and self-enrichment. As they prosper and become wealthy, individuals with power begin to seek for even more power and material wealth accumulation; attitudes of social superiority begin to emerge and become widespread; the common-good social bonds begin to erode and weaken; tribal divisions and class distinctions start to form, and people begin to contend with each other for power and wealth. The concept of social structure based on God is replaced by worship of material wealth and social superiority; moral compromise in favor of material wealth becomes socially acceptable, inviting the advent of servitude and bondage in place of agency and stewardship. Corruption in leadership, tribal contention, and class wars accelerate to armed conflict and social collapse.

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

179

Subjugation—the practice of taking personal power and agency from others to enhance one’s own position of power—takes many forms and is one of the cornerstones of wealth creation in a Babylon society. Tolley (2003) writes, “For some the power sought is simply survival; for others it is wealth; and for others it is to have dominion over people and things” (3). This principle of power over others rather than honoring individual agency and seeking to empower others is a key distinguishing feature of Babylon. Scriptural accounts of Babylon society suggest that they are often presided over by corrupt leadership in the form of kings or priests, who set the moral tone for the civilization and exemplify greed. Slavery, bondage, burdensome taxation for the purpose of enriching those in power, and the intentional sacrifice of human life or wellbeing in order to gain wealth and power are among the patterns outlined in the scriptures. These patterns have their parallels today in postcolonial critiques of corporate culture and the practices of so-called “modern slavery” (Crane 2013) and resonates with scholarship on the role of business leaders in setting a moral tone for corporations (Hood 2003). Babylon societies, though they may begin as resource-rich, are often marked by depletion of resources that results from extractive practices rather than stewardship. This depletion can take the form of environmental depletion in which economic interests and the pursuit of wealth leads to an imbalance in the use and renewal of resources and limits the growth of a society and builds in the potential for conflict, deterioration, and demise in social-ecological systems (Ostrom 2009; Abel et al. 2006). While Zion embraces the creation of wealth in order to lift all of society until all poverty is alleviated, a Babylon society focuses almost exclusively on self-­ enrichment, viewing personal wealth as the purpose of economic activity and the goal of productive work, commerce, and trade. Just as the Zion society model describes a virtuous cycle that amplifies social wealth and prosperity, the Babylon society model describes a vicious cycle that dampens social wealth in favor of personal wealth. The deterioration of a Babylon society can thus be described as follows: 1 . Individuals have access to resources, primarily from extraction or subjugation 2. Those with resources use their wealth to gain power over others and compel them to work through slavery, servitude, or excessive taxation 3. Poor stewardship leads to overuse of natural resources and human capital 4. Excess wealth is directed primarily toward those who already possess wealth and power 5. Poverty increases as resources are removed from the general economy and retained by the wealthy 6. Class divisions are exacerbated and ultimately lead to social unrest 7. The general standard of living decreases until the social structure is too unstable to maintain cohesion 8. Members of the society scatter, either due to civil unrest, lack of resources, or assimilation into other social groups 9. Dampening cycle leads to social collapse

180

E. Witesman et al.

The view of Babylon suggests several implications for observers. First, it suggests the view that social economic structures without a social moral center are unsustainable in the long term. Second, it suggests that the pursuit of material wealth as the primary objective in life opens the door for socially-accepted wickedness and corruption. Third, it observes that socially acceptable wickedness leads to the accumulation of material wealth and power by deception, force, and government corruption, as those in power seek to stay in power, and finally, it observes that tribal affiliations protect “winner-take-all” economic advantage and result in excess wealth concentrations that result in a few very rich, but many poor who are exploited, leading to tribal divides, social class distinctions, and wealth disparities that are a catalyst for cultural and economic collapse. Table 10.2 describes the key distinguishing characteristics that separate the Babylon society from the Zion society.

10.7 The Deciding Factor: God or Mammon The scriptural accounts of wealth, trade, and social structure in the LDS canon of scriptures suggest two ideal types for the destiny of society in the presence of wealth. One, the Zion society, expands wealth for the whole of society, increases human potential, and experiences boundless growth due to wise stewardship of resources and an absence of internal conflict. The other, a Babylon society, results in social fractures, class divisions, war, strife, and destruction. This begs the question of what specific business or market practices or institutions can ensure the potential for perpetual growth and which lead to the deterioration of society. In the LDS view, the key to remaining on the Zion pathway is to keep the commandments of God. Of course, as observed by the lawyer in Matthew 22, who asked, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” There are many commandments in the scripture. However, the LDS view follows the teaching of Jesus in response to that inquiry, in which he outlines two great commandments. The two great commandments, as articulated by Jesus Christ, are “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Matt 22:37–39). These two commandments form the core decision point for societies that will either ascend toward perpetual growth and prosperity or descend toward division, war, and destruction. The idea of serving God in the context of trade, prosperity, and wealth, is specifically contrasted with the idea of serving mammon (a biblical term for wealth and riches. See Matthew 6:24). In Matthew 19:21–24, the Bible records an encounter between a wealthy young man and Jesus: “Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, “verily I say unto you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

181

Table 10.2  Contrasting Babylon Society with Zion Society Generation of wealth Purpose of wealth Treatment of others Social consequences

Babylon society Subjugation, slavery, bondage, depletion (Mormon 8:37–40) Set oneself up above others (1 Nephi 11:26; DandC 55:16) Contention, strife (Mormon 9:18–19; Helaman 11:24–27; Proverbs 22:16) War, contention, scattering (Mormon 8:6–7; Helaman 13:33–36)

Attitude toward work Social structure

Idleness (2 Nephi 5:24; Mosiah 27:4) Class divisions (4 Nephi 1:26; Alma 31:12–18; Alma 51:8)

Property rights

Personal property (4 Nephi 1: 25; Ether 14:1–2)

Wealth management Leadership characteristics

Wealth accumulation (Helaman 13:30–36; DandC 49:20) Subjugation, taxation, idleness (Mosiah 11:2–11; Alma 30:17)

Wealth distribution

Unequal (4 Nephi 1:25–26; Alma 4:12)

Education

Available and accessible only to the privileged (3 Nephi 6: 12–14; Jacob 7:2–4) Governmental corruption; burdensome taxation (Mosiah 2:11–14; Mosiah 11:3–6) Shrinking demographics; family is secondary to individual self-interests (Proverbs 15:20; Proclamation on the Family)

Government structure Demographics/ family formation

Zion society Stewardship, servant leadership, slavery abolished (4 Nephi 1:3; Psalm 62:10, Alma 1:28–31) Serve others (2 Nephi 2:17–19; Mosiah 2:17; Jacob 2:19) Unity, justice (4 Nephi 1:2, Moses 7:18; Mosiah 2:17) Peace, gathering expansion of human potential (4 Nephi 1:2–4, DandC 42:36, DandC 78:15) Righteous work (2 Nephi 26:31, DandC 42:40–42) Equality; no poor (Moses 7:18, 4 Nephi 1:3; Mosiah 10:4–5; DandC 78:5) Communal property with stewardship responsibility (4 Nephi 1:3, DandC 42:32, Acts 2:44–45; Acts 4:32–34) Consecration (DandC 42:30–39; DandC 51:2–19; 58:35–36) Accountability, stewardship, servant leadership, self-sustaining (DandC 42:32; Alma 60:36; Alma 61:9; 1 Peter 5:1–2) Wealth equality (DandC 49:20; DandC 78:5–6; DandC 51:3, DandC 82:17–19; DandC 104:14–16) Available and accessible to all (DandC 93:53) Self-governing; fair and just (DandC 134:1–3; DandC 101:77–80) High family formation; growing demographics (4 Nephi 1:10–11; Psalms 127:3; Proclamation on the Family)

heaven. And again I say unto you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” This story emphasizes the Christian expectation that material wealth be consecrated for the support of the poor, and that personal wealth is antithetical to the achievement of a Zion society. This suggests the need in business to identify a moral center and social mission that transcends, supersedes, and trumps the pursuit of personal wealth as the object of trade.

182

E. Witesman et al.

The role of wealth in LDS scripture is pivotal in determining the social trajectory toward growth and exaltation or deterioration and death. There are three core decisions every person must make in regards to wealth. These are: 1 . Whether to prioritize God or wealth 2. Determining whether and why to pursue wealth at all, and 3. What to do with wealth when it is gained The institutional structures of the Church provide various avenues for sharing wealth with others in a manner that provides humanitarian relief and substantive support to those within and outside of the church. In addition to financial donations, the church orchestrates significant donations of time and talent at every level, including the assignment of administrative roles and responsibilities to virtually every member of the church to be discharged on a weekly basis, as well as missionary service in which individuals or couples pay their own way to provide service to the church or their fellowmen. In addition, the church owns and manages several humanitarian organizations that recycle, repurpose, and sell donations of clothing and household goods, grow, store, and distribute food, and distribute aid in the form of money, water, volunteers, wheelchairs, and more (Mangum and Blumell 1993). It is important to emphasize here that living a righteous life does not guarantee wealth prosperity (i.e., a “Prosperity Gospel” view), and that these practices are not limited to the wealthy. The practices of tithing and consecration in the Church suggest that wealth should be shared even when there is not much of it. Even the poor are encouraged to tithe or consecrate their gain, being assured that they will receive in return sufficient for their needs.

10.7.1 Infinite Increase and the Environment The concept of infinite human increase could certainly cause alarm in consideration of the global environment. Links between climate change science and global population dynamics suggest that carbon emissions and deforestation resulting primarily from economic activity in the developed world has negative impacts that affect parts of the world that contribute less to climate change but that house much more of the human population (Stephenson et al. 2010; Jones and Warner 2016; Eubank 2019; Groth 2020). Thus, environmental degradation exacts a social toll, not just a natural one. As the developing world shifts toward the consumption and production norms of the developed world, the threat of increased carbon emissions and other environmental harms looms. Some have noted the lack of an official statement from the Church on climate change and interpreted this as an anti-environmental stance (Ward 2012). The views of the Church on environmental conservation are based in fundamental doctrines and have been consistent since the restoration of the church in the 1800s. A brief summary of the official contemporary LDS view states, “The earth and all things on it are the creations of God. As beneficiaries of this divine creation,

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

183

we should care for the earth, be wise stewards over it, and preserve it for future generations. The earth and all things on it are part of God’s plan for the redemption of His children and should be used responsibly to sustain the human family” (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 2021). Similarly straightforward statements in support of environmental conservation have been made in virtually every generation of church leadership, generally linking social and environmental welfare as moral imperatives. Several prophets and apostles have emphasized that environmental stewardship is linked to personal spirituality and moral rectitude, and that environmental stewardship is associated with a person’s ability to experience empathy and serve others (Young 1861; Kimball 1976; Benson 1988). The LDS view has always connected human and environmental wellbeing as part of the same devotion to God. In recent years, this concept has become even more explicit and concrete. Sharon Eubank, director of LDS Charities and first counselor in the Relief Society, said, “we…share the stewardship of preparing the earth and its people to create this state of Zion…Now what does creating Zion and being of one heart and one mind have to do with caring for the earth?…some people will say, “Isn’t there something more important to do? Shouldn’t we be caring for the poor versus caring for the Earth?” And my question is, are they not linked so inextricably that we can’t do one without caring for the other?” (2019). The LDS view that eternal increase is both possible and desirable for humankind is a view that presumes, as a prerequisite, the welfare of the earth that was created to sustain our mortal existence. With this assumption comes the obligation to care for the earth and serve as a good steward according to God’s commandments. Indeed, the scriptural promise that “the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare” (Doctrine and Covenants 104:17) comes only after the admonition that “I, the Lord, should make every man accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings” (verse 13) and “it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low.” (Verse 16). The pursuit of wealth can be at odds with environmental stewardship, and the LDS view emphasizes the need to sacrifice potential wealth and profit in favor of honoring God’s creations. Elder Steven Snow, a church leader, warns that “financial rewards provide tremendous pressure to unleash our technology to reinvent our surroundings. There will be growth; change will come. But failure to care for the land on which we live means turning our backs on the heritage laid down carefully and at such great cost by our [pioneer] forefathers” (1998). Thus, a Zion society is one in which conservation, stewardship, and a love and honor of all God’s creations serves to glorify God, improve society’s desire to preserve and care for one another as well and the environment, and enjoy sustainable increase in harmony with God’s law and creation. A Babylon society, by contrast, is one that sacrifices the environment for the sake of financial wealth, thereby dulling the human spirit, eroding social consciousness, and ultimately destroying God’s creation, dishonoring Him.

184

E. Witesman et al.

10.7.2 Zion and the Non-believer We acknowledge that the terms “Zion” and “Babylon” are deeply religious and carry with them long-standing connotations in which Zion is comprised of the faithful believers and Babylon is populated by unbelievers. However, if we view Zion as a society that enjoys peace, prosperity and growth, and Babylon as a society that experiences conflict, decline, and degradation, then these highly religious ideal types can be retasked to understand sociological patterns and the consequences of sociopolitical activity writ large. While believers may view the benefits of a Zion society to be blessings associated with the deeply sacred covenants they make with God, many of these benefits are natural consequences resulting from principles that apply both inside and outside the faith (see D&C 130:20–21). Thus, while a member of the Church might behave in a certain way because they are working toward the promise of exaltation, others outside the faith might apply the same principles in hopes of being “conscious capitalists,” adherents to social contract theory (Donaldson and Dunfee 1999), or otherwise working toward their own view of a better world. In this way, the principles and views expressed here can contribute to a larger dialogue about the appropriate role and character of economic activity.

10.7.3 On the Path Toward Zion The concept of business activity that creates a utopian Zion society is clearly an ideal type that feels far from our present capitalist reality. Bringing the principles of LDS theological belief into the present-day reality of profit-driven capitalism raises questions about how individuals or groups can work toward Zion even when the system of which they are a part does not meet their ideals. The very real pressures of global business, capitalism, and the expectation to return profits to shareholders provide a weighty counterpoint to the high ideals of a Zion society. So how do business leaders who are also members of the Church reconcile their idealistic faith and principles with the real-world pressures of business practice? We begin this reconciliation by noting that most LDS business practitioners practice business similarly to most of other business people. They seek to live their religious lives in their business careers but haven’t necessarily been on the forefront of conscious capitalism. For most, trying to live with integrity, respecting others, and working hard are how they meet their religious obligations at work. They have often personally demonstrated religious devotion through philanthropic means and the sacrifice of both time and money. Like many others in an increasingly interconnected world, they seek to understand how to more fully incorporate the ideals of Zion and conscious capitalism into their business lives. In practice, there is a continuum that stretches from Babylon to Zion. Capitalism as theorized by Milton Friedman (1970) with its emphasis on profit-making without

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

185

deception is certainly a significant improvement over Babylon, but its emphasis on profit maximization can push people toward Babylon. Conscious capitalism pulls business practice more toward the Zion side of the continuum. An article in Business Insider pointed out that because of the unique system of leadership used in the church, its members tend to be over-represented in business executive positions (Groth 2011). We now turn to a few examples of prominent business people who are also members of the Church and illustrations of their efforts to live the ideals of conscious capitalism. 1. Jon Huntsman, former Chairman and CEO of Huntsman Corporation. Jon once made a large business deal on a handshake to sell 40% of a portion of his business. By the time all of the due diligence, paperwork, and other necessary elements had been completed, the market had shifted such that the business was now worth several times what it had been worth at the time of the agreement. The CEO of the Fortune 500 company who had made the agreement with him wondered whether Huntsman would now make a lot more money on the transaction because nothing had been signed or if he would stick to the original handshake agreement he had made 6 months earlier. Huntsman told him that they had made an agreement and that he would stick with it, even though it cost him about $200 million (Huntsman 2005). 2. Amy Rees Anderson, founder and former CEO of MediConnect. As Amy began her business leadership without the benefit of formal business education, she leaned on her religious leadership training. The motto of her company became “Do what is right, let the consequence follow,” a phrase well-known to church members as a line in one of the faith’s frequently-sung hymns. Amy attributes much of her company’s success to following this motto (Anderson 2018). 3. Jim Parke, President and CEO of Otter Products and CEO of Blue Ocean Enterprises. When hurricane Irma of 2017 struck the Caribbean, it destroyed virtually everything on the Island of Tortola, including the resort owned by Blue Ocean Enterprises. The employees of the resort, along with all of the individuals on the island, were living in very difficult conditions. Blue Ocean Enterprises wanted to help, but it was difficult to provide any assistance. Parke was able to find one boat that could ferry critical supplies from Puerto Rico to this island. However, he had no employees on the ground in Puerto Rico to go purchase the supplies and have them transferred to the boat. He reached out to one of the LDS church leaders in Puerto Rico to help out with this task. His congregation began buying these critical supplies and transferring them to the boat. However, because they were purchasing the items faster than they could be transferred to the island, they started stockpiling the supplies in one of the church buildings. When Hurricane Maria then hit Puerto Rico a few weeks later causing major damage there, the church leader, with the approval of Parke, was able to use some of these supplies to help the people in Puerto Rico. Notably, the founder of the company, an evangelical Christian, led and partnered in all of these actions (Parke 2019, 22:51–31:08).

186

E. Witesman et al.

4. Gail Miller, Chair of the Larry H. Miller Group of Companies and former owner of the Utah Jazz. During a basketball game in 2019 there was a verbal altercation between a Utah Jazz fan and Russell Westbrook, a player for the opposing team. The fan was allegedly using racial slurs against Westbrook. Miller took action. Prior to the following game, she spoke to the fans, emphasizing the need for respect for and civility toward everyone and accountability between spectators. The fan was given a lifetime ban from Jazz games and the team’s ownership apologized to the opposing team (Eppers 2019). 5. Bob Gay. Former Managing Director of Bain Capital and former CEO of Huntsman Gay Global Capital. Gay was called to serve as a full-time mission president for the church for 3 years in Ghana and the Ivory Coast, necessitating his resignation as managing director of Bain Capital. He accepted the assignment knowing that he would be missing out on substantial compensation. Nevertheless, when contemplating his various professional options upon completion of his missionary service, he chose to start a new private equity firm with Jon Huntsman where they agreed to donate all of their profits to charity. 6. Davis Smith, Founder and CEO of Cotopaxi. Since Smith formed Cotopaxi in 2014, the outdoor clothing company has been dedicated to improving conditions for people in third-world countries in South and Central America. In addition to donating a portion of revenues to charitable causes, Cotopaxi embeds social impact into its business model. For example, the company’s supply-chain structure is designed to provide work for Bolivian wool farmers who would otherwise live below the poverty line. Cotopaxi is known for its involvement in community projects to provide relief for poverty-stricken nations (Taylor 2017). 7. Bill Marriott, Executive Chairman of Marriott International. When Bill was a young busy CEO of Marriott International, he was called to be the bishop of his local ward. In his recent biography, we read the following about that experience. “Bill’s ready acceptance of the call to service might have been the greatest act of faith he had ever shown. He felt ill prepared and thought the timing couldn’t be worse… Two decades after his release as bishop, Bill reflected that the service ‘really brought me a much better understanding of our associates in our company—what kind of problems they have in making ends meet, in trying to raise families, trying to get their kids to do right, trying to provide health care and pay the light bill, the heat bill, the rent. When you’re the CEO of a company, it’s hard to really understand what’s going on in the people’s lives that are working down in the trenches. The church job gave me more empathy. I became a better listener because of it. Those two years became an anchor in troubled times. No question about it.’” (Van Atta 2019). Evidence of the spirit of conscious capitalism is also evident in LDS business thought. A small sampling of management professors who are also members of the Church includes such prominent scholars as Jay Barney, Kim Cameron, Kim Clark, Alison Davis-Blake, Jeff Dyer, Jeff Harrison, Bob Hoskisson, Brigitte Madrian, Ron Mitchell, Bob Quinn, and Dave Whetten. Additionally, a recent thinkers50

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

187

global ranking of management thinkers (2015) includes five LDS thinkers: Clayton Christensen, Whitney Johnson, Hal Gregersen, Liz Wiseman, and Dave Ulrich (thinkers50.com 2019). A strong LDS influence is also seen in Stephen R. Covey’s work “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People” and his son Stephen M.R. Covey’s book “The Speed of Trust.” The Marriott School of Business, housed at the church-sponsored Brigham Young University—was ranked by Bloomberg BusinessWeek as the #1 MBA program for ethical career preparation in its most recent rankings in 2018 (Bloomberg BusinessWeek 2018). The Marriott School’s Ballard Center is also one of the largest and most active university centers in the world for social innovation.

10.8 Conclusion: Implications for Modern Business The idea of “conscious” capitalism suggests a capitalism that is cognizant of social problems and intentionally working to address them, mitigate them, and prevent contributions toward them. But the term “capitalism” accepts the premise of a potentially problematic system in which social concerns are secondary to the profit motive. By viewing value creation, trade, and business activity as a set of organizing activities that allow for the practice of principles of a Zion society, economic activity is elevated from a capitalistic view focused on money to a view that is centered on the potential of humanity—both as individuals and as societies. The LDS view of economic activity is largely shaped by the doctrines of exaltation which suggest the possibility of a utopian social structure in which individual freedom of choice in markets, free trade, wealth, and prosperity unify and exalt humankind rather than causing division and strife. If achieved, such a society would steward its natural and human resources such that these resources are never depleted but instead create a virtuous cycle in which there is continual increase of prosperity for all people and the planet. However, success of this social model hinges on the decision of the people to love God above all, and to love one another (Christ’s two great commandments). In order to love God and keep His commandments, the purpose of wealth accumulation must be focused on achieving the prosperity of the collective rather than on the personal wealth of individuals. Markets and trade, then, play a role in stewarding and redistributing resources, providing work that empowers individuals to become their best selves, and to generate wealth that can then be voluntarily redistributed to the less fortunate in a pattern of social equalization and unity. This is achieved through a pattern of voluntary production and trade that inspires every individual to achieve their greatest individual potential while eliminating social inequity through creation of a unified, holy, covenant-keeping society that results in unbounded, sustainable growth.

188

E. Witesman et al.

References Abel, N., D.H.  Cumming, and J.M.  Anderies. 2006. Collapse and Reorganization in Social-­ Ecological Systems: Questions, Some Ideas, and Policy Implications. Ecology and Society 11 (1). Agle, B.R. 2012. Mortal Ministry: Seeking After Virtue in Business. In Virtue and the Abundant Life, ed. Lloyd Newell, Richard Williams, Terry Olsen, and Emily Reynolds, 240–259. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book. Agle, B.R., and H.  Van Buren. 1999. God and Mammon: The Modern Relationship. Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (4): 563–582. Agle, B.R., T.  Donaldson, R.E.  Freeman, M.C.  Jensen, R.K.  Mitchell, and D.J.  Wood. 2008. Dialogue: Toward Superior Stakeholder Theory. Business Ethics Quarterly: 153–190. Anderson, A. 2018. What Awesome Looks Like: How to Excel in Business and Life. Charleston: Forbes Books. Benson, E.T. 1988. Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson. Bookcraft Pubs. Bible Authorized King James Version. 2000. General editor, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-­ day Saints. Bloomberg Business Week. 2018. https://www.bloomberg.com/business-­schools/2018/insights/ student-­scores. Blumell, B.D. 1979. Welfare Before Welfare: Twentieth Century LDS Church Charity Before the Great Depression. Journal of Mormon History 6: 89–106. Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. 1981. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-­ Day Saints. Bowen, H.R. 1953. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New York: Harper. Brady, F.N., and W. Woodworth. 2001. A Mormon Perspective on Business and Economics. In Spiritual Goods: Faith Traditions and the Practice of Business, ed. S.W. Herman, 165–190. Philosophy Documentation Center. Carroll, A.B. 1979. A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review 4 (4): 497–505. ———. 1991. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons 34 (4): 39–48. ———. 1999. Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business and Society 38 (3): 268–295. Crane, A. 2013. Modern Slavery as a Management Practice: Exploring the Conditions and Capabilities for Human Exploitation. Academy of Management Review 38 (1): 49–69. Davis, J.H., F.D.  Schoorman, and L.  Donaldson. 1997. Toward a Stewardship Theory of Management. Academy of Management Review 22 (1): 20–47. Doctrine and Covenants. 1981. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Donaldson, T., and T.W.  Dunfee. 1999. Ties That Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics. Dyllick, T., and K.  Hockerts. 2002. Beyond the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment 11 (2): 130–141. Eppers, M. 2019. Jazz Owner Gail Miller Addresses Utah Crowd on Russell Westbrook Incident: ‘This Should Never Happen’. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/ sports/nba/jazz/2019/03/14/jazz-­owner-­gail-­m iller-­a ddresses-­c rowd-­r ussell-­w estbrook-­ confrontation/3170346002/ Eubank, S. 2019. That we may be one. Retrieved from https://ldsearthstewardship.org/component/ k2/2870?Itemid=101 Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pittman. Freeman, R.E., K.  Martin, and B.  Parmar. 2007. Stakeholder Capitalism. Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4): 303–314. Friedman, M. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times Magazine, September 13, p. 17.

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

189

Goodman, N.P., and R.Q.  Herzberg. 2020. Gifts as Governance: Church Welfare and the Samaritan’s Dilemma. Journal of Institutional Economics 16 (5): 703–714. Gorb, P. 1951. Robert Owen as a Businessman. Bulletin of the Business Historical Society 25 (3): 127–148. Groth, A. 2011. The REAL REASON So Many Mormons Become Executives and Political Leaders. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/mormon-­business-­leaders-­2011-­7 Groth, R. 2020. Population Control, Climate Change, and Christian Ethics. Paper Presented at the Religious Studies Student Organization Undergraduate Research Conference, April 4. Hagen, K.D. 2006. Eternal Progression in a Multiverse: An Explorative Mormon Cosmology. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 39 (2): 1–45. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/ stable/45227238?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents. Hill, C.W., and T.M. Jones. 1992. Stakeholder-Agency Theory. Journal of Management Studies 29 (2): 131–154. Hood, J.N. 2003. The Relationship of Leadership Style and CEO Values to Ethical Practices in Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics 43 (4): 263–273. Huntsman, J. 2005. To Family, Business, and Humankind. In Business with Integrity, ed. J.M. Murdock and J.D. Ogden, 89–103. Provo: Brigham Young University Press. Husted, Bryan. 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility Practice from 1800–1914: Past Initiatives and Current Debates. Business Ethics Quarterly 25: 125–141. Jensen, M.C. 2002. Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function. Business Ethics Quarterly: 235–256. Jones, T.M. 1995. Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics. Academy of Management Review 20 (2): 404–437. Jones, G.A., and K.J. Warner. 2016. The 21st Century Population-Energy-Climate Nexus. Energy Policy 93: 206–212. Kane, R. 1998. The Significance of Free Will. Oxford University Press on Demand. Kimball, S.W. 1976. The False Gods We Worship. The Ensign, June. Retrieved from https://www. churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1976/06/the-­false-­gods-­we-­worship?lang=eng. Kotva, J.J., Jr. 1996. The Christian Case for Virtue Ethics. Georgetown University Press. Larsen, D.J. 2014. Enoch and the City of Zion: Can an Entire Community Ascend to Heaven? BYU Studies Quarterly 53 (1): 25–37. LDS Newsroom. 2020. Latter-Day Saint Charities Blessed Millions of Lives in 2019 [press release], February 24. https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/latter-­day-­saint-­charities-­2019-­ annual-­report#:~:text=These%20funds%20represent%20only%20a,poorest%20members%20 of%20their%20congregations. Logsdon, J.M., and D.J. Wood. 2002. Business Citizenship: From Domestic to Global Level of Analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly: 155–187. Lovett, I., and R. Levy. 2020. The Mormon Church Amassed $100 Billion. In It Was the Best-Kept Secret in the Investment World. New York: Wall Street Journal, Eastern Edition. Lucas, J.W., and W.P. Woodworth. 1999. Working Toward Zion: Principles of the United Order for the Modern World. Aspen Books. Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Mangum, G.L., and B.D. Blumell. 1993. The Mormons’ War on Poverty: A History of LDS Welfare 1830–1990. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Moore, G. 2005. Corporate Character: Modern Virtue Ethics and the Virtuous Corporation. Business Ethics Quarterly: 659–685. Nibley, H. 2009. Approaching Zion: The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley. Vol. 9. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book. Olsen, S.L. 1993. Joseph Smith’s Concept of the City of Zion. In Joseph Smith: The Prophet, the Man, ed. Susan E. Black and Charles D. Tate Jr. Provo: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University. Ostrom, E. 2009. A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science 325 (5939): 419–422.

190

E. Witesman et al.

Parke, J. [The Wheatley Institution]. 2019. Integrity, Ethics, and Covenants – Jim Parke. [Video]. YouTube. Integrity, Ethics, and Covenants – Jim Parke, April 1. Pearl of Great Price. 1981. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Porter, M., and M.  Kramer. 2011. Harvard Business Review: Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review. Romney, M.G. 1973. Man – A Child of God. Ensign, July. Rothbard, M.N. 1978. For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto. Ludwig von Mises Institute. Snow, S.E. 1998. Skipping the Grand Canyon. In New Genesis: A Mormon Reader on Land and Community, ed. T.T. Williams, W.B. Smart, and G.M. Smith, 242–244. Soskis, B. 2010. The Pre- and Early History of American Corporate Philanthropy. In History of Corporate Responsibility, Working Paper 3. Minnesota: Center for Ethical Business Cultures, University of St. Thomas. Stephenson, J., K. Newman, and S. Mayhew. 2010. Population Dynamics and Climate Change: What Are the Links? Journal of Public Health 32 (2): 150–156. Stigler, G.J. 1950. The Development of Utility Theory. Journal of Political Economy 58 (4): 307–327. Taylor, P.L. 2017. Gear for Good: Outdoor Start-Up Cotopaxi on Why Millennials Want Stories, Not Things. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/petertaylor/2017/01/30/gear-­for-­good-­ outdoor-­start-­up-­cotopaxi-­on-­why-­millennials-­want-­stories-­not-­things/?sh=3ceb84496cfd. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1995. The Family: A Proclamation to the World. Retrieved from https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/ the-­family-­a-­proclamation-­to-­the-­world/the-­family-­a-­proclamation-­to-­the-­world?lang=eng. ———. 2021. Environmental Stewardship and Conservation. Retrieved from https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-­topics/environmental-­stewardship-­ and-­conservation?lang=eng Thinkers50. 2019. The Thinkers50 rating. Thinkers50.com. https://thinkers50.com/ t50-­ranking/?tab=2019. Tolley, H.D. 2003. Doing Business in Babylon. BYU Office of Information Technology. Van Atta, D. 2019. Bill Marriott: Success Is Never Final – His Life and the Decisions that Built a Hotel Empire. Shadow Mountain. Van Buren, H., and B. Agle. 1998. Measuring Christian Beliefs that Affect Managerial Decision-­ Making: A Beginning. International Journal of Value-Based Management 11: 159–177. Vocation of the Business Leader: A Reflection, Fifth Edition. 2018. Dicastery for promoting integral human development, Vatican City. Von Neumann, J., and O.  Morgenstern 2007. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (commemorative ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Ward, B. 2012. Mormon Silence on Climate Change: Why, and What Might It Mean? Yale Climate Connections, August 9. https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/08/ mormon-­silence-­on-­climate-­change-­why-­and-­what-­might-­it-­mean/. Watson, M. 2021. Billionaire Jeff Green Leaves the Mormon Church, Donates $600K to LGBTQ Organization. CNN, December 22. https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/22/us/jeff-­green-­mormon-­ church/index.html. Weaver, G.R., and B.R. Agle. 2002. Religiosity and Ethical Behavior in Organizations: A Symbolic Interactionist Perspective. Academy of Management Review 27 (1): 77–97. Welford, R., and A. Gouldson. 1993. Environmental Management and Business Strategy. Pitman Publishing Limited. Wood, D.J. 1991. Corporate Social Performance Revisited. Academy of Management Review 16 (4): 691–718. Young, B. 1861. Journal of Discourses. Vol. 8. Liverpool: George Q. Cannon.

10  Wealth as the Path to Heaven or Hell: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on the Spirit…

191

Eva Witesman is an Associate Professor of Public Management in the Romney Institute of Public Service and Ethics in the Marriott School of Business at Brigham Young University. Her areas of expertise include public management, nonprofit management, and prosocial business strategy. Her research appears in many volumes and journals, including Public Administration Review, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, and Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.  

Bradley R. Agle is the George W. Romney Endowed Professor, and Professor of Leadership and Ethics in the Romney Institute of Public Service and Ethics in the Marriott School of Business at Brigham Young University. A past president of the International Association for Business and Society, his scholarly works are published in Academy of Management Review, Business and Society, Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, and Harvard Business Review.  

Brad Oates had a distinguished professional football career in the National Football League after a noted athletic career at Brigham Young University where he was a two-time captain of the football team and was named to the 1975 Associated Press All-American team. Brad is currently Chairman of Stone Advisors, LP, a Dallas-based buyout, business advisory, and resolution services firm. He has held numerous top executive positions and is currently an independent director at the CIT Group.  

Chapter 11

Christianity and Conscious Capitalism Maggie Arevalo Eusebio

11.1 Introduction This chapter explores conscious capitalism from a Christian standpoint and evaluates whether the ideals of the concept are achievable and executable when brought under the principles of Christian teaching. The following are highlights of the ideology of conscious capitalism as defined by Mackey and Sisodia (2013) in their Harvard Business Review article: 1. “Conscious Capitalism” is a way of thinking about capitalism and business that better reflects where we are in the human journey, the state of our world today, and the innate potential of business to make a positive impact on the world. 2. Conscious businesses are galvanized by higher purposes that serve, align, and integrate the interests of all their major stakeholders. 3. The conscious businesses’ higher state of consciousness makes visible to it the interdependencies that exist across all stakeholders, allowing it to discover and harvest synergies from situations that otherwise seem replete with trade-offs. 4. Conscious businesses have conscious leaders who are driven by service to the company’s purpose, to all the people the business touches, and to the planet we all share. 5. Conscious businesses have trusting, authentic, innovative, and caring cultures that make working for them a source of both personal growth and professional fulfillment.

M. A. Eusebio (*) Family Corporation, General Trias, Cavite, Philippines e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_11

193

194

M. A. Eusebio

6. They (conscious businesses) endeavor to create financial, intellectual, social, cultural, emotional, spiritual, physical, and ecological wealth for all their stakeholders. Conscious capitalism makes the following large and hopeful claims about the potential of business in today’s world: 1. Businesses can move beyond profit maximization and embrace a variety of higher purposes. 2. The higher purposes of conscious capitalism can tightly align the interests and interdependencies of the various stakeholders and will thus allow businesses to move beyond the notion of trade-offs. 3. Conscious leaders can put aside their own self interests in order to serve the company’s unique purposes. 4. Conscious businesses can create a culture that supports personal growth and professional fulfillment.

11.2 Christian Principles/Teachings Relevant to Conscious Capitalism The following are basic Christian principles that are important and relevant in laying the foundation to examine conscious capitalism through the lens of Christianity.

11.2.1 “The Fall” and Its Effects on Human Nature “… for there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” Rom 3:22–23 New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition).

The basic premise of Christian teaching is the love of God for mankind and mankind’s inability to completely embrace and operate from a love (God’s) perspective for themselves or anything else without God’s love. This is the nature of human frailty which originated with the “fall” of Adam and Eve when they disobeyed God and chose to separate themselves from His love and their ability to operate at a higher level of consciousness. Because of their disconnection from His love, they became sensual/carnal creatures that relied almost solely upon their senses for their survival. The consequential effect is the stain upon all of mankind or Adam’s descendants: concupiscence or the trait of leaning towards that which is contrary to God’s commands which are grounded in love. Because of the fall, every human being inherited spiritual dormancy and a self-centered focus coming from dependency on one’s senses, a weakness resulting from the fall. And hence, no person is able to fulfill the entire law, i.e. the 10 commandments, thereby creating a rift or broken relationship between humanity and God, the Father and Creator of all things.

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

195

The law—being the gauge that God established to demonstrate/illuminate our lack of love for ourselves, others, and creation as a whole—became a curse to all, since fulfillment of it in its entirety is impossible without agape, God’s love. Because of God’s unfailing love and mercy for mankind, He delivered a solution that would reconcile humanity back to Himself and reconnect mankind to His love, which renews, revitalizes, heals, empowers, and replenishes. That solution is His son, Jesus, who came into the world in the form of a human, took upon Himself the sins of the entire world, died, defeated death and the hold that the sin-state had over humanity, and gloriously resurrected, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Anyone who believes in Him as the savior and means for reconciliation to God, the father, is delivered from the curse of the law and becomes a renewed creature in Christ from whom all grace may be obtained to live up to the commandments which previously, a non-believing person could not fulfill. Redemption and the new life in Christ grant the believer countless graces from the relationship he or she now has formed with the Lord Christ. In Him is the answer to all of one’s needs, and in Him is the key to overcoming the inherent fallibility of human frailty.

11.2.2 The Inner Struggle of Man (Concupiscence) Despite one’s desire to do good, i.e. to live up to God’s law, the ten commandments, and its requirements, one always finds difficulty in fulfilling the demands of the law. The inner struggle is like a civil war (Nee 1957/ 1977), and the battle is within oneself, as the mind wants to do what is right, but the flesh or the body wants to do what is contrary. Even the ability to discern what is right can be clouded with self-serving agendas which can twist the mind into rationalizing ill motives as good; such mental state follows from the disconnected relationship with God. Still, it is the healing power of God’s love that can bring about clarity of thinking and discernment of what is right. This inner battle is described in Rom 7:14–25.

11.2.3 Sins vs. Sin as a Principle Sins (the acts) vs. sin as a principle are two different matters. Sins are wrongdoings committed by a person, whereas sin as a principle is a force that operates in a person causing them to do wrong or to lean towards that which is contrary to good. The latter can be thought of as manifesting itself in wrong thinking which produces wrong results (sins). God has provided an expiation for man’s sins (acquittal) by producing the ultimate sacrifice, which no human has ever or can ever match  – Jesus, the perfect sacrifice. Because of sins, a person is overwhelmed by guilt. God’s offering, Jesus, is the forgiveness of sins and is what acquits or reconciles a person

196

M. A. Eusebio

back to God. This forgiveness is attained through faith. Therefore, sins correspond to actions that are contrary to God’s laws. Sin, on the other hand, is a principle operating in a person that causes them to do wrong, i.e. concupiscence; sin can be likened to a force that causes rebellion or diversion from God’s teachings and commandments.

11.2.4 The Sinner (The “Old Man”/Heritage from Adam The sinners are the way they are because of their heritage/genealogy, i.e. they descend from Adam, “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned” (Rom 5:12). The fall which entailed Adam’s disobedience towards God had consequences on all subsequent generations: mankind became more sensual or driven by senses. This change in the make-up of mankind which originated in the fall and persisted onwards can be thought of as a spiritual defect that was passed on to subsequent generations, thus the concept of inheriting “concupiscence”, “for just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners…” (Rom 5:19). Thus, all of mankind possess this trait. All are sinners (inheritors of the spiritual defect) as stated in Romans 3:23.

11.2.5 Repentance/Recognition of Wrongdoing Merrier-Webster (2022) defines repent as “to turn from sin and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one’s life”, “to feel regret or contrition”, and “to change one’s mind”; Oxford University Press (2022) describes repentance as “The acknowledgement and condemnation of one’s sins, coupled with a turning to God. It includes sorrow for the sin committed, confession of guilt, and the purpose of amendment.” A repentant person is one who has come to the realization of their wrongdoing or errors and feels regret for having committed the error; regret or sorrow is one of the characteristics of a repentant heart. However, it is possible to recognize wrongdoing in oneself and yet feel no sense of shame or regret; one may even feel justified or victorious over committing such offense, and in such case, the person would not be considered repentant. The desire to change and to make restitution or amends for harm done with the intention to turn to God, are all marks of one who has made a 180 degree turn from previous behaviors/actions and mindset. What was once thought of as right is now viewed as wrong. This new stance positions the person to receive God’s forgiveness. St. Peter states in Acts 2:38, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

197

Holy Spirit.” He clearly indicates that in order to be forgiven, one must repent (and be baptized). Furthermore, an additional gift awaits – that of the Holy Spirit. Before delving into the gift of the Holy Spirit, it is worth exploring what it takes for a person to become repentant – what the conditions are. In most cases, a person comes to the end of themself, i.e., they become completely bankrupt in their resources and descend to a bottom that finally leaves them no choice but to surrender. One becomes defeated by the thing, behavior or mindset that has caused them and others much pain and grief – defeat resulting from loss of control or from being consumed by the destructive behavior or mindset itself. When one has finally lost the battle, say over a vice that has brought much pain and suffering, then one gives up, admits their fault with remorse and becomes ready to do it another way, i.e., according to God’s way. Yet there is another type of situation from which repentance may spring forth – one that involves an encounter with God’s consuming love. If one understands God to be punishing, it would be difficult and unpleasant to approach Him or to turn to Him, especially when one has violated certain rules. However, if one’s understanding is that of a loving God – a forgiving one who loves unconditionally and whose love is not based on performance or fulfillment of rules but just out of complete love and mercy and one who loves so deeply that He provided a sacrifice for all sins, i.e., Jesus the Christ  – then one cannot but be moved by this unfathomable love that breaks the hardest of hearts and tears down the strongest of barriers. And it is this encounter with love from which springs forth a deep repentance that makes one want to turn towards Him and wholeheartedly embrace the source of unconditional and all-consuming love that surpasses all understanding.

11.2.6 Christian Solution to Human Problem/Inner Struggle As described above, there are two problems: wrong thinking based on a fleshly or sensual-driven perspective (the principle of sin) and wrongdoings (the sins) resulting from the former. The solution in Christianity is Christ. For the former, Jesus is the answer – the cross. For the latter, the solution is also Jesus, but in this case, His blood which is the sacrifice for one’s sins. The blood clears the conscience of the sinner: God looks at the sacrifice – Jesus for the atonement of sins. The sinner cannot do anything to redeem or cleanse themselves from their sins, but the solution is provided through Christ who was the sacrifice. All past wrongdoings are forgiven; the believer is acquitted and deemed not guilty not by his merit but by Jesus, the offering/ransom for the sins of the individual. However, the tendency for the person to continue to sin, i.e. his make-up that makes him/her gravitate towards self-seeking motives that are often contrary to God’s will, is dealt with through the cross. This is the crux of the problem and solution. The only way that man can overcome his constitution is to undergo the operation of the cross, which means dying with Christ through baptism, and this death

198

M. A. Eusebio

means dying to the heritage/ancestral line of Adam and resurrecting with a new heritage that is from Christ. The moment that a believer accepts Jesus as the offering for their sins, the spiritual genealogy of that person shifts to Jesus as the ancestor, and from that point onwards, all the graces, traits and love that Jesus possess are also available to that person. So, in essence, through baptism and the work of the cross, one’s lineage changes from Adam to Christ, and thus one becomes a new creation. The work of the cross involves the death of Jesus and the understanding that he is the one and only price for the sins/wrongdoings that a person has committed; the cross also entails the triumphant victory over sin as a principle and that it is in the resurrected Jesus and relationship with him where all the love and graces can be found for one to live and operate in such a way that one’s life brings healing, order and love to this world. Watchman Nee (1957/ 1977) in his book The Normal Christian Life so eloquently describes and explains this concept of changing lineage through the work of the cross. It is important to dwell on the idea of the sinner and the solution to it being the cross, because it is this idea that will be the basis and framework from which conscious capitalism will be examined, especially with regard to how conscious leaders will be able to fulfill their role in their respective conscious businesses.

11.2.7 God’s Love for Mankind and the Command to Love One Another God’s love for mankind was so deep, “…for I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 8:38–39), that he sent His only begotten son to save the world. God did not want man to waste into eternal damnation, (i.e. to continuously “misfire” into complete dysfunctionality into all of eternity) as a result of sin, so not only did He provide a way to salvation but also a solution to the sinner’s problem of concupiscence  – the solution to both being Jesus Christ. The basis of Christian teaching is love, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life” (John 3:16). The teaching not only describes God’s love for mankind but also Jesus’ commandment that His disciples love one another. This theme is the cohesive and underlying message of the new testament, especially in the gospel of John. The two most important commandments are first, to love God with all one’s heart mind and soul, and second, to love one’s neighbor as themselves, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31). The second does not abolish the 10 commandments (Mat 22:40), but instead fulfills them, for to truly love one’s neighbor and oneself is to love as Jesus did, which would inherently espouse all of the 10 commandments. In Paul’s epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor 3:1–13), he beautifully

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

199

describes the traits of love and states that the greatest amongst faith, hope and love is love (1 Cor 3:13). The highly important point to note is that while we were yet sinners, God was set on redeeming His people/His children, “But God proves his love for us in that while we still were sinners Christ died for us” (Rom 5:8). This statement has far-reaching implications. It implies that even in the state of sin or imperfection, God’s love for each individual is so deep that regardless of their deeds, He provided the solution to reconcile all of humanity to Him. This is the utmost expression of unconditional love. The individual or sinner does not have to do anything to earn God’s love. God loves each person regardless of their worth, deeds, achievements, number of sins, etc. God loves each person unconditionally. He loves each person, despite of their brokenness. When a person grasps and understands this truth, all sorts of remarkable and powerful changes happen to the person’s mindset (paradigm shift) as well as consequential behaviors and actions. A paradigm can be likened to a conceptual framework from which one operates and when it changes (shifts) decision-making and pursuant actions stem from the new framework. This change can be thought of as a conversion experience, and in some cases come about suddenly, similar to the saints’ pivotal and key moments in their transformation, such as St. Paul hearing Jesus speak to him (Acts 9:1–19) or St. Augustine (n.d./ 1960, p. 202) hearing the voice of a child urging him to read the bible. Starbuck (1911, as cited in James 1958) identified two types of conversion experience: the volitional type vs. type by self-surrender. The former gradually takes place over a period of time, whereas the latter is characterized by sudden shifts in belief systems. The examples given above are of the type by self-surrender. Regardless of the type of conversion, the end result is a lasting change in outlook, belief system and actions. When one grasps the concept of God’s unconditional love, the power seat is in knowing that one does not have to do anything to earn God’s love, for it is unconditional. When that principle is embraced, less time is spent on proving worthiness to God (redeeming acts) or avoiding what was previously believed a punishing God. Such new stance opens the person to receiving Jesus as the solution to their broken relationship with God, a solution which He provided in the first place. Once a person receives Jesus as the son of God and solution to their salvation, a new life begins.

11.2.8 The Holy Spirit The Holy Spirit is the gift from God resulting from Jesus’ ascension into heaven (Acts 2:32–33); it is a gift to all who believe in Jesus as their Lord and savior, following repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38). During Old Testament times, the Holy Spirit would fall only upon a few select individuals such as priests, judges and prophets, like Moses, David and Elijah. However, after Jesus’ exultation into heaven, it was “poured out” (Acts 2:33).

200

M. A. Eusebio

Receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit is not based on one’s merit such as praying, fasting, or practicing a certain discipline. It is given freely, and thus it is a gift. The basis for the gift is Jesus’ exultation and glorification – what He has done. Likewise, God’s forgiveness is not based on a person’s acts of penance or sacrifice, but on what Jesus has accomplished: His sacrificial death for the sins of humanity (Nee 1958/1977, p. 125). To live by the Holy Spirit is not to rely on oneself, which is contrary to worldly wisdom, but to rely on it to face any demand or situation. The flesh is opposed to what the spirit wants, “For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want” (Gal 5:17). The instruction to walk by the spirit is clearly stated in St. Paul’s letter to the Galatians, “Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16). Nee Nee, W. (1958/1977) stated: Living in the Spirit means that I trust the Holy Spirit to do in me what I cannot do myself. This life is completely different from the life I would naturally live of myself. Each time I am faced with a new demand from the Lord, I look to Him to do in me what He requires of me. It is not a case of trying but of trusting; not of struggling but of resting in Him. If I have a hasty temper, impure thoughts, a quick tongue or a critical spirit, I shall not set out with a determined effort to change myself, but, reckoning myself dead in Christ to these things, I shall look to the Spirit of God to produce in me the needed purity or humility or meekness. This is what it means to “stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will work for you” (Exod. 14:13). (pp. 176–177). When the Holy Spirit takes things in hand there is no need for strain on our part. It is not a case of clenching our teeth and thinking that thus we have controlled ourselves beautifully and have had a glorious victory. No, where there is a real victory there is no fleshly effort. We are gloriously carried through by the Lord. (pp. 177–178)

Therefore, living by the spirit is all about trusting in Christ to produce the desired behavior or attitude for a given situation or need. It is not about trying to produce the desired effect oneself, as that would involve strain. When the Holy Spirit operates there is grace. This way of living is challenging, because the flesh, by default, will exert itself in every situation. One must actually become aware and pause to allow the Holy Spirit to lead in one’s life. It is a life that involves daily surrender to the working of God in one’s life so that one becomes a channel of His power, grace, and love.

11.2.9 The New Life/Person in Christ The new life of a believer becomes tightly connected to the resurrected life of and in Christ. The old person is dead through the power of the cross and the “new person” is alive in Christ, and it is from and through Him that all power is drawn to do good, “Apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). It is not that a person or non-believer cannot do good, but the flesh is limited in its capacity to completely

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

201

surrender to do God’s will – to do that which brings glory to Him. As described in Romans 7:14–25, the flesh is unable to do what is right, though the spirit is willing; the tendency is that intentions are tainted with self-seeking motives. If the origin of the act of good is from the flesh, there is always a tarnish or taint of self-serving motives. When one lives by the spirit, the cross is able to work on a person (providing that person surrenders to the power of the cross, i.e. draws all strength, graces and love from Jesus) so that the person’s “fleshly” desires remain dead on the cross and their stance of surrender allows the grace of the Holy Spirit to empower that person to do all that is good and would give glory to the Father. The new life is about continuous surrender, trusting in the Holy Spirit and drawing all strength from Christ to fulfill and carry out anything that is good and would bring glory to God, the creator of all things.

11.3 Viewing Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Framework Having laid the Christian principles that are relevant, conscious capitalism may now be examined within this framework.

11.3.1 Stakeholders In Christianity stakeholders include all of humanity and God’s creation. From a business standpoint, stakeholders would include the environment, consumers, local communities, other business organizations, animals, i.e. groups with whom the organization interacts, influences or affects, consisting of a much smaller subset of all of God’s creation which encompasses the entire universe. All is created through Christ, “through him all things came into being, not one thing came into being except through him” (John 1:3 New Jerusalem Bible), and thus, accordingly, all human beings and the rest of God’s creation are treated as holy and sacred. Believers are called to be mindful of God’s creation and to be stewards of all that is on the earth: “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it. The world and all its people belong to him.… You gave them charge of everything you made, putting all things under their authority” (Psalm 24:1, 8:6 New Living Translation). Everything belongs to God, “For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him” (Col 1:16 New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition). One of the values of Ignatian spirituality is to see “God in all things” (Jesuits 2020), directing the believer to His presence in and authorship of all things, which in turn challenges the believer to respond reverently. Therefore, stewardship of all of God’s creation with the goal to achieve ecological balance and

202

M. A. Eusebio

harmony of the local and greater environment is the counterpart to conscious capitalism’s “higher purposes” that entail serving, aligning and integrating the interests of a business’ stakeholders. The essence of the Ignatian vision can be summarized by a reflection stated in the “First Principle and Foundation”, a goal or ideal that can be thought of as the superset from which conscious capitalism derives. A modern paraphrasing of the principle includes the idea that we, as God’s people whom he creates “show reverence for all the gifts of creation and collaborate with God in using them so that by being good stewards we develop as loving persons in our care of God’s world and its development” (Ignatius’ Three-Part Vision, n.d.). In this statement, the object of care or stewardship is all-encompassing  – God’s world which is all of creation. “Good stewards” are the individuals or in the case of conscious capitalism, the conscious leaders whose aims are to draw synergies from situations amongst interdependent stakeholders. In addition, this type of stewardly stance can be applied to the treatment of people in organizations internal and external to the business, treating them with love and respect and from which follows the ideal work scenario where employees find themselves nurtured professionally and internally. Likewise, other stakeholders external to the organization would be treated in a similar fashion while still upholding ethical values. St. Paul gives the following directive with regard to conducting oneself in society: “Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God” (Rom 13:1) and “Do all that you can to live in peace with everyone” (Rom 12:18 New Living Translation). This instruction calls all believers to live harmoniously with everyone, regardless of their faith, even calling them to submit to secular governing authorities. Thus, combining the concept of stewardship with these directives, Christian teaching calls its disciples to take care of a much vaster and and encompassing definition of stakeholders – all of creation.

11.3.2 The “Higher Purposes” of Conscious Capitalism Viewed from Christianity Conscious capitalism entails businesses that are “galvanized by higher purposes that serve, align and integrate the interests of all their major stakeholders” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013). In business major stakeholders would generally include, but not be limited to, shareholders/investors, clients/customers, employees, business partners, suppliers, the local community, and government agencies. To serve, align and integrate the interests of all these groups would be a monumental task, especially should interests and values of the various groups conflict with each another; nevertheless, the ideal is admirable and far-reaching, if it could be successfully implemented. Achieving harmony across all stakeholders implies a spirit of peace amongst all, a state or ideal that is shared with Christianity and that St. Paul calls followers

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

203

to practice, “If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Rom 12:18 New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition). Christians are to be mindful of God’s creation, (stakeholders consist of all of God’s creation), similar to the ideals of conscious capitalism, which at its highest, aims to serve the planet. All is created through Christ, and all are to be treated with love. Yet, Christians are asked to reach beyond living harmoniously. All is to be done for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31). The ultimate goal in a Christian’s act is to give glory to Him. Though conscious capitalism, at its furthest reach, aims to serve the entire planet, Christians are called to serve God and His creation and be stewards of the entire universe. That conscious leaders serve resonates with the idea of servant-­ leadership in Christianity. Jesus came to serve and to be served, “…the son of man came not to be served but to serve…” (Mat 20:28).

11.3.3 Christianity and the Existential Quest for Meaning in the Organizational Life Christians are called, in whatever they do, to give glory to God (Cor 10:31), and this directive applies both to the individual and the entire “body of Christ” or congregation, its business analog being the organization. Paul instructs slaves to obey their masters and to perform their tasks onto Jesus, not as “man pleasers”, working only when their superior is watching; the idea is that regardless of one’s position one does their task wholeheartedly, with reverence and sincerity of heart towards the Lord (Col 3:22–23). This kind of attitude brings a sense of purpose in the individual who is a part of an organization. He or she may not understand the higher goals of the organization, but the attitude and heart with which the person approaches and performs their work – doing it unto the Lord – is already filled with purpose and meaning, thus making for a harmonious and effective member of an organization. From a Christian standpoint the ideal is for the organization to bring glory to God. To some extent there is a parallel between conscious capitalism and Christianity with regard to purpose in the organizational life. The goal of serving stakeholders in conscious capitalism gives purpose to employees/organizational members. Conscious leaders are described with traits and acts that are characteristic of the sacrificial nature of Christian leaders – “other-centeredness” instead of self-seeking. These characteristics set conscious businesses apart from traditional capitalistic organizations, where the focus of the latter is on the bottom line. If the main goal and emphasis of an organization is to ensure that its stock value remains high on Wall Street to the neglect of its products and customers, then such an organization would have little meaning for existence other than to ensure that its stock value remains high. There is plenty of wisdom in scripture and Christian spiritual disciplines and guidelines pertaining to decision-making and counsel, which are crucial in matters where much is at stake e.g. the organization, itself, and a Christian who follows such

204

M. A. Eusebio

guidelines would have a better sense of purpose and meaning in their organizational role as they make decisions that could affect the greater whole. “The plans of the diligent lead surely to abundance, but everyone who is hasty comes only to want” (Prov 21:5). Plans should be well thought out (Prov 15:22) and the counsel of the Godly sought (Psalm 1:1). One who applies these counsels ponders the consequences of their actions and thoughts. Ignatian spirituality provides a method for decision-making through the discernment process, another path to giving meaning to one’s organizational role (Jesuits in Britain, n.d.). Rick Warren in his book The Purpose Driven Life (2002) provides a guide for a believer to discover the answer to the existential question, “Why am I here?” In summary, Christianity embodies the values and teachings that a disciple/ believer may use as their guideline and framework for contemplation and living life, thus giving purpose and meaning to their role in any organization in which they are a part.

11.3.4 Man’s Fallibility and How It Affects Execution of Conscious Capitalism Because of the fall, unless one is redeemed through Christ and operates as a regenerated/spiritual (as opposed to one who is sensory or sensual-delimited) Christian, execution and implementation of the “higher purposes” of conscious capitalism would be difficult and challenging due to human frailty or concupiscence. Even should a conscious leader possess a “higher state of consciousness” he or she would still be subject to the limitations of self-seeking and self-serving pursuits, and without Christ, will find themselves in an inner struggle that would mar or cloud their ability to “discover and harvest synergies” across all stakeholders and weaken their ability to attain the “conscious” goals. For example, should the company’s purpose or that of the stakeholders contradict the leaders’ personal agenda, a temptation arises – to prioritize the latter, thus compromising the goals of the company and its relation to its stakeholders. “Conscious leaders” are human beings, and according to Christian principles stained with original sin, and without redemption, no matter how lofty the ideals, will be subject to fulfilling selfish pursuits, and thus fail if their sole source of strength and determination lies only in themselves, i.e. self-reliance. According to the tenets of conscious capitalism, conscious leaders are driven, by “service”, that being their motivating factor. In Christian teaching, all energy and capacity to do good comes from Jesus, “I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). Thus, without Christ, attempts at doing good cannot be sustained for the long run. Conscious businesses are described as having “trusting, authentic, innovative and caring cultures that make working there a source of both personal growth and

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

205

professional fulfillment”, these cultures comprising of policies, values and leaders who uphold and execute them. In order for an organization to be trustworthy and authentic, there needs to be leaders who ensure that such values and cultures are maintained, and requires the leaders, themselves, to possess traits of integrity, honesty, trustworthiness, caring, etc. to name a few, in order to set and maintain for the long run such mentioned culture. From a Christian standpoint, though such traits can be natural to some leaders, but to sustain them for long periods of time, cannot be done, because “the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mat 26:41). The solution, again, in Christianity is to draw all strength, perceptions and perspective from Jesus. Conscious capitalism also claims to endeavor to create various types of wealth for all stakeholders, but with wealth, especially, money comes temptation. Conscious leaders and subordinates would need the inner strength to rise above the temptation of wealth, “for the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (Tim 6:10).

11.3.5 Apart from Christ, the Ideals of Conscious Capitalism Cannot Be Fully Achieved The ideals of conscious capitalism are far-reaching and lofty, and taking into consideration all possible stakeholders, one wonders how a conscious leader could align the interests of all stakeholders and at the same time serve the goals of the organization. In the case of conflicting interests, some that may even be self-­serving, how would a conscious leader bring harmony to the agenda and interests of the various stakeholders, while balancing them with the overall goals of the company without compromising values and still adhering to ethical decisions? If a conscious leader is to rely wholly on themselves to serve the goals and needs of their organization and its constituents, the long-term effect on the leader would be burnout and exhaustion resulting in poor decision-making that would risk the interests of the stakeholders he/she was trying to represent in the first place. Furthermore, in the face of temptation, how would a conscious leader stand up against it? From a Christian standpoint “evil” is a reality, and there are forces that must be contended with spiritually. The challenges of facing and combating evil require “spiritual warfare” (Eph 6:10–18) in order to achieve harmony across stakeholders without compromising ethics. The essence of these verses refers to a spiritual battle whereby the opposing forces do not consist of people but of ideas and principles. For a conscious business to uphold its tenets, their leaders must have the strength, endurance and know-how to stand firm against ideologies, plans or policies that would undermine the far-reaching goals of the organization. A conscious leader must have the wisdom to make decisions that are in the best interest of all parties, while upholding ethical values and principles; furthermore, the leader must have the strength to execute the decisions and goals. In the face of opposing interests, especially those that are unethical in nature, a Christian conscious leader would draw

206

M. A. Eusebio

their strength, wisdom and knowledge from Christ. As St. Paul’s mentioned in his letter to the Philippians, “I can do all things through him who strengthens me” (Phil 4:13). The key for the Christian conscious leader is to continuously surrender their will to Christ and to allow the love and power of Christ to sustain them into successfully serving all stakeholders. Continuous surrender would be like an electrical device being constantly connected to a power source, and in this case of the Christian conscious leader, their source would be Christ. Jesus said, “Apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). This statement does not mean that a person is unable to do anything at all. In fact, one can do many things, such as undertake projects and pursue and achieve goals, independent of and apart from Christ. What the verse is saying is that to Him, that is in God’s estimate, all acts that are done apart from Him amount to nothing (Nee 1958/1977, pp. 233–234). Any project, task or undertaking that has its origin outside of Christ is nothing. One can ask God to bless the project, but if He is not the author of the project, then no amount of prayer will bring His blessing upon it. The project may even come to pass and last for some time through self-will and effort, but its longevity and long-lasting efficacy will ultimately expire. It will not have the quality of timelessness and universality, characteristic of God’s sovereignty and dominion over all of creation, including space and time. This verse “Apart from me you can do nothing” brings up another point about conscious capitalism and its relation to Christian principles and God’s teaching in scripture. The tenets and ideals of conscious capitalism mimic God’s directives in how to treat one another, how to conduct oneself in society, how to treat the planet, to serve others, to develop people and create a nurturing place for them, etc. All these ideals are actually attractive, pleasing to the ear, politically correct, and fault-­ free. More so, during present times, we need to incorporate these ideals and turn them into business practices. However, it must be emphasized that there’s nothing new or profound about these ideas. They have been only reiterated in a different way and slapped unto capitalism to remake the latter unto a construct that appears to be a novel concept or metamorphosis of capitalism, when in fact the concepts have been loosely drawn from Christian teachings with some variations and specificity towards business. Therefore, one cannot add, subtract, modify or improve on what is already perfect  – God’s principles and teachings. This construct of conscious capitalism originates from man. In no way does it reference or give credit to God. The author and origin is human, not Christ, therefore it is only a vague representation and holds a blurry similarity to the complete truth of God’s teaching. Since the origin of the concept is human and is marred (see Sect. 11.2 above, especially on concupiscence) and is an impure variation on God’s teaching, any pleas or prayer to bless the pursuits is presumptuous of Him approving the construct. In other words, the Christian’s standpoint and approach to conscious capitalism is to aim at the broader goals of Christian teaching rather than a subset, because by targeting the former, the latter is addressed. It is a given that Christian business leaders interact with and face organizations and peoples representing other religions and belief systems. The world is composed of different peoples, cultures and religions. But this fact does not mean that the

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

207

Christian leader is to adjust their beliefs to accommodate or synch with those of their stakeholders. The Christian leader acknowledges that other religions exist and that though there may be commonalities to beliefs, that there are also points of departure, and it is to this latter that the Christian leader cannot compromise. He or she cannot consider a business proposal, negotiation or agreement that would put Christian principles at stake. All decisions must flow from Christian principles and teachings. Overall, the Christian conscious leader respects and recognizes other religions, but still adheres to Christian principles in decision-making and negotiations or policy-making that involves others of differing faiths, focusing on the commonality across belief systems.

11.4 Executing Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Framework The following is a look at conscious capitalism as executed from a Christian framework.

11.4.1 Overcoming Self-Interest Pursuits that Undermine the Altruistic Values of Conscious Capitalism From the perspective of a person operating from the power resulting from their understanding of the love of God for them and that love residing in their hearts, it is possible to move beyond self-interest. The core of Christian teaching is love which moves one beyond self-interest, enabling one to be more Christ-like (John 3:30). Once a person has given their life to Christ, allowing Him to reign in their life, their life is no longer their own, “Or do you not know that … that you are not your own … for you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body” (1 Cor 6:19–20). Again, Christians are instructed that in “whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God” (1 Cor 10:31 New Living Translation). Christian goals entail glorifying God through carrying out his edict from the beginning. The Christian way is a constant surrendering to the work of the cross in one’s life – the mortification of the flesh and the resurrected life in Christ, “What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6). A Christian must be regenerated in order to act beyond self-interest, and rather, draw life and power from God. “Anything we can do without prayer and without an utter dependence upon God must come from the spring of natural life that is tainted with the flesh” (Nee 1958/1977, p. 232). Thus, for the Christian, the key to rising above self-interest is to live a life in Christ. Scripture states, “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tim 6:10 New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition). There is a great temptation,

208

M. A. Eusebio

especially in business, that can lure and trap leaders into a quick descent to the destruction of not only the leader’s reputation but the demise of a business, as in the case of the Enron scandal (Markham, 2006). It’s not that money, of itself, is evil, but it is the love of it that is the root of all kinds of malice. A conscious leader must be able to resist this temptation and not have the love for money. The greatest commandment in Christian teaching is “to love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind” (Mat 22:37). A conscious leader who heeds this commandment is already in a guarded position against the lure to love money and its consequential pitfalls.

11.4.2 Empathy and Conscious Capitalism vs. the Christian Stance The compassion that characterizes Christ, the role model for Christians, is exemplified in how he felt for the crowd that was hungry (Mat 9:36) or the family of Lazarus who was grieving (John 11:33); His response was unconditional. He did not impose any requirements on feeding the crowd; they did not have to believe in his teaching. Jesus saw that they were tired and hungry, and He fed them. On the contrary, the inherent notion of empathy in conscious capitalism implied in their “caring cultures” and goal of endeavoring to create various forms of wealth for its stockholders is completely dependent on the company’s bottom line: the net income. Without income, the conscious business will not be sustainable, and thus be unable to tend to or care for its stakeholders. Though empathy is implicit in the description of a conscious business, its ability to respond to the needs of its stakeholders is closely tied to and constrained by financial and other resources. Overall, there are similarities between empathy in conscious capitalism and Christianity. Both care about their stakeholders. However, the business will be limited by its financial capacity or resources. A business organization cannot allow itself to go bankrupt as a result of “unconditional compassion”, e.g. towards stakeholders. There are certain policies to which adherence is essential to protect the well-being of the business, thus boundaries and limitations become necessary. On the other hand, Christians, overall, are called to respond unconditionally with compassion.

11.4.3 Christian Servant Leadership Style Christ is the perfect example of servant-leadership. He did not come to be served but to serve (Mark 10:45). He illustrated this concept through the washing of the feet during the last supper (John 13:5–9, 12–17), setting an example (John 13:15) for servanthood. His ultimate act of servanthood was offering His life as a sacrifice for

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

209

the salvation of humanity. To a small extent, conscious capitalism shares the Christian concept of service to others, as conscious leaders are “driven by service”. But what drives Christians is their relationship with Christ, the connection to God who is the infinite powerhouse of love; service work only becomes a byproduct of that relationship. On the other hand, conscious leaders draw their inspiration and motivation from service work. What happens when the service work no longer becomes fulfilling or when the stakeholders do not appreciate the well-intended efforts? What then will become the source of inspiration and motivation for the conscious leaders? Thus “driven by service” is a weak foundation from which to draw motivation and inspiration.

11.4.4 Christianity and Economics To date there is no set of formal explicit directives in Christian teaching pertaining to economics, however there are biblical verses, encyclicals, and scholarly writings that indirectly or directly address the world’s economy or economic principles. For example, Proverbs 11:1 states, “Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight”, emphasizing the importance of honesty in business dealings. Sirach 42:2,5 addresses profit-making, “…Do not be ashamed of the law of the Most High and his covenant, and … of profit from dealing with merchants …”. Pope Francis (2015), in his encyclical the Laudato Si’, focuses on the earth’s ecology and calls attention to the shortcomings of the world’s economy. He describes the plundering of the earth’s resources and the consequential loss in biodiversity and attributes this loss to short-sighted approaches to the economy, commerce and production, along with the degree of human intervention in nature, often in the service of business interests and consumerism. In the same encyclical, Pope Francis calls on politics and economy to unite in addressing the ecology from an ethical framework and quotes Pope Benedictine XVI’s (2009) encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, by stating that only when “the economic and social costs of using up shared environmental resources are recognized with transparency and fully borne by those who incur them, not by other peoples or future generations” can those actions be considered ethical. Clark (2014), states that neoclassical economics, based on the “rational economic man”, excludes the context of history, culture, politics and religion, which he claimed are essential components in comprising an economy with ethics. He asserts that every economic theory must adopt some understanding of human nature and that doing so requires turning to the higher discipline of theology. He also mentions that Francis Edgeworth’s claim (1881/1967, as cited in Clark 2014), “The first principle of Economics is that every agent is actuated only by self-interest”, is in contradiction to St. Paul’s advice to “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others” (Philippines 2:3–4).

210

M. A. Eusebio

Clark (2019) also states that the (Catholic) church rejects in theory and practice the “rational economic man” view of human nature. The rational man is based on the idea of a person who makes rational decisions that maximize satisfaction and utility. This self-centered focus is what would be considered fleshly or emanating from original sin. However, one who is living in Christ and led by the Holy Spirit would make decisions that are not based on self-seeking or self-serving interests but would take into consideration the well-being of others and the environment in which he/she lives; this type of decision-making and its motivating force is in complete contradiction to what motivates the “rational man”.

11.4.5 Conscious Capitalism and a Focus Beyond Commodity-Based Exchanges If all stakeholders are taken into consideration, and if the future world economy changes, such that trade encompasses more than just commodities, then it is possible for corporations to trade outside the sphere of commodities. Businesses would also serve as a means to trade services (non-commodity), which is actually active in today’s economy, e.g. call-centers, consulting services, etc. The U.S. is a more service-­ oriented economy (post-industrial revolution), so in the present, non-­ commodities-­based corporations are already prevalent. Conscious capitalism envisions the possibility of moving beyond the purely commodity-based exchanges that seem to define contemporary neo-liberalism. It is possible, for example, that stakeholders be the local community or the environment, and the exchange could be peace and order or preservation of the local ecology, in which case commodities would not be involved. In this type of role, a conscious business would act as a spiritual and moral influence on its stakeholders.

11.4.6 Social Justice and Christianity Conscious capitalism is radical, but it can still go further by making values more important than money and material gain. From the perspective of social justice, the oppressed and underprivileged need to be included as stakeholders. Since conscious leaders are driven by service to various stakeholders, including the “planet we all share”, the ideals of conscious capitalism need to be far reaching and inclusive of all.

11.5 Non-Christian Stakeholders Other organizations lie outside the sphere of the “conscious business”, thus it would be challenging to influence other stakeholders over whom the business has no control.

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

211

11.5.1 Achieving Harmony Amongst Stakeholders If the stakeholders have dependencies on one another, they can take an attitude of teamwork to achieve the greater purpose. Each segment contributes to the greater whole. Examples of stakeholders are customers, consumers, suppliers, stockholders, the local community, environment, local government and employees. The concept of conscious capitalism calls to mind corporate social responsibility (CSR) when it is implemented sincerely and with integrity (not only to comply with governmental policies/requirements). Although CSR is focused on the effects and relation of the corporation with society, it is also a mechanism, when wholly applied, for executing and implementing values that would serve and enhance the local community. If stakeholders are able to see their dependencies on and relations with one another and how their relationships contribute to create a product or service that benefits others, with focus and emphasis on the benefits that would serve the greater whole, such viewpoint could mitigate tension that would otherwise arise should there be conflicting interests. Stakeholders must always keep in mind that they are but one part of a bigger goal or purpose, like a link in a chain, where if one was weak, the entire chain would be compromised. However, it would take stakeholders with attitudes that stretch beyond self-interest in order for them to appreciate their interdependency and effect in creating/serving the greater whole.

11.5.2 The Call for Greater Stakeholder Interdependencies A libertarian worldview calls for minimal governmental intervention, advocating laissez-faire economics, which differs from stakeholder interdependencies inherent in conscious capitalism. The problem or weakness of libertarian worldview is that it excludes morality, such that the individual protects his or her right, regardless of moral implications. A conscious leader would identify stakeholders that would serve the greater purpose of the organization and work at unifying the goal of the various stakeholders, such that each one is interdependent for the success of the overall goal. The individualistic nature of libertarian worldview does not lend itself to group or team dynamics. Therefore, there are inconsistencies between conscious capitalism and libertarian worldview. Should another government policy or organization be established to oversee or manage conscious capitalism, it would be ideal for the overseeing agency to be trained and familiarized with the goals and principles of conscious capitalism. Second, the governing agency should not enforce or dictate corporations to adhere to certain policies; ideally, the approach would be similar to how corporate social responsibility (CSR) is implemented – it falls under good corporate governance, not under a government administration.

212

M. A. Eusebio

11.6 The Practicality of Conscious Capitalism from a Christian Standpoint 11.6.1 How Practical Is It to Implement Conscious Capitalism in Today’s Society? There are already businesses that practice conscious capitalism, e.g. In-N-Out Burger and Chick-Fil-A (Kruse 2015). Organizations can maintain their identity as conscious corporations, provided they adhere to their values and employ or train their members to think likewise. Though there are examples of companies that have partially successfully implemented conscious capitalism to some extent, it is impossible for an organization to achieve the goals of conscious capitalism in its entirety. However if the conscious leader is a “regenerated” Christian (see Sects. 11.3.4 and 11.4.1), i.e. one who has placed Jesus Christ as the head of his/her life and continuously surrenders their will to the work of the cross so that they “die” daily to their flesh and live in the spirit of Christ which requires a complete and continuous surrendering of one’s will to God, they would be more likely to succeed in executing the ideals across stakeholders. Such a leader, in face of say opposing or contradicting stakeholder interests, e.g. government agencies or other organizations, would be able to stand firm on the organization’s goals and principles, though such challenges are more likely to transpire in cultures where corruption is prevalent but can also occur anywhere and unexpectedly. According to Christian teaching the world is passing (1 John 2:17) and is but a temporary place, and definitely not heaven, and without Christ, hope can easily faint amidst an imperfect world, where peace, harmony and the ideals of conscious capitalism seem but elusive concepts. The world is broken and is in need of redemption, and only in Christ may redemption be found. But such waning hope will only persist if a conscious leader attempts to execute solely by relying on themselves because, “apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5).

11.6.2 Challenges of Organizational Growth As organizations grow in size, there is always accompanying growing pains. The ability of an organization to maintain its identity as a conscious business will depend largely on its leadership and constituents. As an organization grows, the number of stakeholders is likely to grow as well. The challenge comes when there are new interests, some of which may conflict with existing goals and values. A conscious leader must be equipped to face resistance, opposition and also have the strength of character to influence stakeholders to understand goals that are in the best interest of all stakeholders. Organization growth requires that a leader be able to manage the various stakeholder groups while simultaneously upholding the values of the

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

213

company and serving/aligning interests across the board. A conscious leader who is a Christian connected to Christ such that they draw their strength from Him and operates out of His love will be equipped to stand and lead an organization through its challenges.

11.6.3 The Role of Christianity in Enhancing Contemporary Organizational Practices Christian teachings, spirituality and values can be used as guidelines for organizations. Moral values serve as guidance for ethical behavior. Much scandal has already transpired involving companies, CEOs, and unethical practices. Christian spirituality can be used as a standard for ethics, and its principles can serve as the content for retreats that can be offered to constituents to enhance professional, personal, and spiritual life. Ignatian spirituality provides a methodology for decision making or “discerning” (Jesuits in Britain, n.d.) of God’s will in their lives. Proper decision-making is of importance to leaders as the actions or policies resulting from their decisions will have significant impact across stakeholders. Thus, to enable a conscious leader to make decisions that not only serve their business’ interest but are ethical in nature, a methodology for decision-making would be of utmost value. The Ignatian discernment process requires a person to examine their inner motives – whether the goals are self-centered or aimed for the greater glory of God. This process, when applied, will help identify and eliminate self-seeking motives that would conflict with or detract the leader from focusing on goals that serve the company’s purpose, its stakeholders, and overall, the planet. Rothausen (2017) discusses how Ignatian principles and practices such as discernment, retreats and spiritual direction might enhance a leader in certain development categories. Such principles and practices can be offered as a seminar or retreat to leaders as well as to employees and other stakeholder members. Overall, from a Christian standpoint, the goal is to bring people closer to God so that He may be glorified in all that one does.

11.7 Conclusion In conclusion, the aspirations and ideals of conscious capitalism are admirable and commendable and to actually achieve them in this broken world is a significant challenge and almost an impossibility. But from a Christian standpoint and framework, providing that the conscious leaders are totally and continuously surrendered to Christ, it is possible to serve the interests of all stakeholders and ultimately the planet and beyond, and such a stance implies that all interests are ethical. Yes, it is a tall order to be a conscious leader, but as St. Paul stated, “I can do all things through him who strengthens me” (Phil 4:13) for “… nothing will be impossible with God” (Luke 1:37).

214

M. A. Eusebio

Glossary Concupiscence  Insubordination of man’s desires to the dictates of reason, and the propensity of human frailty to sin as a result of original sin. More commonly, it refers to the spontaneous movement of the sensitive appetites toward whatever the imagination portrays as pleasant and away from whatever it portrays as painful. However, concupiscence also includes the unruly desires of the will, such as pride, ambition, and envy (Trinity Communications 2020). Regenerated Christian  A Christian who is spiritual as opposed to one who is sensory or sensual-delimited; a believer who draws their strength from God and operates from the power of God’s love.

References Augustine. 1960. The Confessions of St. Augustine. Trans. J.K. Ryan. Doubleday. Benedictine XVI. 2009. Caritas in Veritate. Vatican. Retrieved April 7, 2021, from http://www. vatican.va/content/benedict-­xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-­xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-­ in-­veritate.html Clark, C.M.A. 2014. Where There Is No Vision, Economists Will Perish. Econ Journal Watch 11 (2): 136–143. ———. 2019. Catholicism and Economics: Towards a “Deeper Reflection on the Nature of the Economy and Its Purposes”. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 78 (2): 409–441. Francis. 2015. Laudato Si’: On Care for Our Common Home. Vatican. Retrieved April 7, 2021, from http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-­ francesco_20150524_enciclica-­laudato-­si.html. Ignatius’ Three-Part Vision. n.d.. Retrieved April 7, 2021, from https://www.ignatianspirituality. com/ignatian-­prayer/the-­spiritual-­exercises/ignatius-­three-­part-­vision/. James, W. 1958. The Varieties of Religious Experience. New York: The New American Library. Jesuits. 2020. Ignatian Spirituality. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from Jesuits: https://www.jesuits.org/spirituality/ Jesuits in Britain. n.d.. Discernment. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from Jesuits in Britain: https:// www.jesuit.org.uk/discernment. Kruse, K. 2015. How Chick-fil-A Created a Culture That Lasts, December 8. Retrieved November 6, 2020 from Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2015/12/08/ how-­chick-­fil-­a-­created-­a-­culture-­that-­lasts/#e5d85703602e. Loyola Press. n.d. Finding God in All Things. Retrieved November 6, 2020, from Loyola Press: https://www.loyolapress.com/catholic-­resources/ignatian-­spirituality/finding-­god-­in-­ all-­things/. Mackey, J., and R.  Sisodia. 2013. Leadership | “Conscious Capitalism” Is Not an Oxymoron, January 14. Retrieved October 13, 2020, from Harvard Business Review: https://hbr. org/2013/01/cultivating-­a-­higher-­conscious. Markham, J.W. 2006. A Financial History of Modern U.S. Corporate Scandals: From Enron to Reform. Routledge. Merriam-Webster. 2022. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-­ webster.com/dictionary/repent. Nee, W. 1977. The Normal Christian Life. American ed. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers. (Original published 1957).

11  Christianity and Conscious Capitalism

215

New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition. 1993. United States of America: National Council of the Churches of Christ (Original published 1989). Retrieved October 20, 2020, from https://www.biblegateway.com/. Oxford University Press. 2022. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from Oxford Reference: https://tinyurl. com/38fxr54d. Rothausen, T.J. 2017. Integrating Leadership Development with Ignatian Spirituality: A Model for Designing a Spiritual Leader Development Practice. Journal of Business Ethics 145 (4): 811–829. The New Jerusalem Bible. 1990. New York: Doubleday. Trinity Communications. 2020. Catholic Dictionary. Trinity Communications. Retrieved October 22, 2020, from https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index. cfm?id=32697. Tyndale House Foundation. 1996/2015. New Living Translation. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Foundation. Warren, R. 2002. The Purpose Driven Life. Mandaluyong City: OMF Literature. Maggie Arevalo Eusebio worked ten years at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration/ Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena (California), working on space missions to Mars and Saturn, as well as research in planetary geophysics. She also worked at Autodesk, Inc., in Ithaca (New York), for seven years as a quality and software engineer specializing in the user-interface (UI) for software applications and testing of the mathematical and graphics engines of two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) solid modeling software. Her hobby is organic farming, and her passion is in Christianity and astrophysics. She currently resides in the Philippines with her husband where she is  managing a family corporation established in General Trias, Cavite (Philippines).  

Chapter 12

The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism Carlos Hoevel

12.1 Introduction In the current debate on capitalism there is an oscillation between two opposing perceptions. On the one hand, capitalism is seen as a great success due to its results in terms of wealth creation, poverty reduction, technological development and progress for millions of people. However, on the other hand, it is also experienced as a relative failure because it seems to be frustrating expectations regarding distribution of wealth, relative poverty, job stability and due to the negative secondary effects that it is producing in the political system, the social fabric, the environment and people’s spiritual happiness (Milanovic 2020). Faced with this ambiguous perception, several different diagnoses and proposals for solutions are presented. Some authors de-emphasize the problems and highlight the virtues of capitalism, pointing out its enormous capacity for self-transformation, so it would only be necessary to wait for it to solve its problems through its own evolutionary dynamics (Kaletsky 2010). Other authors emphasize its negative aspects, foreshadowing its terminal crisis, although they never finish describing how this will happen. Finally, there are authors who believe that – at least for the next few decades – no end of capitalism is in sight. However, the same authors consider that it will not improve on its own either, but that it is necessary to act to renew its dynamism and reorient its current direction. Those of us who share the latter position, however, wonder how the latter could be achieved.

C. Hoevel (*) Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_12

217

218

C. Hoevel

The purpose of this chapter is to offer a vision on the possible improvement of capitalism, in the line of what is called conscious capitalism, exploring the possibilities of ethical change generated by Christian religious doctrine and experience. In the first sect. I will try to show why, although institutional improvements – especially the quality of laws and governments – are essential to improve capitalism, a much more profound change in the level of ethical consciousness and decisions is also necessary. Secondly, I will point out the way in which today, in economic science, going beyond the assumptions of conventional theory, there are new approaches that highlight motives other than monetary -especially ethical values ​​and relationships with others  – to explain the motivational structure of economic actors. Thirdly, I will show the way in which, along the same lines, numerous studies also point out the influence of the religious dimension on ethical behavior in general and on economic behavior in particular, also noting its different positive or negative effects depending on the type of religiosity in question. Fourthly, I will present the thesis that Christianity, due to its two characteristics of ethical universality and personal relationality, provides an additional potential enlargement and reinforcement to the ethical and relational capacities of people. Fifthly, I will try to show, by means of a brief historical account, the main universal principles of the Christian ethical-­ economic tradition that – beyond the errors and deviations that occurred in practice- can nourish today not only Christians, but also any ethically inspired person or economic agent. Sixthly, I will offer a brief overview of some relational and community practices that Christians have developed throughout history, which today are reissued under new experimental forms aiming at the ethical improvement of the economy. Finally, in the conclusion I will reflect on the current scope and future perspectives of Christianity as an ethical doctrine and spiritual source to inspire economic actors in the direction of conscious capitalism.

12.2 Market and Institutional Conditions: Necessary But Not Sufficient The most widespread solution proposal to the current crisis of capitalism -which many promoted after the financial crisis of 2008 and is reinforced today after the covid-19 pandemic- is to appeal to a much more intense intervention of the State. Against the generally pro-deregulation and pro-market policies practiced for several decades, today there is a tendency to apply new regulations, interventions, taxes and restrictions on international trade, many times carried out by populist political leaders in charge of national states. Trying to overcome this governmental unilateralism harmful to the health of global capitalism, others favor the construction of a

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

219

structure of global regulations in pursuit of more and better investments, creation of more stable jobs, better distribution of wealth, greater political stability and less environmental damage. Certainly, the improvement in the capacity of state legal and political agency is essential to orient capitalism (Acemoglu and Robinson 2019). Especially in emerging countries but also in many of the developed ones, institutional weakness is generating a monopoly or crony capitalism, formed by networks of private economic groups that, in collusion with politicians and officials, colonize State institutions, controlling and manipulating markets and entire sectors of the economy and thus deteriorates the economic, legal and ethical functioning of both local and global capitalism. Tainted by structural corruption, this type of capitalism generates in the long-term worse levels of investment, poor income distribution, environmental damage, and periodic crises. For this reason, the strengthening of the rule of law, the division of powers, the impartiality and suitability of public officials, fewer and better regulations, and an active control of government management by citizens are decisive elements for the improvement of capitalism. However, while law enforcement and good regulations are essential, they are not enough. Even in countries where there is significant institutional strength to regulate capitalism, this is insufficient for several reasons. On the one hand, while laws and regulations can provide a framework for businesses and markets at the local and national level, they are powerless at the global level over which they have no jurisdiction. On the other hand, the technological dynamics of globalization is almost always far ahead of state regulatory attempts. In addition, laws and regulations manage to guide the actions of economic agents only at the strictly legal level, but they are powerless against business activities, perhaps formally legal, but ethically irresponsible, mediocre, or corrupt. For the rest, state or para-state laws and regulations are not always or necessarily good: in many cases they are counterproductive, unjust or downright bad. For this reason, their application does not guarantee an improvement in the economic and ethical quality of capitalism (Davies 2012). This impotence of laws and regulations was clearly evident in the crises of the last decades and continues to be so in the many delicate dilemmas of capitalism today. For example, at present we need to create more wealth to lower unemployment and poverty, but we also need to ensure that this wealth is better distributed and that it does not damage the environment. We must also expand the financial system so that credit reaches more people, especially small and medium-sized companies, and young and poor entrepreneurs, but at the same time we need to avoid excessive financial risk. Faced with these and many other dilemmas, capitalism requires much more particularized, weighed, and complex decisions than those that a state regulator can offer (Haskel and Westlake 2017). In fact, the most important human decisions, which guide our individual and social life, go far beyond laws and regulations. They spring from a much deeper and internal sphere of human beings. But what does this sphere consist of? How can we describe it? And, above all, how does it interrelate with the economic and institutional dimension?

220

C. Hoevel

12.3 The Ethical and Relational Dimension of Market Activities I understand by conscious capitalism an economic system in a constant process of self-correction, where not only market incentives or institutions, but also ethical intentions and actions of individuals – entrepreneurs, workers, investors, consumers, politicians, trade unionists and leaders in general – decisively influence the way the system acquires. In a conscious capitalism, institutions, markets and companies are of good quality and work well, mainly because the people who act in them have an attitude of reflective review of their actions in order to improve them in the direction of moral good. Although in this type of capitalism the monetary and institutional factors are important, they are interrelated with the ethical and relational dimension. In this sense, a conscious capitalism supposes a broader and more complex idea of economic ​​ and human action than that usually described by conventional economic models (Mackey and Sisodia 2013). Certainly, the dominant paradigm in economic science to explain the functioning of the capitalist system is still that of neoclassical economic theory. With various names such as economic approach, rational choice, homo oeconomicus, self-­interest or –simply- utilitarian model, this paradigm is based on a series of central methodological assumptions. In the first place in “the hypothesis that the most widespread and persistent human behavior can be explained by a generalized calculation of utility maximization” (Becker and Stigler 1977, 76). According to this approach, this hypothesis would not only be valid to explain the behaviors of those who carry out activities traditionally considered “economic”, but also to account for all the behaviors of all human beings in general: from that of the most ambitious stock market player to that of the Mother Teresa of Calcutta. A second axiom of the aforementioned approach is the principle of value neutrality, according to which referring to other psychological, moral, or religious motivations to explain economic behavior is irrelevant to the analysis of the economist who can completely dispense with them. The neoclassical economist considers these motivations as mere subjective preferences or tastes product of culture or of the average morality of society which tend to be universal and constant over time and therefore do not modify maximizing behavior at all. “Tastes do not change whimsically or differ significantly between different people. They will be the same next year and they are the same in all men” (Becker and Stigler 1977, 76). Finally, the neoclassical mainstream of economics is also based on the assumption of methodological individualism by which it is argued that economic analysis can dispense with the social or relational dimension. Social entities are considered, at least at the heuristic level, as mere sums or aggregates of individual actions. Thus, from this perspective, the interaction that takes place through the relationships between people does not modify in any way their maximizing individual behavior. However, although a paradigm shift is not yet in sight (Sontheimer 2006), several decades ago, various authors, especially in the line of behavioral economics founded by Vernon Smith and Daniel Kahneman (both Nobel Laureates in 2002), began to

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

221

carry out psychological experiments showing that the real actions of people differ many times from those that describe conventional models, finding evidence that would show the decisive importance of ethical motivations. For example, the economist Bruno Frey (1997) has demonstrated the central role of intrinsic motivations in economic decisions, compared to the idea of ​​the absolute priority of monetary incentives typical of neoclassical orthodoxy. George Akerlof (2000) has also highlighted the fundamental role of spiritual factors such as the so-called “expressive rationality” and the role of identity in economic decision-making. On the other hand, since the works of Richard Easterlin (1974) and Tibor Scitovsky (1992) followed later by other researchers such as Richard Layard (2005) and Robert Frank (2000), it is possible to verify how people are strongly influenced by the search for happiness in their economic decisions, going far beyond the monetary gain or consumer satisfaction postulated by neoclassicals. Finally, other studies have shown that when economic actors recognize a moral value, they generally feel obliged to totally modify the motivational structure of their decisions, subordinating all other variables -monetary or psychological- to said value that is presented to them as unconditional and therefore immeasurable in relation to them (Crespo 2007). Beside the evidence on the effects of the involvement of economic actors in the sphere of moral values, behavioral economists have discovered one more decisive element: the modification in one’s own behavior represented by the presence of the “other”. Indeed, against the assumption – implicit in the dominant neoclassical paradigm – that economic agents act exclusively within the sphere of the ego, behavioral economists rediscovered the relational dimension of economic actions. Many experiments of the last decades show the difference between the behavior of economic actors when they interact with others face to face and when they interact with others anonymously (Gui and Sugden 2005; Behrens and Kret 2019). This same concept can be found in authors such as Armin Falk and Urs Fischbacher (2006), who have highlighted the presence of mutual recognition, altruistic reciprocity and a sense of justice (fairness) in economic activities, seriously weakening the neoclassical hypothesis of perfect egoism. In this sense, it would seem that economic agents truly open themselves to the sphere of moral values ​​- and thus strengthen the foundations of a conscious capitalism – only through the interpellation represented by the relationship with a concrete you of flesh and blood (Behrens and Kret 2019).

12.4 The Role of Religion in Strengthening the Ethical and Relational Dimension of Economic Actions Along with the openness to the ethical and relational dimension, other researchers have discovered the influence of an additional dimension that could reinforce the moral motivations of people in the midst of economic activities: that of religious experiences, beliefs and practices. In the last decades, numerous studies have tried to test the correlations between the increase in religiosity and the broadening and

222

C. Hoevel

improvement of the motivational structure of people in areas such as criminal activity (DiIulio 2009), alcohol and drug use (Geppert et al. 2007), physical and mental health (Park and Slattery 2013) and marriage (Dollahite et al. 2012) among others. Other works indicate positive behavior changes in economic actors  – such as an improvement in the ethical behavior or social responsibility of entrepreneurs, investors, or simple consumers – related to strong religious beliefs or practices (Giacalone and Jurkiewicz 2003). Certainly, the role of religion in strengthening ethical behaviors is a highly controversial issue (Henley 2017). On the one hand, there are differences as to what is understood by religion and what type of religiosity is taken into account as an influencing factor in the ethical behaviors of the actors of capitalism. On the other hand, it is discussed whether there really is evidence that shows that religion – whatever the concept of religiosity adopted – has a positive or negative influence on the ethical behaviors of economic agents (Pava 2003; Case and Gosling, 2010), or if in fact no definitive correlation between the two can be proven (Brammer et  al. 2007; Chan-Serafin et al. 2013; Shariff 2015). If we take into account the empirical studies carried out among business managers in recent decades, it could be argued that there is insufficient evidence to establish a positive correlation between declared religious identity and the reinforcement of positive ethical behaviors. Other studies also point out that a type of purely extrinsic religiosity -that is, limited to a merely ritual or social fulfillment- does not seem to have a decisive influence on the ethical behavior of economic agents (Longenecker et al. 2004). On the other hand, a type of fundamentalist or intolerant religiosity, identified exclusively with belonging to a particular cultural, ethnic or social group, could be strongly negative for the ethical development of people in capitalist organizations (Chan-Serafin et al. 2013). Besides, it is also debated how the influence of religiosity  – many times generic, diffuse or experienced in an unconscious way- would translate into the concrete ethical actions of economic agents, also influenced by many other factors and circumstances (Graafland et al. 2007). However, in the midst of this complex debate, I believe that it is still possible to distinguish which aspects can produce a positive feedback between religion and the ethical conduct of economic actors and which cannot (Fernando and Chowdhury 2010; Kara et al. 2016). Indeed, together with these and other studies that seem to point in a variable way towards a positive, negative or neutral influence of religion on the ethical conduct of economic actors, some studies seem to show evidence of a positive influence when it comes to a type of religiosity that presents three specific characteristics: its intrinsic character, its relational intensity and its link with a rational and universalistic ethical content (Longenecker et al. 2004). The type of ethically positive religiosity to which we refer is intrinsic because it is not sustained solely for utilitarian, external or particularistic reasons linked to belonging to a particular social, cultural or ethnic group but is assumed as an end in itself (Chau et  al. 1990). At the same time it is intensely relational, because the believer develops an existential and spiritual bond by which he or she feels linked to a transcendent Being and to a specific community of believers – which includes the emotional, the volitional and, in the case of religions with dogmatic or ritual forms,

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

223

the intellectual and the corporeal- and is made concrete either through an experience, a belief, a rite (especially prayer) and a law or path of life shared in common (Beck and McDonald 2004). Likewise, this type of religiosity also includes a link with a universal reason for which it is possible to recognize general ethical values​​ that transcend the limits and possible moral deviations of one’s own religion or culture, such as violence, fundamentalism or sectarianism. In this sense, when people live this kind of religiosity, they seem to access a much more intense and profound existential plane, which disrupts their entire motivational structure, expanding their level of consciousness and their ethical commitment not only with God and with the members of their own religion, but also with other human beings, nature and reality in general (Giacalone and Jurkiewicz 2003). In this way, taking into account the three characteristics of this specific type of religiosity, the results of research that indicate a positive correlation between mystical, pantheistic or monotheistic religiosity and the ethical behavior of certain people in the capitalist economy can be understood (Clark and Dawson 1996; Epstein 2002; Angelidis and Ibrahim 2004; Kurpis et al. 2008; Adams 2008; van Mazereeuw et al. 2014).

12.5 Does Christian Faith Provide an Additional Enlargement and Reinforcement to the Ethical and Relational Capacities of Human Beings? There are multiple research works that show the broadening of the ethical horizon and relational dimension of the economic agents adhering to the Asian religions of mystical and/or pantheistic orientation such as Buddhism, Taoism or the various forms of Hinduism (Low 2011; Dunn and Jensen 2019; Chen et al. 2020). According to other research, this positive expansion in the ethical and relational dimension could even be accentuated in those economic agents belonging to the sphere of the three great monotheistic religions, due to the particular combination between the broad universalistic and rationally articulated ethical content and the intense personal bond with the Divinity that characterizes this type of religiosity (Calkins 2000). Certainly, the form that the realization of good takes in the three religions that emerged from both the biblical and the Koranic ethical traditions is very different from that of the Eastern religions. In the latter, the moral realization of the good is identified with a general attitude of spiritual and practical wisdom and ethical norms are not in general related to a personal Divinity. On the contrary, what characterizes monotheistic religions is the identification of ethical behavior with a concrete personal response to a call from a perfectly individualized God that must take place in a limited time and place and implies the fulfillment of a series of specific moral mandates of universal scope. In this way, in these religions the demand for such a personal response would in principle have a capacity to strongly reinforce the ethical commitment of the monotheistic believer both in general as in economic life in particular (Granqvist 2020). Various studies (Gillian 1999; Fathallah et  al. 2020)

224

C. Hoevel

confirm this in the case of Islam, in which the response of the believer tends to identify with submission to the divine will that requires universal compliance with certain norms (although in Islam there are also currents such as Sufism that extend in a spiritual sense the concept of submission). Something analogous happens in the case of Judaism, in which the central response of the human being lies in the fulfillment of the Torah (law), which implies an indestructible bond between the believer and God and the observance of universal and specific prescriptions (Heschel 1976). Moreover, the tendency to conceive the human response to God’s call in an increasingly existential and personal way and, at the same time, structured in mandates with a progressively more universal and rationally articulated ethical content, is accentuated along the Bible finding its highest degree of intensity in the Christian New Testament. Indeed, on the one hand, for Christians it is no longer only the omnipotent and transcendent God, who seeks man’s response in the form of submission to a Will or obedience to a Law. The novelty of Christianity lies, on the one hand, in the fact that God makes himself present in person through the Incarnation of his Son in a human individual and seeks, moved by love, to establish an intimate relationship with the believer to the point of giving his own corporal and spiritual Self as his or her new existential basis. As Joseph Ratzinger affirms, “being Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person” (Benedict XVI 2005, 1). It is precisely this encounter and intimate union of faith and love with the very Person of Christ, which gives flesh and blood to concepts and an unprecedented realism to the Christian’s moral experience, providing “a new horizon and a decisive direction”(Benedict XVI 2005, 1). Indeed, by being existentially incorporated into Christ, the Christian undergoes a total transformation of his or her person, gradually adopting the feelings, intentions, attitudes and behaviors of Christ, thus giving a qualitative leap in his or her ethical conduct (which in Christian terms is expressed with the notion of Grace) that he or she could never have realized by him or herself. However, is there not a risk that this very intense bond of faith and love with a personal God leads to a particularistic and irrationalist attitude opposed to the rational universalism that we have pointed out as one of the characteristics that allow a positive influence of religion on ethical behavior? Certainly, a wrong interpretation of the intensification of this personal bond has resulted many times in the history of Christianity in a particularistic irrationalism by which any conduct – even the most aberrant – was justified in the name of the union of the believer to Christ. Many of the wars and persecutions for religious reasons that devastated Europe have their origin in this particularistic-fideistic interpretation of Christianity. However, in opposition to these historical deformations, the Christian doctrine affirms the identity of God’s and Christ’s Love (Agape) with Reason (Logos) in a universalist sense and therefore not capable of being interpreted as a pure Power or Will that justifies any irrational or arbitrary behavior. In fact, in the pages of the Gospel Christ shows, on the basis of this personal bond of faith and love with the believer that he builds through the gradual pedagogy of his dialogues, signs, parables and, above all, through the eloquence of his concrete actions, the profound

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

225

ethical reasonableness and universality of what he calls to believe and do. In that sense, he shows the validity of his ethical teachings not only for Christians, but for all human beings. Therefore, in Christianity the strength of the relational bond of faith and love between the believer and Christ and of the believers among themselves, which gives the existential and affective force to commit and act, is amalgamated with the universality of ethical reason that opens this believing and loving force to all human beings (the parable of the Good Samaritan is in this sense the canonical example), breaking down the walls of any potential social, ethnic or religious sectarianism. Now, the question that follows would be: how this double reinforcement, relational and ethical, that Christianity seems to give to human actions, is integrated in a concrete way in the specific field of the economy?

12.6 Universal Ethical Principles of Christianity in the Economic Field The ethical conscience of the Christian believer who acts in the economic field is founded, on the one hand, on a series of universal ethical principles that she or he can share not only with other believers but also with all other economic agents of good will. These are contained in the Hebrew Bible (and in that sense represent a continuity with Jewish ethics), in the doctrinal and practical teachings of Christ in the New Testament and in the philosophical, theological and ethical doctrines developed by religious authorities and Christian thinkers of the different churches in dialogue with non-Christian thinkers of religious or secular thinking. It is not the aim of this article to elaborate in detail all the universal ethical principles that Christianity prescribes for economic life, but I will at least attempt to point out very briefly some of the most important ones. Probably one of the greatest contributions of the Christian faith to universal ethical conscience in general and to economic ethics in particular has been the discovery of the human being as a person. This idea, which has important antecedents in classical ancient philosophy, is founded in the first place on the biblical Hebrew revelation, according to which every human being has been created in the image of God (Gn 1,27). This means that the human being is not a purely material being, an evolved animal endowed only with a sophisticated brain, but a physical being endowed with spirit. Therefore, although he or she has a physical dimension dependent on the material world, he or she also has an intelligence and a free will that is open to the spiritual and moral dimension. Because is created individually by God, each human being also has within him or her a desire, a demand for the Absolute and, therefore, is called to a transcendent destiny. On the other hand, this personal dimension of openness to the Infinite is also reflected in the human being in his or her relational and social dimension. In fact, the human being is not conceived by Christianity as acting only in function of his or her self-preservation or individual interest, but rather “for by his innermost nature man is a social being, and unless he

226

C. Hoevel

relates himself to others he can neither live nor develop his potential” (Gaudium et spes 1965, 12). In other words: Because of having been made in the image of God, the human being has the dignity of person; he is not just something, but someone. He is capable of knowing himself, of possessing himself and of giving himself freely and entering into communion with other people; and he is called, by grace, to an alliance with his Creator, to offer Him a response of faith and love that no other being can give in his place (C.C.C. 1983, 357).

This idea of the ​​ human being as a person deepens and expands to unsuspected limits in the life and teaching of Christ. The ethically revolutionary social and economic nucleus of Christianity lies precisely in the fact that in it the economic activity is inserted within the framework of both the doctrinal and existential recognition by Jesus of each human being, without respect for class, race, culture or religion, as a being destined for eternity, bearer of absolute dignity. Having given practical testimony of his love for each person – and especially for the poorest and most fragile – to the point of giving his own life, Christ places at the center of economic ethics a series of central commands directed at Christians. These do not point to a more or less selfish balance between their individual interests or to a revolutionary change in social structures, but to the inner conversion of the person from which the structural and moral improvement of the economy and society will emerge gradually and indirectly. Indeed, on the one hand, Christ confirms the mandate of the biblical tradition to “work the land” that is to collaborate with God in his Creation -which is something “good” and a gift- that cannot be equivalent to arbitrary, predatory and selfish exploitation, but a responsible stewardship based on care and not on mere dominance (Genesis 2:15, Francis 2015). Unfortunately, throughout the history of European Christianity, this biblical mandate has been many times wrongly interpreted as authorizing unlimited and irresponsible exploitation of nature. On the contrary, Christ calls men to “be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt 5, 48), not leaving sterile, or greedily exploiting human and natural resources but multiplying them through serious and responsible work and administration (Mt 25: 14–30). On the other hand, in the second place, Christ commands to develop economic activity not simply following one’s own interests, individual desires or subjective preferences, but putting first the respect for human dignity and the inalienable rights of each man, beginning with the close neighbor, a mandate that is contained in the moral law summarized in the Biblical Decalogue, deducible also through reason from the very structure of reality and expressed in the universal golden rule of ethics that he also confirms: “Do to others as you would like them to do to you” (Luke 6:27; Matthew 7:12). However, for Christ this alone is not enough. Taking to the maximum the universal and relational power of human nature, assumed and expanded by its union to his own divine Person, he also requires a third mandate: that of exercising economic activity with the aim of love (agape) or service to others, especially, and urgently, towards the poorest and weakest in society (Mt 25, 35–46). This is taught by him, as we have repeatedly stressed, not only as a theoretical idea but mainly by his concrete and exemplar actions as he himself openly affirms in the Gospel: “Whoever wishes to be great among you, must be your

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

227

servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve ”(Mt. 20: 27–28). Starting from these great general ethical mandates of Christ, the Church Fathers first (Gordon 1989) and the medieval scholastics later, developed more specific concepts of economic ethics – such as the ethical obligation to work, the right and limits to private property, the prohibition of usury, the demand for aid to the poor, justice in business and commercial practices – which would be the later basis of the very important development of the economic ethics of the so-called Second Scholasticism in the early days of mercantilist capitalism of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries (Chafuen 2003; Alves and Moreira 2013; Melé and Fontrodona 2017). In any case, these high doctrines do not seem to have been enough to moderate in practice the unbridled economic ambition and exploitation of people, both in Europe and in its colonies throughout the world, by Christian civilization, especially since the beginning of the Modern age. Likewise, a central chapter in the history of Christian economic ethics is undoubtedly that of the Reformation. Although both Luther and Calvin maintained relative continuity with several of the principles of Christian economic ethics of previous centuries (such as the condemnation of excessive profits and luxuries or the need to help the poor), they introduced important changes that will powerfully influence the capitalist world. Luther will incorporate the idea of professional ​​ work as a vocation of equal value to other vocations within society and the Church. Calvin, for his part, will vindicate the collection of interest, the payment of wages and credit as activities compatible with Christian economic ethics (Finn 2013, 359–404; Eaton 2013). Although the positive contribution of the Reform to the emergence of modern capitalism is undeniable, it is also necessary to point out -as Max Weber famously didthe new problems it caused. In fact, the transposition to the economic field of some Protestant religious ideas (such as the need to show visible signs of predestination to individual salvation) often became the basis for justifying a type of economic conduct exclusively focused on the individual’s own personal success and indifferent to the fate of others, especially the poor and the “failures” of the system. In times when the social injustices of the first liberal industrial and commercial capitalism raged and when the materialism of Marxist ideology was emerging with violence, Christian economic ethics was updated by the various theoretical and practical currents of the so-called Christian social thought of Catholic roots developed from the nineteenth century to the present. Within this last historical period, the role played by the teaching of encyclicals and other papal documents dedicated to socio-economic issues has been key (PCJP 2004; Finn 2013). In them, the general ethical principles of previous centuries are particularized or systematized in more specific ethical-social principles -such as those of the common good, the universal destination of goods, subsidiarity, the dignity of work, solidarity and social justice, among others. In addition, these teachings seek to illuminate and in many cases – following the prophetic tradition of the Bible – denounce in a strongly critical tone, the great problems and social contradictions of contemporary economic systems -such as poverty, inequality, unemployment, exclusion, underdevelopment, market excesses, bad business management and environmental deterioration (Melé

228

C. Hoevel

and Fontrodona 2017). In any case, the social doctrine of the Popes was not always – nor is it even today – really accepted and put into practice, not even in the Catholic Church itself. In fact, many Christians Catholics- including many prelates – declaim it formally but do not incarnate it in their economic life, while many openly consider it an abstract doctrine inapplicable to concrete reality. For the rest, among the contemporary Anglican, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, and other vast numbers of newer churches, among which several evangelical churches stand out, there is also a multiple variety of social and ethical teachings regarding to the economy and business in which affinities with each other and with Catholic economic ethics can be recognized in a background of a relatively common unity (Finn 2013). However, it must also be said that, especially in evangelicalism, a fideistic “prosperity gospel” is often encouraged that instrumentalizes religion as a pure means to achieve economic profits completely separated from a rational ethical analysis. The same could be said of the Orthodox churches which, following their rich theological tradition, have been developing an important ethical doctrine on social and economic issues (Payne 2013; Nicolaides 2020) but at the same time they are in practice excessively dependent on the interests of political and economic power. In recent centuries, not only the Church authorities, but also many individual Christian social thinkers and economists, based on diverse epistemological and socio-political positions, have gone beyond the teaching of general principles, seeking to critically analyze the relationships between Christian economic ethics and economic theory. Although there is a minority of authors who maintain either their complete compatibility or incompatibility, many thinkers – such as Antonio Rosmini (1994) and Luigi Taparelli D’Azeglio (1949) in the nineteenth century or François Perroux (1967) and Wilhelm Röpke (2017) in the twentieth century – have made attempts to find superior syntheses. The central question in all of them is almost always the way to make compatible the principle of individual self-interest or utility from classical and neoclassical economic theories, with the principles of the person, justice, the common good and the commandment of love, proper of Christian ethics (Nass 2020). In this sense, in the last decades, there are abundant works by Christian authors, often inspired by research on experimental economics, on topics such as the role of gift and reciprocity in market relations, ethical consumer behavior, the economy of happiness, corporate social responsibility, financial ethics or the new forms of social and environmental justice in the context of globalization (Novak 1996; Bruni 2008; Koslowski 2011; Zamagni and Bruni 2013; Hoevel 2013; Crespo 2017; Finn 2019).

12.7 Some Specific Christian Relational Practices in the Economic and Business Field Certainly, the relations between the doctrines and practices of the Christian Churches with capitalism have not always been fluid or exempt from inconsistencies. In fact, at the same time that, for example, the Catholic Church took centuries

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

229

to accept the logic of modern capitalism, it also tolerated or even endorsed in fact, forms of economic exploitation that were in principle incompatible with its own doctrines. On the other hand, Christianity offers capitalism, as we have already said, not only the theoretical knowledge of universal ethical-economic principles but also the existential and relational dimension that gives the economic agents the strength to live them and embody them in their concrete activities. Certainly, Christian relational and experiential practices in the realm of the modern capitalist economy and enterprise have been much less developed than its ethical principles and doctrines. It is still a relatively virgin field, in an experimental state and little explored. On the other hand, the idea of ​​bringing these practices to the firm has been and is still resisted by those who consider it a source of potential problems, such as the imposition of a certain confessional belief, the manipulation of the conscience of the employees or the instrumentalization of religion for economic purposes (Case and Gosling 2010). In this sense, to avoid this risk, Christianinspired business organizations today generally seek to clearly make their objectives explicit, promoting the ethical and religious appeal of their mission in a climate of freedom, solidarity and service (Mabey et al. 2017). If we explore the origins of Christianity, we can see how the relational and existential dimension of faith -that is, the union of believers with Christ and between believers among themselves- had immediate practical consequences in their economic organization. In fact, one of the practices described in the book of the Acts of the Apostles is the way in which the first believers of different social classes grouped themselves in communities, putting their goods in common, although this was probably a provisional measure. Within the current literature on Christian spirituality in the firm there are, on the other hand, different attempts to renew practices from the long and rich history of the various religious orders and Christian spiritualities. For example, some recent investigations, carried out in monasteries that still live under the rule of Saint Benedict, founder of western monastic spirituality, seek to show the possibilities of current application of certain aspects of this spirituality, which for the first time combined manual work and the contemplative prayer life, in modern organizations and companies (Keplinger et  al. 2015). There are also attempts to apply the practices of Franciscan fraternity (Couturier 2007), whose role was key in the medieval emergence of both the market economy and bank credit (Monte di Pietà), in current companies with social purposes or in systems of microcredit for the poor (Todeschini 2009). Other initiatives try to apply Jesuit spirituality, especially that contained in the Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius of Loyola, to educate the capacities of discernment of the ultimate purpose of one’s own activity, perception and empathy towards others and the vocation of service of the current business manager (Lozano 2017). However, as in any human organization, the economic practices of the ancient religious orders also had serious flaws. The feudal confinement of the Benedictines, the pauperistic utopianism of the Franciscans, and the instrumental and often Machiavellian rationality of the Jesuits, too focused on the search for power, are also realities that overshadow the good ethical influence of these great orders that it is necessary to recognize.

230

C. Hoevel

Moreover, among contemporary non-Catholic Christian denominations, there is an important variety of practical and community initiatives that seek to influence capitalism at both the social and corporate levels. On the one hand, in a spirit very close to the Catholic Church, many of these Churches have been developing a strong community work to accompany groups and individuals in regions plagued by underdevelopment and extreme poverty (World Alliance of Reformed Churches 2004). In addition, especially in the field of some evangelical religious communities, practices inspired by the the already mentioned prosperity gospel are developed. These offer members of the community, both in the West and in the Far East, spiritual support and even technical advice on accounting, administrative or financial matters, combining, in a way that may be ethically and theologically questionable, the search for religious salvation with economic or business success (Arrunada 2010; Huang and Lu 2017; Koning and Njoto-Feillard 2017; Koehrsen 2018; Smith Bradley 2020). Finally, in the Catholic sphere, new practices have been developed for more than a century for an ethical change in the company and in the economy. During the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, the ecclesial and union movement of the so-called social Catholicism with key reformist figures such as Bishop Wilhelm Von Ketteler and the Dominican economist Louis-Joseph Lebret stand out. In the second half of the twentieth century, the initiatives of the various charisms of lay movements were especially important. Among them are those developed by Opus dei (founded by the Spanish priest José María Escrivá de Balaguer), based on the idea of excellence ​​ in work and in the business profession as ways to fulfill the vocation to holiness (Piątkowski 2007), an approach that they seek to transmit in a practical way in their various managerial training centers in different countries. Another example is that of the so-called Economy of Communion (Bruni 2002) developed by the Focolare movement (founded by the Italian teacher and consecrated laywoman Chiara Lubich). Inspired by Franciscan spirituality, this approach has been applied in a practical way in more than 700 companies in different countries, organized on the basis of the logic of reciprocity and charitable service to all stakeholders and on a common financial fund destined to the triple objective of the sustainability of the company, helping the poor and education. Finally, the Communion and Liberation movement (founded by the Italian priest Luigi Giussani 2008), focused on the expansion of consciousness and the freedom of the self through the encounter with Christ, developed in the so-called schools of community that bring together all its members, seeks a general change in the orientation of personal life and, from this, indirectly achieves a work and professional ethic expressed in multiple business and educational endeavors carried out by members of this movement around the world. Certainly, as we have been pointing out about other previous Christian experiences, also these new ecclesial movements, of great influence in the economic field, suffered in the past and still suffer today from serious defects, distortions and even, in many cases, from serious corruption scandals, which cloud their original mission and goals. However, I believe that, from many other hundreds of positive cases, it is

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

231

possible to affirm that, in general, they also demonstrate that an intense degree of adherence to the Christian faith on the part of people operating in the capitalist economy seems to lead to higher levels of ethical awareness and social responsibility (Delbecq 1999; Conroy and Emerson 2004; Werner 2008).

12.8 Conclusion The purpose of this article was to show the contribution of Christianity, both from a theoretical and a practical point of view, to the gradual achievement of conscious capitalism. In the first place, I have argued how, while at the macro level institutional structures that offer a legal and political framework are very necessary to improve capitalism, they are by no means sufficient: a change in behavior that arises from the ethical conscience of people is also essential. On the other hand, I have also shown how in the economic field, much research in recent decades indicates that people’s behavior is not always limited to profit maximization or mere legal compliance, as conventional economic models usually describe: it is often open to the moral and spiritual dimensions. In the specifically business sphere, the study of these dimensions is key if one seeks to encourage conscious capitalism. To go in this direction, entrepreneurs and managers are needed who, in addition to pursuing profitability, seek to improve the ethical quality of their business activity and a much more comprehensive and inclusive development of people both inside and outside the organization. This change in business leadership must be accompanied by a broader change that includes all people in their different roles as economic agents: consumers, suppliers, financial investors, public officials in charge of public policies. In addition, I have also made reference to numerous studies that show the influence of the religious dimension on ethical conduct in general and in the economic field in particular. However, I have also tried to clarify that not any type of religiosity is suitable to raise the ethical level of consciousness. It must be a kind of religiosity that, at the same time that it existentially links the person to a transcendent Meaning or Being, it also makes the human being capable of rationally recognizing a set of universal ethical values, avoiding unilateral and irrational behavior. In this sense, I have tried to demonstrate the way in which, in the general context of the enormous variety of religions and the most specific realm of monotheistic religions, Christianity presents in my opinion these two characteristics of ethical universality and personal or existential relationality, essential for a positive influence of religion on the ethical conduct of people in the economy. Indeed, the Gospel, which promises such a great transformation of the human being at the deepest level of his or her personal dimension, is based both on an existential relationship with Christ through faith and love, and on a recognition of a set of universal ethical values that ​​ can be understood through reason. Therefore, many researchers argue that Christian spirituality -both through its relational and community dimension as well as through the

232

C. Hoevel

principles of its long and rich ethical tradition- can contribute to improving the ethical orientation of many people even in the difficult context of current capitalism (McKenna 2013; Mabey et al. 2017). In the specific case of Christian inspired managers, many studies find that they become capable of expanding their consciousness to the point of conceiving their task far beyond maximizing profits for owners or shareholders. In light of the mandate of service to others that their faith transmits to them, they conceive profits as a control criterion and not as the ultimate purpose of the company which, according to Christian business ethics, is actually to create good products or offer good services. (PCJP 2012) Illuminated by the biblical and evangelical sense of work, many executives also discover that their job can be an intrinsically interesting activity, which allows them to learn and find a purpose, a sense of connection with things and a bond of union and affection with others. Likewise, imbued by a sense of the common good, social justice and care towards Creation, many managers also understand that their obligation is to judge wisely and treat fairly not only shareholders, but also all other stakeholders -customers, employees, suppliers- of the company without forgetting the social and natural environment (Abela 2014; Alford and Naughton 2001). Certainly, we have also pointed out that the Christianly inspired economic life does not imply the absence of errors, distortions, corruption and other serious downfalls. However, even when problems, dilemmas, conflicts and falls do not disappear, the experience of faith seems to give these managers the possibility to raise their gaze, correct deviations, heal wounds and repair offenses. Ultimately, their Christian experience makes them more capable of living a working life, always imperfect and incomplete, but progressively more integrated with the other dimensions of life. According to the Italian economist Luigino Bruni (2012), much of the problem of current capitalism is due to an immune device by which the managerial elites in charge of companies and many sectors of society tend to close themselves around the vicious circle of profit maximization, a more or less hedonistic well-being and empty consumerism. This is accentuated by the diffusion of a short-term and selfish mentality spread by media and by economic and managerial theories whose central strategy seems to be only to make more money in the midst of an ultra-competitive economy. In order to compensate for these reductionist conceptions and attitudes, trends oriented by the concepts of corporate and consumer social responsibility, compliance or sustainability have developed in recent decades. However, in many cases, these ended up being rather pragmatic notions reduced to mere instruments of corporate strategies aimed at risk control and compliance with legal and regulatory standards, in order to achieve profit maximization. In this sense, Christianity, which can gradually produce a real and profound change of mentality in many people and potentially generate more humane ways of doing business, seems to acquire a new and unexpected relevance by effectively contributing to the improvement of the ethical level of capitalism.

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

233

References Abela, A.V. 2014. A Catechism for Business: Tough Ethical Questions and Insights from Catholic Teaching. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press. Acemoglu, D., and J.A. Robinson. 2019. The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty. New York: Penguin Press. Adams, T. 2008. Impact of Prayer on the Relationship Between Supervisory Support and Employee’s Perception of Workplace Equity. Emerging Leadership Journeys 1 (2): 3–13. Akerlof, G. 2000. Economics and Identity. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115 (3): 715–753. Alford, H., and M. Naughton. 2001. Managing as if Faith Mattered. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. Alves, A.A., and J.M. Moreira. 2013. Business Ethics in the School of Salamanca. In Handbook of the Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics, ed. C.  Lüetge, 207–225. Heidelberg: Springer. Angelidis, J., and N. Ibrahim. 2004. An exploratory Study of the Impact of Degree of Religiousness Upon an Individual’s Corporate Social Responsiveness Orientation. Journal of Business Ethics 51: 119–128. Arrunada, B. 2010. Protestants and Catholics: Similar Work Ethic, Different Social Ethics. Economic Journal 120: 890–918. Beck, R., and A. McDonald. 2004. Attachment to God: The Attachment to God Inventory, Tests of Working Model Correspondence, and an Exploration of Faith Group Differences. Journal of Psychology and Theology 32 (2): 92–103. Becker, G., and G.  Stigler. 1977. De gustibus non est dispuntandum. The American Economic review 67 (2): 76–90. Behrens, F., and M.E. Kret. 2019. The Interplay Between Face-to-Face Contact and Feedback on Cooperation During Real-Life Interactions. J Nonverbal Behav 43: 513–528. Benedict XVI. 2005. Deus Caritas Est. Encyclical Letter. http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-­ xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-­xvi_enc_20051225_deus-­caritas-­est.html. Accesed on 2 May 2021. Brammer, S., G.  Williams, and J.  Zinkin. 2007. Religion and Attitudes to Corporate Social Responsibility in a Large Cross-Country Sample. Journal of Business Ethics 71: 229–243. Bruni, L. 2012. The Wound and the Blessing: Economics, Relationships, and Happiness. New York: New City Press. ———. 2008. Reciprocity, Altruism, and the Civil Society. In Praise of Heterogeneity. London: Routledge. ———., ed. 2002. The Economy of Communion. Toward a Multi-Dimensional Economic Culture. New York: New City Press. Calkins, M.S.J. 2000. Recovering Religion’s Prophetic Voice for Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 23: 339–352. Case, P., and J. Gosling. 2010. The Spiritual Organization: Critical Reflections on the Instrumentality of Workplace Spirituality. Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion 7 (4): 257–282. (CCC) Catechism of the Catholic Church. 1983. Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Città del Vaticano. https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM Accessed on 8 Mar 2021. Chafuen, A. 2003. Faith and Liberty: The Economic Thought of the Late Scholastics. Maryland: Lanham. Chan-Serafin, S., A.P.  Brief, and J.M.  George. 2013. How Does Religion Matter and Why? Religion and the Organizational Sciences. Organization Science 24 (5): 1585–1600. Chau, L.L., R.C. Johnson, J.K. Bowers, T.J. Darvill, and G.P. Danko. 1990. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religiosity as Related to Conscience, Adjustment, and Altruism. Personality and Individual Differences 11 (4): 397–400. Chen, K., W. Guo, Y. Kang, and Q. Wan. 2020. Does Religion Improve Corporate Environmental Responsibility? Evidence from China. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 28 (2): 808–818.

234

C. Hoevel

Clark, J.W., and L.E. Dawson. 1996. Personal Religiousness and Ethical Judgments: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics 15 (3): 359–372. Conroy, S.J., and T.L.N. Emerson. 2004. Business Ethics and Religion: Religiosity as a Predictor of Ethical Awareness Among Students. Journal of Business Ethics 50 (4): 383–396. Couturier, David. 2007. Fraternal Economy. A Pastoral Psychology of Franciscan Economics. South Bend: Cloverdale Book. Crespo, Ricardo. 2017. Economics and Other Disciplines: Assessing New Economic Currents. New York: Taylor and Francis. Crespo, R.F. 2007. ‘Practical Comparability’ and Ends in Economics. Journal of Economic Methodology 14 (3): 371–393. Davies, H. 2012. Regulatory Responses to the Financial Crisis: An Interim Assessment. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 9 (3): 206–216. Delbecq, A.L. 1999. Christian Spirituality and Contemporary Business Leadership. Journal of Organizational Change Management 12 (4): 345–354. DiIulio, J., Jr. 2009. More Religion, Less Crime? Science, Felonies, and the Three Faith Factors. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 5 (1): 115–133. Dollahite, D.C., A.J. Hawkins, and M.R. Parr. 2012. “Something More”: The Meaning of Marriage for Religious Couples in America. Marriage and Family Review 48: 339–362. Dunn, S.L., and J.D. Jensen. 2019. Hinduism and Hindu Business Practices. International Journal of Business Administration 10 (1): 33–48. Eaton, D. 2013. The Economists of the Reformation: An Overview of Reformation Teaching Concerning Work, Wealth, and Interest. SAGE Open 3 (3): 1–9. Easterlin, R.A. 1974. Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? In Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, ed. P.A. David and M.W. Reder. New York: Academic Press, Inc. Epstein, E.M. 2002. Religion and Business. The Critical Role of Religious Traditions in Management Education. Journal of Business Ethics 38: 91–96. Fathallah, R., Y.  Sidani, and S.  Khalil. 2020. How Religion Shapes Family Business Ethical Behaviors: An Institutional Logics Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 163: 647–659. Falk, A., and U. Fischbacher. 2006. A Theory of Reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior 54 (2): 293–315. Fernando, M., and R.  Chowdhury. 2010. The Relationship Between Spiritual Wellbeing and Ethical Orientations in Decision Making: An Empirical Study with Business Executives in Australia. Journal of Business Ethics 95 (2): 211–225. Finn, D.K. 2019. Consumer Ethics in a Global Economy. Washigton, DC: Georgetown University Press. ———. 2013. Christian Economic Ethics. History and Implications. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Francis, P. 2015. Praised Be: On the Care of Our Common Home. Encyclical Letter Laudato si’ of the Holy Father Francis. http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/ papa-­francesco_20150524_enciclica-­laudato-­si.html. Accessed on 30 June 2020. Frank, R. 2000. Luxury Fever: Money and Happiness in an Era of Excess. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Frey, B. 1997. Not Just for the Money: An Economic Theory of Personal Motivation. London: Edward Elgar. Gaudium et Spes. 1965. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes, Second Vatican Council. https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-­ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-­et-­spes_en.html. Accesed on 7 Apr 2021. Geppert, C., M.P.  Bogenschutz, and W.R.  Miller. 2007. Development of a Bibliography on Religion, Spirituality and Addictions. Drug and Alcohol Review 26 (4): 389–395. Giacalone, R.A., and C.L. Jurkiewicz. 2003. Right from Wrong: The Influence of Spirituality on Perceptions of Unethical Business Activities. Journal of Business Ethics 46 (1): 85–97. Gillian, R. 1999. Islamic Ethics and the Implications for Business. Journal of Business Ethics 18 (4): 345–358.

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

235

Giussani, L. 2008. El valor del trabajo. In El yo, el poder, las obras, 48–88. Madrid: Encuentro. Gordon, B. 1989. The Economic Problem in Biblical and Patristic Thought. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Graafland, J., M. Kaptein, and C. Mazereeuw-van der Duijn Schouten. 2007. Conceptions of God, Normative Convictions, and Socially Responsible Business Conduct: An Explorative Study Among Executives. Business and Society 46 (3): 331–368. Granqvist, P. 2020. Attachment in Religion and Spirituality: A Wider View. New York: Guilford Publications. Gui, B., and R. Sugden, eds. 2005. Economics and Social Interaction: Accounting for Interpersonal Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Haskel, J., and S. Westlake. 2017. Capitalism Without Capital: The Rise of the Intangible Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Henley, A. 2017. Does Religion Influence Entrepreneurial Behavior? International Small Business Journal 35: 597–617. Heschel, A.J. 1976. God in Search of Man: A Philosophy of Judaism. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Hoevel, C. 2013. The Economy of Recognition. Person, Market, and Society in Antonio Rosmini. Dordrecht: Springer. Huang, C.-C., and L.-C.  Lu. 2017. Examining the Roles of Collectivism, Attitude Toward Business, and Religious Beliefs on Consumer Ethics in China. Journal of Business Ethics 146 (3): 505–514. Kaletsky, A. 2010. Capitalism 4.0: The Birth of a New Economy in the Aftermath of Crisis. London: Bloomsbury. Kara, A., J.I. Rojas-Méndez, and M. Turan. 2016. Ethical Evaluations of Business Students in an Emerging Market: Effects of Ethical Sensitivity, Cultural Values, Personality, and Religiosity. Journal of Academic Ethics 14 (4): 297–325. Keplinger, K., B. Feldbauer-Durstmüller, S. Sandberger, and M. Neulinger. 2015. Entrepreneurial Activities of Benedictine Monasteries: A Special Form of Family Business? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing 8 (4): 317–333. Koehrsen, J. 2018. The Economy of Prosperity Gospel: Hybrid or Distinctive Social Worlds? In Religion in Contexts: Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, ed. A. Schnabel, M. Reddig, and H. Winkel, 159–172. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Koning, J., and G. Njoto-Feillard. 2017. Introduction: New Religiosities, Modern Capitalism, and Moral Complexities in Southeast Asia. In New Religiosities, Modern Capitalism, and Moral Complexities in Southeast Asia, ed. J. Koning and G. Njoto-Feillard, 1–15. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan. Koslowski, P. 2011. The Ethics of Banking. Conclusions from the Financial Crisis. Dordrecht: Springer. Kurpis, L.V., M.S. Beqiri, and J.G. Helgeson. 2008. The Effects of Commitment to Moral Self-­ Improvement and Religiosity on Ethics of Business Students. Journal of Business Ethics 80 (3): 447–463. Layard, R. 2005. Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. London: Penguin Books. Longenecker, J.G., J.A.  McKinney, and C.W.  Moore. 2004. Religious Intensity, Evangelical Christianity, and Business Ethics: An Empirical Study. Journal of Business Ethics 55: 373–386. Low, K.C.P. 2011. Confucianism versus Taoism. Conflict Resolution and Negotiation Journal 4: 111–127. Lozano, Josep M. 2017. Leadership: The Being Component. Can the Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius Contribute to the Debate on Business Education? Journal of Business Ethics 145 (4): 795–809. Mabey, C., M. Conroy, K. Blakeley, and S. de Marco. 2017. Having Burned the Straw Man of Christian Spiritual Leadership, what can We Learn from Jesus About Leading Ethically? Journal of Business Ethics 145: 757–769. Mackey, J., and R, Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press.

236

C. Hoevel

McKenna, D.L. 2013. Christ-Centered Leadership: The Incarnational Difference. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books. Melé, D., and J.  Fontrodona. 2017. Christian Ethics and Spirituality in Leading Business Organizations: Editorial Introduction. Journal of Business Ethics 145: 671–679. Milanovic, B. 2020. Capitalism, Alone: The Future of the System That Rules the World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Nass, E. 2020. Behavioral Economical Ethics: The Catholic Contribution to a New Chapter in Economic Ethics. Catholic Social Science Review 25: 181–196. Nicolaides, A. 2020. Ethics and the dignity of work: An Orthodox Christian perspective. Pharos Journal of Theology 101. https://www.pharosjot.com. Accessed on 5 May 2021. Novak, M. 1996. Business as a Calling. New York: Free Press. Park, C.L., and J.M., Slattery. 2013. Religion, spirituality, and mental health. Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality, eds. Paloutzian, R.F., and C.L., Park, 540–559. New York: The Guilford Press. Pava, M.L. 2003. Searching for Spirituality in All the Wrong Places. Journal of Business Ethics 48: 393–400. Payne, D. 2013. Eastern Orthodoxy’s Theology of Economics. In The Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics, ed. P. Oslington, 197–205. Oxford: Oxford University Press. PCJP (Pontificium Consilium Justice and Peace). 2004. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Available at: http://www.vatican. va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_ 20060526_compendio-­dott-­soc_en.html. ———. 2012. Vocation of the Business Leader. A Reflection. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Available at: http://www.iustitiaetpax.va/content/giustiziaepace/en/archivio/pubblicazioni/ vocation-­of-­the-­business-­leader–a-­reflection-­.html. Perroux, F. 1967. Vers l'économie de tout l'homme et de tous les hommes. Paris: CERAS. Piątkowski, P. 2007. The Spiritual Status of Work in Opus Dei. Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion 4 (4): 418–431. Roepke, W. 2017. The Moral Foundations of Civil Society. New York: Routledge. Rosmini, A. 1994. The Philosophy of Politics, vol. 2: Society and its Purpose. Denis Cleary and Terence Watson, Trans. Durham: Rosmini House. Scitovsky, T. 1992. The Joyless Economy. The Psychology of Human Satisfaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shariff, A.F. 2015. Does Religion Increase Moral Behavior? Current Opinion in Psychology 6: 108–113. Sontheimer, K. 2006. Behavioural Versus Neoclassical Economics: Paradigm Shift or Generalization? In Handbook of Contemporary Behavioural Economics: Foundations and Developments, ed. M. Altman, 237–256. New York: M. E. Sharpe. Smith, Bradley C. 2020. Baptizing Business: Evangelical Executives and the Sacred Pursuit of Profit. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Taparelli D’Azeglio, L. 1949. Saggio teoretico di diritto naturale appoggiato sul fatto, ristampa della quarta edizione corretta e accresciuta. Roma: Civiltà Cattolica. Todeschini, G. 2009. Franciscan Wealth: From Voluntary Poverty to Market Society. D. Melucci. St Bonaventure, trans. New York: Franciscan Institute. van der Mazereeuw, Duijn, C. Schouten, J. Graafland, and M. Kaptein. 2014. Religiosity, CSR Attitudes, and CSR Behavior: An Empirical Study of Executives’ Religiosity and CSR. Journal of Business Ethics 123: 437–459. Werner, A. 2008. The Influence of Christian Identity on SME Owner-Managers’ Conceptualisations of Business Practice. Journal of Business Ethics 82: 449–462. World Alliance of Reformed Churches. 2004. The Accra Confession: Covenanting for Justice in the Economy and the Earth. http://wcrc.ch/accra. Assessed on 14 Mar 2021. Zamagni, S., and L. Bruni. 2013. Handbook on the Economics of Philanthropy, Reciprocity and Social Enterprise. Cheltenham: Elgar.

12  The Christian Contribution to Conscious Capitalism

237

Carlos Hoevel is Professor of History of Economic and Political Thought, Economic Ethics and Philosophy of Economics at the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina (Argentina). Director of the Center of Studies in Economy and Culture and of the Journal Cultura Económica. He has been Fulbright, Archibald Fund, Templeton Foundation and University of Chicago Fellow, and visiting Professor in various Universities and research centers. In 2008, he received the Novak Award in Economics, Culture and Religion. His latest book is: The Economy of Recognition. Person, Market and Society in Antonio Rosmini (Springer, 2013).  

Chapter 13

Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy Maria Krambia-Kapardis

13.1 Introduction: A Brief Outline of Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism Theology Professor Fotiou (2020) points out to his readers in his book ‘Engravings for the Modern World’ that “in order for one to comprehend the anthropological type of each epoch one ought to comprehend the prevailing ideology” (p.9). The same author (Fotiou) in his prologue to his 2018 book “Greed and the Thoughtless Rich” reminds us that the main parameters of the prevailing ideology today are “the deconstruction of the social, having made greed morally acceptable, aiming for our own individual bliss, being indifferent to our fellow human beings, the commercialization of everything, and the ecological decay”. Capitalism is both an economic and a political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the State. As Kounnoushis (2018) points out, since it first emerged, the capitalist economy is based on the private ownership of the means of production and the motive for its development has been the maximization of profit (p. 45). Taking the example of the United States as the epitome of a capitalist country today, like many other countries, it has an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are owned by individuals or private companies and the operations are funded by profits in a relatively competitive environment through the investment of capital to produce profits. In a country with such an economic system wealth is concentrated in the hands of a small minority of individuals and companies (Arkadas 2018). This results in economic inequality and, historically, increased government action and control have evolved to ameliorate the negative impact of the inequality. Today, of course, contemporary capitalism goes beyond the idea of capital and private property M. Krambia-Kapardis (*) School of Management and Economics, Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_13

239

240

M. Krambia-Kapardis

because we live in a market economy and for many authors, in fact, a market system. Some Orthodox theologians (see: Bishop Vasileios, 2013) consider the capitalist economic system to have failed because: (a) it encourages greed, (b) it results in income inequality which of itself is not unethical but becomes morally comprehensible when it is achieved at the expense of others, and (c) society ends up being ruled by capital (pp. 5–7). The antithesis of capitalism is communism, an economic ideology developed by Karl Marx. Communism is an economic ideology that advocates for a classless society in which all property and wealth is communally owned, instead of by individual persons (Marx and Engels 1848). In fact, Marx believed that religion is the opium of the people and religion heals the people when they are in need (Konstantinou and Lianti 2013). A few countries that are self-proclaimed communist (e.g., China, Cuba, Vietnam) have some aspects of socialism. In the economic system broadly termed ‘socialism’, resources are also centrally planned and allocated by taking the needs of people, both individual needs and such greater social needs as transportation, education, health care, and preservation of natural resources into account. In addition, in a socialist country the government emphasizes the importance of taking good care of those who cannot work such as the elderly, children and their caretakers. While incorporating many aspects of a capitalistic economy, the five Nordic countries—Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland— are democracies with strongly socialist systems. Thus, the State, on behalf of the people, owns a large percentage of the economy, spends a large portion on education, housing, and public welfare. We can distinguish eight types of socialism, namely: democratic, revolutionary, libertarian, market, green, Christian, utopian and Fabián. Christian teachings of brotherhood are the same values expressed by socialism.1 However, discussion of the different types of socialism is beyond the scope of the present chapter. Before attention turns to Orthodoxy, let us focus briefly on principles and concepts of Christianity as a backdrop to Orthodoxy.

13.2 Principles and Concepts of Christianity Concerning principles of Christianity, it is accepted that in one’s struggle to develop Christlike character, one’s actions need to reflect such Christian virtues as humility, faith, charity, courage, self-government, virtue, industry, and wisdom. According to Dunnington (2019), in his book Humility, Pride and Christian Virtue Theory, Christian humility is as practised by the desert fathers and is totally unconcerned with the self. The life, teaching and ministry of Jesus Christ embody what it means to live in relationship with God, His example and teaching emphasise loving one’s neighbour, particularly the weak and vulnerable, as part of loving  Dialectical Marxism: The Writings of Bertell Ollman. “Socialism Is Practical Christianity.” [Accessed Jan. 18, 2020]. 1

13  Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy

241

God. In other words, this encompasses a compassionate environment with a compassionate and empathic leader- the very environment conscious capitalism is based on (see below). Turning next to concepts of Christianity, fundamental to Christian belief is the existence of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, i.e. the Holy Trinity concept, which was revealed to people through the life and work of Jesus Christ himself. According to Fotiou (2014, p. 17), the tripartite nature of God both negates every egocentricity, every consideration of the primacy of one’s self over others as well as excludes any notion of only loving a number of people because it establishes as axioms three features of genuine inter-personal relationships- that every individual is unique (διαφορά), equality (i.e. no one is superior to anyone) and unity (i.e. that nobody keeps anything as belonging only to him/herself but all is everybody’s property) (p. 18). As Fotiou reminds us, the revelation of Christ as the inseparable part of the Holy Trinity is the Christian gospel and people are invited to become part of this community (p. 19). Furthermore, Christians believe the universe and human life are God’s good creation and humans are made in the image of God. Incarnation means that Jesus is God in the flesh, and that, in Jesus, God came to live amongst humans. Humans, of course, tend to go their own way rather than keep their place in relation to their creator, popularly called ‘the Fall’. The idea that humans are ‘fallen’ and in need of rescue, salvation, points to the root cause of many problems for humanity. ‘Gospel’ means ‘good news’ and Christians believe Jesus’ incarnation is ‘good news’ for all people. In the New Testament Jesus is the answer, the Messiah and Saviour, who repairs the effects of sin and the Fall and offer a way for humans to be at one with God again. Jesus’ death and resurrection open the way towards God. Christians believe that through Jesus, sin is dealt with, forgiveness offered, and the relationship between God and humans is restored. The lack of egocentricity and caring for others is also a basic feature of conscious capitalism. To understand the said relationship between God and people, let us briefly also consider the Eucharist and the clergy as represented by the Bishop. In his seven short letters which St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, wrote in about 197 A.D as he travelled to Rome to be martyred, the focus is on the Bishop and Eucharist. According to St Ignatius, “The bishop in each Church presides in place of God” (Ware 1997, p.13) and ‘it is the bishop’s primary and distinctive task to celebrate the Eucharist’, “the medicine of immortality” (ibid, p.13). Thus, a Bishop is a conscious leader serving a higher purpose, two fundamental tenets of Conscious Capitalism.

13.3 Orthodoxy The Orthodoxy prides itself on having preserved the original apostolic faith, which was also expressed in the common Christian tradition of the first centuries. Thus, it conforms to the Christian faith as represented in the decrees of the early Church and as established by the first seven ecumenical councils between the years of 325

242

M. Krambia-Kapardis

and 787 A.D. (Fairchild 2019). Thus, the frequent citing in the present chapter of relevant material from both the New as well as the Old Testament illustrates that without any deviation, the traditions, and doctrines of the early Christian church established by the Apostles is still adhered in Orthodoxy and are very relevant in the twenty-first century. The term ‘Orthodoxy’ is used as synonymous with the Eastern Orthodox Church Beliefs. Writing about the Church in Orthodoxy, Voskou (2020) emphasizes that the Holy Eucharist does not just have a symbolic value as in some other denominations. With the Holy Communion one is part of the miracle taking place whereby one in fact takes in the Body and Blood of Christ, while, by divine intervention, the ingredients of bread and wine are not themselves altered (p.10). The same miracle occurs during the Orthodox Baptism in which one is imbued with the triadic God Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Drawing on Fairchild (2019), in contrast to the Western outlook that is guided more by a practical and legal mentality, the mindset in Orthodoxy is inclined towards philosophy, mysticism, and ideology. Concerning the basis system of beliefs: • “The Holy Scriptures (as interpreted and defined by church teaching in the first seven ecumenical councils) along with Holy Tradition are of equal value and importance. • Baptism is the initiator of the salvation experience and baptism is practiced by full immersion. • The Eucharist is the center of worship. Eastern Orthodox believe that during the Eucharist adherents partake mystically of Christ’s body and blood and through it receive his life and strength.” The theme running through the chapter is social justice, as illustrated by Jesus. In his book “Κοινωνική Δικαιοσύνη και Ορθόδοξη Θεολογία: Μία Προκήρυξη”/ “Social Justice and Orthodox Theology: A Proclamation”, Papathanasiou (2001), writes about charity, citing the words of St Gregorios of Nissi (fourth century A.D) who said, “what good is it if you create many poor by exploiting people and through charity you provide relief to one- if the many exploiters did not exist, there would not be many exploited either” (p. 23). For Papathanasiou, the early fathers of the Orthodox faith sought the causes of social injustice. In the fifth century, St. Akakios, Bishop of Amides, made available precious objects from churches (e.g., goblets, trays etc.) in order to raise money to save thousands of Persians taken hostages of war by the Byzantines. It is noteworthy that writing about spiritual values in orthodoxy today, Dr. Vasileios  (2009), Bishop of Constantia-Famagusta, informs his readers that the Orthodoxy retains unchanged the basic Christian values (p. 73) and, also, that the third Presynod Panorthodox Council in 1986 drafted a text which described “The contribution of the Orthodox Church to the prevailing of peace, justice, freedom, brotherhood and love between people and the end of racial and other forms of discrimination” (p.  70). At the same time, Ioannis Bekos (2018) emphasizes that the Christian tradition is opposing the notion of lending money and

13  Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy

243

charging interest, and also asserts that  Christian theology and the Church cannot remain apolitical. Recent publications continue to advocate earlier sculpture found in Orthodoxy about people’s behavior. These principles of being humble, caring, giving, having empathy and compassion, being resilient and having a higher purpose in life are principles that also characterize conscious capitalism. Interestingly, St. Gregorios the Theologist (who is considered one of the most prominent theologians after the Evangelist and Apostle John) claims that just like it is difficult to identify one beautiful flower from a garden full of beautiful flowers it is equally difficult to identify some virtues as more important than others. In his “Filoptohia” writings,2 he advocates that faith, hope and love are the milestones of all other virtues. The virtues he lists in ‘Filoptohia’3 are: gentleness, kindness, humility, contempt for money, generosity, munificence, patience, honesty, nemesis, caring and compassion and magnanimity. Finally, according to Mantzaridis (2017), Orthodoxy advocates communitarianism which is closer to collectivism and socialism. It is also based on solidarity whereas capitalism and communism tend to express an individual-centered ideology. Principles advocated by Mackay and Sisodia as conscious capitalism are principles the Byzantine business world was built on where there was no unemployment, the currency in use had stable value over six centuries, the wheat was sold the same price 960–1014 A.D., consumers’ rights were protected and left some profit to the traders but not too much so as to prevent them from accumulating too much wealth (Taxou 2020).

13.4 The Orthodox Church and Wealth Writing on the issue of church and wealth, Bekos (2018) states that the religion’s stance on wealth is generally negative and ranges from the one extreme of ‘owning nothing’ or ‘communal ownership’ to the other of ‘reserved acceptance’ which is being content with owning a little and giving to charity. Of course, Orthodoxy prohibits monks in monasteries and monks living on their own in the wilderness to own any material possessions or to get married. For Orthodoxy, to be rich is synonymous with being a sinner while the poor is a friend of God. Forgiveness of the rich is a very rare occurrence and charging interest on a loan, saving, or investing money is prohibited because wealth generally is a vain possession (Bekos 2018). Interestingly, wealth is regarded as a necessary evil because, through charity, is the antidote to poverty. Thus, excessive luxury is prohibited but one is forgiven for being wealthy if he/she gives to charity; in fact, charity is considered to be a moral  Filoptohia, https://orthodoxfathers.com/logos/philoptochia [Accessed 28 October 2020].  Interestingly enough the virtues outlined in Filoptohia by St Gregorios the Theologist do not deviate much from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. See Tredennick (2004) for a discussion on Nicomachean Ethics. 2 3

244

M. Krambia-Kapardis

obligation. Wealth separates people into the rich and the poor, it creates social inequality, facilitates the development of a free market economy, and segregate the people into the haves and the have-nots. In contrast to wealth, religion unites people, it binds them together. It should be noted in this context, however, that while monks and nuns own no property, their monasteries do and so does the institution of the Orthodox Church. Orthodox theologians have no problem with this apparent oxymoron as long as: (a) there is transparency in the management of the Church’s property and (b) it is used to improve the living conditions of the destitute and others in need of assistance in our midst. Bishop Vasileios (2013) analyses the following Christian principles and moral values that should underpin the economy: (a) everybody exists in a social context created by God and there is the socialization of human beings; and (b) people’s socialization mandates solidarity. He then goes on to consider some Gospel principles for the economy that ought to characterize the exchanges between people generally as well as between the rich and the poor, namely: • being free, • having mutual support between the rich and the poor, • the need to prioritize one’s values in life to have freedom and dignity (which comes about when people are content with little material possessions), • to have freedom and dignity at work and, • the wealthy ought to shoulder their responsibility towards the poor and all their fellow human beings by using their wealth wisely so as to maximize their chance of finding themselves on the right side of God when the day of Judgement comes (pp. 9–11). The Gospel principles listed are, in essence, no different from how one thinks about conscious capitalism in business and in accordance with its basic tenets considered below. Writing at a time of economic recession and the social crisis that accompanies it, Atmatzides (2013), a Thessaloniki University Theology Professor, stresses that the said crisis tests the solidarity among people which has been the basis for the European Union. He proceeds to discuss ‘logeia’4 which according to St Paul refers to the assistance given by Christians in other countries to their Christian brothers in Jerusalem, despite the fact that they themselves lived in poverty- setting an example of solidarity for Christians today and the Church to emulate by adhering to a theology of love that is inclusive of all human beings (p.35).

 From the Greek verb ‘logevo’ which means to collect money or material goods for charity.

4

13  Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy

245

13.5 The Concept of Conscious Capitalism (CC) Mackay and Sisodia (2014) advocate that conscious capitalism sees people as source not resource. They explain that while a resource is a coal you burn, and it’s gone the source is like the sun continually generating energy, light, and warmth. Thus, the same authors claim that a conscious business empowers its people, by enabling them to make decisions affecting their work, and give an example that the person sweeping the floor ought to be allowed to choose the broom (p. 240). They go on to advocate that “empowerment encourages creativity and innovation and accelerates the production of the organization” but “empowerment without accountability leads to broken promises” (p. 241). It could be argued that the notion of conscious capitalism follows in the wake of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and compassion in business and management. As stated by Porter and Kramer 2011, conscious capitalism goes beyond corporate social responsibility by placing societal needs and their challenges at the core of the company’s existence. The differences between the two are well outlined by Mackay and Sisodia (2014, p. 38) where they state that as far as CSR is concerned: • “shareholders must sacrifice for society, • it adds an ethical burden to business goals, • it is often grafted onto traditional business model, usually as a separate department or part of public relations, • sees limited overlap between business and society and between business and the planet, • is easy to meet as a charitable gesture, • assumes all good deeds are desirable, and • is compatible with traditional leadership” On the other hand, the same authors argue that Conscious Capitalism (CC): • • • • • •

“integrates the interests of all stakeholders, incorporates higher purpose and a caring culture, reconciles caring and profitability thorough higher synergies, assumes social responsibility is at the core of the business… requires genuine transformation through commitment to the four tenets, requires that good deeds also advance the company’s core purpose and create value for the whole system, and • requires conscious leadership”. More specifically, Mackey and Sisodia (2014, p.  32–33) advocate that conscious capitalism “(…) is a way of thinking about business that is more conscious of its higher purpose, its impacts on the world, and the relationships it has with its various constituencies and stakeholders”. The four inter-connected and mutually reinforcing tenets of CC are: 1 . higher purpose and core values; 2. stakeholder integration;

246

M. Krambia-Kapardis

3 . conscious leadership; and 4. conscious culture and management. For CC to be effectively manifested, the four tenets are the prerequisite elements of a philosophy that must be understood in its totality (p. 33). Thus, let us next consider CC in some detail. The emphasis is on less violence, less cruelty, more peace. The management of a business is conscious of the wellbeing of all their stakeholders, embraces their suppliers, cares about their employees and elevate the civic life of the business. Conscious capitalism is an emerging philosophy based on the belief that businesses can enhance corporate performance while simultaneously improving the quality of life for all stakeholders. The concept of conscious capitalism takes additional significance when we come to appreciate the brain science behind it, the biological importance of trust, social inclusion, stakeholder sharing and optimism (Pillary and Sisodia, 2011). Warning against disengagement and the motivation to impress, Ogunfowara and Bourdage (2014) remind us that low honesty and humility creates ethical disengagement and engages in motivation to impress. Similarly, Padilla et al. (2007) pointed out that destructive leaders, unlike constructive leaders, overestimate personal capabilities, and disregard the views of others. Thus, organizational toxicity, characterized by, for example, endemic pain at work, emotions that are not filtered, and the abundance of narcissistic behaviour, can be encapsulated in the toxic triangle put forward by Padilla et al. (2007, p. 180). The toxic triangle is made of destructive leaders requires susceptible followers and needs a conducive environment. They argue that destructive leaders are charismatic, narcissistic, practice an ideology of hate, have negative life themes and personalized power. The susceptible followers are either conformers (who have unmet needs, low core self-evaluations, low maturity) or colluders (ambitious and those with bad values). The conducive environment is characterised with instability, perceived threat, lack of checks and balances and ineffective institutions. The antithesis of a toxic work environment is a compassionate environment with compassionate and empathic leaders. This is the environment the conscious capitalism is based on. According to Holmes (2017), in order to cultivate compassion, what is needed is: to find commonalities with other people, don’t put emphasis on money, act on empathy, self-compassion, teach others, be mindful, high emotional intelligence is called for, and express gratitude. In this context, according to Frost (2003), the capacities a good leader must possess are: emotional sensitivity, emotional intelligence, pay attention to the surrounding emotional and interpersonal climate, recognize the impact of organizational decisions on people first, anticipate the factors and events that may adversely impact the organisation and its people in the future and take incremental steps to minimize that impact, make the hard decisions, such as choosing among the options that are in the best interests of people regardless of the financial outcomes or political implications. Academic literature (Dierendonck and Patterson 2015; Lenka and Tiwari 2016; Brown 2012, 2018) has unveiled the main characteristics and qualities leaders ought to possess:

13  Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy

247

• being ethical by having moral fibre and exercise ethical competence, • having qualities which reduce legal problems, • illustrating employment commitment/satisfaction and empowering employee ethical conduct, • communicating and supporting interpersonal dealings, • demonstrating commitment to the personal growth, safety, security, and quality of life of his/her staff, • showing kindness and having time to listen to the employees’ personal problems by revealing a human fallibility to one another, • showing vulnerability and the ability to admit to mistakes, inspire loyalty and cultivate authenticity, As already mentioned, these qualities are qualities exhibited in Orthodoxy, i.e. that one ought to be authentic, have empathy and compassion and be available and willing to help his/her fellow human beings regardless which race, colour or gender they belong to. To illustrate, Saint Gregory the Theologian in his writing on helping the poor advocated that compassion ought to be coming out of your soul as it is a great healing process for those in need (cited by Vasiliadou 2011). Similarly, in the Gospel, John 4:20, it is highlighted that you can’t say you love God without loving people. As noted by Mbousa (2011, p. 171) our salvation depends on how we treat others. On this, Fotiou (2009, p. 13) noted that in the Readings, it is asserted that by caring and loving others, one exists; knowing one’s self, means a person knows him/ herself and his/her negative actions and sins; thus he/she can then appreciate the behavior of others.

13.6 Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy The position of Orthodoxy vis-a-vis benign capitalism can be discerned in the New Testament (Acts 4:34–45), where we are told that “there were no needy persons among them. From time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the Apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need”. We see that in the actions of the Apostles, we encounter the concept of capitalism. If someone has wealth, this is not considered a bad thing, as long as it is used for a good purpose. For instance, it is not used for self-satisfaction, but to help fellow human beings. Along the same vein, in the New Testament, Matthew 19: 16–26, Parable of «The Rich and the Kingdom of God» (V.23), it is stated that “assuredly, I say to you it is hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of heaven”. Papathanasiou (2013) by citing versus from the New Testament (Jacobs 5:1–6) illustrates that the rich ought to fear the pain and brutality that will follow if they have not duly paid their workers and they in turn are starving, if they have lived their lives with enjoyment and waste and at the same time blamed those who were innocent. Thus, the man who has great wealth may think that being wealthy gives him more power and strength. In fact, the

248

M. Krambia-Kapardis

Orthodoxy asserts that if a man wants to enter the Kingdom of heaven, he has to sell all his possessions to help his fellow human beings. The philanthropy of Christianity is different from the philanthropy of other philosophies in the way that the Christian will help his fellow human out of love and not out of coercion. Similarly, is the Ananias and Sapphira (New Testament, Acts, 5:1–11, V3) instance where the couple had great wealth but gave only part of it away to their fellow humans and kept the biggest share for themselves. Apostle Peter realised this conspiracy and said “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.” (Acts 5:3–4, NIV). The couple soon after fell dead. How realistic is this though in the twenty-first century to give most of your wealth away is a question that is outside the context of this article. In essence however, the orthodoxy advocates that every Christian, must love his neighbour as himself and help, donate and give to charity for their soul to be saved. Concerning a ‘higher purpose’, in Genesis 2:15, we are told that “The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” One may interpret this that in today’s world, the employees wherever they work ought to feel confident that their leader will make sure that they are provided with healthy working conditions for them to work in. An example of the joy offered by the work can be found in the first book of the Old Testament, when God gave the command to the first humans in Paradise to take care of it. “Garden” in Old Testament means a whole environment, which a human can use it but not to destroy it. Examples of a conscious leader can be found in the Old Testament, Exodus 14: 1–31, “Crossing the Red Sea”. A leader must face all the threats that can have tragic consequences for business. Sometimes a leader may have to sacrifice some of his belongings to get it right. For instance, in Orthodoxy we observe, this situation in Moses’ attempt to escape with the Israelites from Egypt. They encounter many difficulties, but Moses as a true leader helps his fellow humans, with a spirit of self-­ sacrifice and prays to God that they cross the sea. Also, in the New Testament, John 11: 49–50, we are told that “you know nothing at all. Nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people and not that the whole nation should perish.” Jesus Christ with his self-sacrifice is a great example of a true leader, when he was captured by the Jewish soldiers, he protected his disciples with his surrender. In the end, he was crucified for God. Thus, a good leader, in terms of being a conscious leader, tries to resolve all the disagreements of the partners and employees with calmness, communication and love, so that everyone understands the importance of good cooperation. At the same time a good leader is one that does not look down upon the younger generation or the less experienced. Guidance on how best to go about human relationships is to be a conscious leader and can be found, for example, in Mark 10: 43–44, “whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all”. In other words, relationships are very important for the business reputation. The leaders ought to choose very carefully the people, with whom one

13  Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy

249

will work. On the other hand, a conscious leader should reciprocate the appropriate help, which is received from one’s relationships, to create a strong collaboration. In the New Testament (Corinthians 12: 12–14, v.12) we find unequivocal support for the basic premise in conscious capitalism in that a leader ought to take care of all the stakeholders- “Just as a body, through one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ.” Thus, it illustrates that whilst each stakeholder is different and has different needs all form part of the whole and they each contribute to the benefit of the business regardless of its size. Thus, leaders need to acknowledge the role of each stakeholder in a business, regardless whether one is a competitor, employee, supplier or local community member. In doing so each stakeholder will offer his full potential and all together to be a stable team. A leader, of course, exists in a management culture but a conscious leader functions effectively in a conscious management culture with certain essential characteristics that are stated in the Old Testament (Psalm 146:8), “The Lord gives sight to the blind, the Lord lifts up those who are bowed down, the Lord loves the righteous”. In other words, it is very important in a conscious culture and management to be resilient and self-healing. Leaders are called every day to try to improve themselves and overcome the pain and hardship experienced as God is there to help, as long as they demonstrate blamelessness, character, conscientiousness, decency, fairness, high-mindedness, incorruptibility, irreproachability, irreproachableness, justice, morality, nobility, reputability, respectability, right-mindedness, scrupulousness, virtue. This means healing from hardships, personal problems or even just a rough day. In the Bible, healing embraces the man, both spiritually and physically. It symbolizes, a new beginning and better moments to come. For Christians, each day is a new chance to start their journey to healing, an act of resilience. Jesus has taught us to be resilient through His behaviour when holding the cross and despite the pain (physically and mentally) He demonstrated that He was resilient up until His crucifixion. Similarly, Virgin Mary demonstrated Her resilience when seeing Her son being crucified and Jesus seeing His mother and His beloved disciple says, “Here is your son.” This is clearly demonstrating to us when we have difficulties, we need to keep on going. Along the same lines, in the New Testament-Matthew 11:28–30, says “come to me, all you who are weary and burdened and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for you souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” This illustrates that it is very important to show trust and appreciation to the people around us by showing empathy and compassion. In fact, a good manager is one that demonstrates to his employees that they are respected and appreciated, and his door is always open for them if they need help. In the Bible, a human being is not just the “other” but the icon of God. So, we must follow the example of the Lord, who calls us to rest our weary souls with Him and will grant us peace of mind, body, and soul, even in the hardest days. Such behaviour illustrates accountability, care, empathy, and loyalty. We also see each other, with egalitarianism (or tolerance) because we are all children of the same God.

250

M. Krambia-Kapardis

Finally, in the New Testament Mathew (6. 21) noted we are reminded of Christ’s words that “where your treasure is, there, too, is your heart”. This illustrates that the purpose of life, according to Christian teaching is love, which has two legs. The first one, is a love to God and the second love to yourself and your fellow man. In the eyes of man, you must see God Himself. Thus, with this reasoning we will be able to eliminate selfishness and we will be able to lay solid foundations for better relationships in various areas whether in work or personal life.

13.7 Conclusion In this chapter, capitalism, communism, and socialism were briefly considered, noting that Christian teachings of brotherhood are the same values expressed by socialism. The Orthodoxy prides itself on having preserved the original apostolic faith, which was also expressed in the common Christian tradition of the first centuries. Thus, Orthodoxy conforms to the Christian faith as represented in the decrees of the early Church and as established by the first seven ecumenical councils between the years of 325 and 787 A.D. Interestingly, wealth is regarded by Orthodoxy as a necessary evil because, through charity poverty can be reduced/eliminated. Thus, whilst excessive luxury is prohibited one is forgiven for being wealthy if he/she gives to charity. This chapter also discusses synergies between the beliefs and teachings of Orthodoxy and Conscious Capitalism. The four inter-connected and mutually reinforcing tenets of CC are higher purpose and core values; stakeholder integration; conscious leadership; and conscious culture and management (Mackey and Sisodia, 2014, p. 32–33). Conscious Capitalism also highlights the need for less violence and cruelty, more peace in the world and the business environment. Principles also found in the New and Old Testament. Thus, both concepts and principles of Christianity converge with basic tenets of Conscious Capitalism. Finally, the chapter considers the characteristics and qualities leaders ought to possess within the boundaries of toxic working environments. Some of the qualities identified as necessary for conscious leaders within the context of CC are also qualities demonstrated in Orthodoxy. Such qualities include authenticity, empathy and compassion and being available and willing to help other fellow human beings regardless of race, colour, or gender. It can be concluded that there is ample documentation demonstrating that many of the Principles Orthodoxy is built on are found in Conscious Capitalism. Acknowledgments  I would like to thank Professor S. Fotiou for his constructive comments on an earlier draft of the chapter, Konstandinos Petrides for assisting with the research into ‘Orthodoxy’ and His Eminence, the Most Reverend Bishop Isaias (Kykkotis) of Tamassos and Orinis for providing some very useful reading material.

13  Conscious Capitalism and Orthodoxy

251

References Arkadas, D. 2018. The Bulimia of Wealth. In Modern Greek Philosophy of Religion: Theology, Technology, and Ideology, ed. M. Begzos, 72–82. Athens: Pedio Publishers. [in Greek]. Atmatzides, C. 2013. ‘Logeia’ as a Model of How to Manifest Love and Social Solidarity Among Christians. Pnevmatiki Diakonoea 17: 20–35. Bekos, M., ed. 2018. Modern Greek Philosophy of Religion: Theology, Technology, and Ideology. Athens: Pedio Publishers. [in Greek]. Bishop Vasileios. 2009. Orthodox Spiritual Values and Modern Times. In The Acceptance of the Other: Orthodox Spiritual Values and Modernity, ed. S.  Fotiou, 56–73. Athens: Armos Publishers. [in Greek]. ———. 2013. A Table Giving Thanks-A Table of Love. God’s Economy-A Human Economy. Pnevmatiki Diakonoea 17: 3–11. Brown, B. 2018. Dare to Lead. London: Ebury Publishing. ———. 2012. Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead. Avery Publishing Group. Dierendonck, D.V., and K.  Patterson. 2015. Compassionate Love as a Cornerstone of Servant Leadership: An Integration of Previous Theorizing and Research. Journal of Business Ethics 128: 119–131. Dunnington, K. 2019. Humility, Pride, and Christian Value Theory: Oxford Studies in Analytic Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fairchild, M. 2019. Eastern Orthodox Church Beliefs and Practices. https://www.learnreligions.com/eastern-­o rthodox-­c hurch-­b eliefs-­7 00622#:~:text=The%20word%20 %22orthodox%22%20means%20%22right%20believing%22%20and%20was,fully%20 preserved%2C%20without%20any%20deviation%2C%20the%20traditions%2C%20. Accessed 21 Oct 2020. Fotiou, S. 2009. The Acceptance of the Other. Athens: Armos Publishers. [in Greek]. ———. 2014. The Orthodox Faith: Introduction to Christian Teaching. Armos Publishers. [in Greek]. ———. 2018. Greed and the Thoughtless Rich. Athens: Armos Publishers. [in Greek]. ———., ed. 2020. Engravings for the Modern World. Nicosia: Kykkou Monastery Research Centre. [in Greek]. Frost, P. 2003. Toxic Emotions at Work: How Compassionate Managers Handle Pain and Conflict. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Holmes, L. 2017. 8 Ways To Tell If You’re A Truly Compassionate Person, The Huffington Post. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/habits-­of-­compassionate-­people_n_5522941?gucc ounter=1andguce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9pbnQuc2VhcmNoLm15d2F5LmNvbS8andg uce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJZ3ludeuhy4lV7g1ZR5BvqlZc-­G _PLe6xwPpU0CaA_dteRTW8OETIQh6HQes7SRJ7xJxB9lurtnLrDyzIcBs1qHXi42cRmYNsfrVq9B7qotSkzueMc8hB75KnS5mRhrJgDQDE5I1iUv0ObmEx4UV3hYUjtX0tTMlrVqfnb3E8VO. Accessed 21 Oct 2020. Lenka, U., and B. Tiwari. 2016. Achieving Triple “P” Bottom Line Through Resonant Leadership: An Indian Perspective. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 65 (5): 694–670. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-­02-­2015-­0023. Marx, K., and Engels, F. 1848. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Marxists Internet Archive. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-­manifesto. Accessed 12 Oct 2020. Konstantinou, M., and Lianti, N. 2013. The Red God. https://tvxs.gr/news/egrapsan-­eipan/o-­kokkinos-­theos-­ton-­m-­konstantinoy-­kai-­ey-­lianoy-­lianti. [in Greek, Accessed 21 Oct 2020]. Kounnoushis, G. 2018. The Ethics of Capitalism and the “’Unethical” Society. In Greed and the Thoughtless Rich, ed. S. Fotiou, 39–64. Athens: Armos Publishers. [in Greek].

252

M. Krambia-Kapardis

Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2014. Conscious Capitalism. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Mantzaridis, G. 2017. The Social Spirit of Orthodoxy is not due to Collectivism but Solidarity. https://www.pemptousia.gr/2017/12/to-­kinoviako-­pnevma-­tis-­orthodoxias-­den-­ekfrazete-­me-­ ton-­kollektivismo-­alla-­me-­tin-­omopsichia/. [ιν Γρεεκ, Accessed 21 Oct 2020]. Mbousa, X.M. 2011. O Γέρων Άνθιμος, Ο Αγιαννανίτης/ The elder Anthimos, o Agiannanitis, (in Greek) Thesaloniki: Migdonia. Ogunfowara, B., and J.S.  Bourdage. 2014. Does Honesty-Humility Influence Evaluations of Leadership Emergence? The Mediating Role of Moral Disengagement. Personality and Individual Differences 56: 95–99. Padilla, A., R. Hogan, and R.B. Kaiser. 2007. The Toxic Triangle: Destructive Leaders, Susceptible Followers and Conducive Environments. The Leadership Quarterly 18: 176–194. Papathanasiou, T. 2013. Social Justice and Orthodox Theology. https://antifono.gr/%CE%BA% CE%BF%CE%B9%CE%BD%CF%89%CE%BD%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE-­%CE%B4 %CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%B9%CE%BF%CF%83%CF%8D%CE%BD%CE%B7-­ %CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%B9-­%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%B8%CF%8C%CE%B4%CE%BF %CE%BE%CE%B7-­%CE%B8%CE%B5/. [in Greek, Accessed 21 Oct 2020]. ———. 2001. Κοινωνική Δικαιοσύνη και Ορθόδοξη Θεολογία: Μία “Προκήρυξη”/ “Social Justice and Orthodox Theology: A proclamation”, Akritas: Greece. Pillary, S.S., and Sisodia, R.S. 2011. A case for Conscious Capitalism: Conscious leadership through the lens of brain science, IVEY Business Journal, September/ October (four pages). https://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/a-­c ase-­f or-­c onscious-­c apitalism-­c onscious-­ leadership-­through-­the-­lens-­of-­brain-­science/. Accessed 12 Oct 2020. Porter, M.E., and M.R.  Kramer. 2011. Creating Shared Value: How to Reinvent Capitalism  – Unleash a Wave of Innovation and Growth. Harvard Business Review 89 (1-2): 62–77. Taxou, I. 2020. The Economic System of Byzantine Empire is a Model for us Today? http:// www.kivotoshelp.gr/index.php/orthodoxo-­bhma/934-­to-­oikonomiko-­systima-­tis-­vyzantinis-­ aftokratorias-­protypo-­kai-­gia-­emas-­tora. [in Greek, Accessed 21 Oct 2020]. Tredennick, H. 2004. Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. New York: Penguin. Vasiliadou, K. 2011. Social Justice and Christianity, PhD dissertation, Unpublished. http://ikee. lib.auth.gr/record/129341/files/GRI-­2012-­8775.pdf [in Greek, Accessed 21 Oct 2020]. Voskou, M. 2020. What does ‘Church’ mean? Paraklisi 104: 9–11. [in Greek]. Ware, T. 1997. The Orthodox Church: New Edition. New York: Penguin. Maria Krambia-Kapardis is Professor of Accounting (with a specialization in Forensic Accounting) at the Cyprus University of Technology (Cyprus). She is also the Associate Dean of the School of Management and Economics at the same University. Prof. Krambia-Kapardis is the founder and first Chair of Transparency International-Cyprus (2010–2017), the founder and first president of the Economic Crime and Forensic Accounting Committee of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Cyprus (2010–2014), and a co-founder and member of the Board of the Cyprus Branch of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE- Cyprus) (2017–2020). She is a Fellow member of Chartered Accountants of Australia and New Zealand and a Certified Fraud Examiner. Prof. Krambia-Kapardis’ research interests include: corruption and anti-­ corruption; ethical behavior; fraud detection, investigation, and prevention; and ethical leadership. Her latest books include: Corporate Fraud and Corruption: A Holistic Approach to Preventing Financial Crises (Palgrave Macmillan, 2016); Financial Compliance: Issues, Concerns, and Future Directions (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019).  

Chapter 14

Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence Mohammad Omar Farooq and Abu Umar Faruq Ahmad

14.1 Introduction Two competing economic systems prevailing in our contemporary times are Capitalism and Socialism. As part of the Western civilization, both systems, representing a distinct vision and a set of values, have rivaled to dominate the minds of people as well as the societies and social systems. However, in this rivalry, as far as economic prosperity and broader acceptance of people are concerned, one system is a clear winner: Capitalism. The societies that have embraced the spirit and ideals of Capitalism have shown a much greater economic success. While during the first half of the twentieth century, the World Wars as well as the Great Depression wreaked global havoc, challenged the industrialized, capitalist countries on the one hand, and the rise of the communist block on the other, by the end of the twentieth century Soviet Union imploded, China gradually shifted away from Communism as an economic system and the dominance of the capitalist world was rather well established. At the theoretical as well as practical level, Capitalism is now the dominant system but not necessarily without its own serious problems. Three key problems associated with the capitalist system are: instability and recurring crisis; extreme inequality and concentration of wealth (hereinafter, ICW); and the ecological crisis. The last one has become an existential threat for the humanity and for this one planet of ours (Ibrahim 2012), where if the threat is not addressed (and soon), the merit of one system (Capitalism) over the other (Socialism) might not matter.

M. O. Farooq Department of Accounting and Finance, Gulf University, Sanad, Bahrain e-mail: [email protected] A. U. F. Ahmad (*) Islamic Finance, United International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_14

253

254

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

Despite the problems with Capitalism, according to many advocates, there is no credible, viable alternative and therefore to them it makes sense that there are deliberate and systematic efforts to improve upon the contemporary Capitalism than simply dumping it. One such undertaking is Conscious Capitalism (hereinafter CC) that offers some major, visionary adjustments to Capitalism, especially focusing on the role businesses play in this system. There is a growing body of work on the theoretical front and practical projects to advocate for and spread the message and model of CC. This chapter has a more limited and specific purpose. As CC is trying to build a broader global consensus, there is a genuine effort to engage global community at various levels, including the adherents of major global religions. A particular world religion that proposes a comprehensive way of life, including a distinct economic system of its own is Islam. In this chapter, we seek to explore the convergence between CC and an Islamic economic system to determine potential mutual engagement, while also exploring how Islamic economic system, as part of a comprehensive Islamic way of life, may have some nuanced aspects to offer something more beyond CC.

14.2 Conscious Capitalism Despite the veritable success of Capitalism to emerge as the dominant economic system, it is facing some critical challenges, both intellectual and practical. A robust body of literature from contributors from myriad of fields, from economics to political science, from sociology to psychology, from history to business, addresses this pivotal challenge facing Capitalism. While there are many socialist critics of Capitalism who are still awaiting the demise of the persistent and resilient Capitalism, there are also many works indicating belief in Capitalism still as the dominant system but needing a fundamental and continuous reform. Bower et al. (2011) in their book Capitalism at Risk enumerates ten core and one overarching concern as identified by the business leaders. These ten concerns are as follows: the financial system; the state of trade; inequality and populism; migration; environmental degradation; failure of the rule of law; the state of public health and general education; the rise of state Capitalism; radical movements, terrorism, and war; pandemics and disease; while the eleventh and overarching concern is the inadequacy of existing institutions of governance  - corporate, national, and international- to deal with the other ten issues (Bower et al. 2011).

The key to overcoming these challenges so that Capitalism can continue to deliver on its potential is the leadership role of business. … business needed to take a leadership role in addressing the threats both because governments alone could or would not solve them and because business had distinctive skills and capabilities that could help … companies could do so in ways that made strategic sense and could enhance their own growth and future profitability (Bower et al. 2011).

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

255

The proponents of Binary Economics also expose the challenges faced by Capitalism and have a vision to overcome these challenges to make Capitalism function better and more effectively. According to Binary Economics, there are only two all-­ inclusive factors of production: the human (labor) and non-human (capital), and these two factors can link marketable outputs from the labor-capital mix directly to incomes distributed according to market-quantified values of all ‘labor’ and all ‘capital’ inputs. And, since modern economies have grown exponentially due to the specific productivity augmenting role of capital, especially facilitated by technological progress, as labor is combined with capital, the key to sustained economic prosperity is inclusive, broad-based, capital ownership (Ashford and Shakespeare 1999; Kelso and Adler 2017). Nobel Laureate Muhammad Yunus envisions “a new kind of Capitalism” that is driven by his “Social Business” paradigm (Yunus 2011). Subsequently, he articulated the case for a world “without three Zeros” (zero poverty, zero unemployment and zero carbon emission), also to be led by businesses, through collaboration or involvement with all other relevant parties (Yunus 2017). Others also have called for a human-centered approach “as if people mattered” (Frankel and Bromberger 2013). In all the above-mentioned cases, the advocates of their ideas see Capitalism in crisis, while calling for a business-led interventions or initiatives for the rescue. While there are those who are more specific about the need for collaborative engagement of businesses, governments, and other social institutions (Eggers and Macmillan 2013), there is a strong advocacy for such changes taking place through the leading role of business. Among others, one such advocacy framework, a sort of capitalist reform movement (Kotler 2015), has become quite popular and well known and has gone beyond having a prescriptive stance is CC. Advocates of CC poignantly make the case that market freedom in the form of “entrepreneurship and innovation, combined with freedom and dignity for businesspeople” has been most instrumental for the success and performance of “free-­ enterprise Capitalism” (Mackey and Sisodia 2014). Yet, they are also deeply concerned about some fundamentally rough edges of Capitalism. Their thoughts about reforming Capitalism are encapsulated in CC as a brand. Even though modern Capitalism is attributed much to the trailblazing contribution of Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, (Smith 1827) from which emanated the conceptualization of the homo economicus (the economic man) driven by self-interest, according to the proponents of CC, another, probably even more important, work of Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (Smith 1761), was fundamentally ignored. The early intellectual case for capitalism was built almost exclusively on the theory that people create businesses to pursue only their personal self-interest. Economists, social critics, and business leaders largely disregarded the second and often more powerful aspect of human nature: the desire and need to care for others and for ideals and causes that transcend one’s self-interest (Mackey and Sisodia 2014).

Mackey and Sisodia (2014) argue that Capitalism was intellectually hijacked, as businesses are often with “low level consciousness” about the unintended consequence of their activities, and they are trapped due to the false premise of profit

256

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

maximization that emanated “from two sources: a narrow view of human nature and an inadequate explanation of the causes of business success.” (Mackey and Sisodia 2014). With the focus of the CC movement to place business at the center of the discourse, the movement’s goal is to raise holistic and practical consciousness beyond the motto and praxis of profit maximization by embracing a variety of higher purposes that align the interests and interdependencies of the various stakeholders, displacing the selfishness (often masked as self-interest) with the company’s unique purposes and creating and promoting a culture that supports personal growth and professional fulfillment. It is argued that by raising appropriate kind and level of consciousness among the businesses that embrace the commitment to honor the responsibilities to all relevant stakeholders in a holistic way Capitalism’s rough edges can be addressed, and it can serve the humanity more substantively and compellingly. At the core of CC’s framework of thought and praxis is the hopeful approach involving business and societal transformation. Advocates of CC envisions business to embrace and uphold three distinctive principles: 1. A deeper meta purpose in addition to maximizing profits. 2. A recognition not only that it is a complex ecosystem comprising numerous interdependent stakeholders in addition to stockholders but also that it needs to deliver value to all stakeholders. 3. A chief executive officer who is the steward of his company and its ecosystem, working for the benefits of all the stakeholders, not just for his own enrichment (Montgomery 2012). Thus, the concept of stewardship or servant leadership is embedded in CC (Legault 2012; Smith 2016; Mackey et al. 2020). The advocates of CC caution that it should not be confused with merely “corporate social responsibility”. Conscious capitalism is not synonymous with corporate social responsibility (CSR); since society is recognized as an important, even the primary stakeholder, the core business itself must by definition be socially responsible. A conscious approach to business is based on the adoption of a higher purpose that transcends profits, a stakeholder rather than shareholder orientation, and conscious, service-oriented leadership (Sisodia 2009).

Thus, among the values CC articulates is “doing no harm” to either people or environment and an approach that believes in “triple bottom line: people, planet and profit” (Howes 2014). CC envisions a society and economy within Capitalism where businesses, working with other stakeholders, will fulfill their role with a “higher purpose”, beyond the traditional pursuit of “profit maximization” or other similar pursuits. However, from a business perspective, CC advocates do not merely resort to ideological tenets, but also claim to have demonstrated that businesses that embrace and implement CC significantly outperform even the best of the companies that do not embrace CC (Anderson 2015; Schwartz 2013).

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

257

14.3 Conscious Capitalism and Islam As CC is trying to raise awareness about its vision and agenda, it is worthwhile to explore how much convergence it has with other major religions of the world. Given that, religious, philosophical, and cultural belief systems play a vital role in shaping the thoughts and behaviors of the adherents of the respective religions, this exploration is highly pertinent. While CC can be explored in the context of most major faiths and religions, the scope and focus of this chapter is specific and somewhat limited: exploring the convergence between CC and Islamic faith. A relevant analysis requires some deconstruction of CC, without taking any issue with Capitalism as a system itself at this stage of the study. In this section, we provide an overview of a few key important aspects of Islamic teachings that converge with the aspirations and propositions of CC.

14.3.1 Business Orientation A good starting point of a solid convergence between CC and Islam is their emphasis on business and businesspeople. It is worth emphasizing that though Islam traces its heritage through all the Prophets of God, beginning with Adam and continuing through Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Jesus (peace be upon them all, p hereinafter) to name a few, Islam’s normative ideal and empirical history are represented in the life of the Prophet Muhammad (p). Before he became a messenger of God, as per the beliefs of Islam, through receiving revelation from Him, he was a businessman, who earned the recognition from his community as the “Al-Amin” (the trustworthy) and “Al-Sādiq” (the truthful one). Prior to becoming a businessman, he also worked for a businesswoman as an entrepreneur who later herself proposed Prophet Muhammad (p) to marry. Also, from his youth, he has been involved in social welfare activities contributing to social well-being. Mobilizing his conflict-prone community and the neighboring tribes, he initiated Ḥilf al-Fuḍūl (the Alliance of the Virtuous) (Haykal 2008), with the mutual pledge to uphold justice for all and to establish justice by collectively intervening whenever a conflict arose. As he is the exemplary role model for humankind in the eyes of faithful people, Islam encourages its adherents and invites the humanity to tread his path. Makkah was never a center of production, whether agriculture or industry. Rather, it was an emerging business destination for trading communities, and therefore business was their primary source of income for which four key characteristics were inevitable: freedom, security, skills (or capital), and readiness to take risk. All these features were instrumental in the evolution of a society that emphasizes market with a moral imperative to seek divine and worldly blessings while giving due share to others (all stakeholders to whom some rights are due). If one takes into consideration those four aspects, one will find the reason why parallel to expansion of the Islamic world due to the conflicts it faced and handled, the role Muslim

258

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

merchants played in their commerce to lands far and wide was pivotal in spreading the universal message of Islam and permanently widening the sphere of the expansion of Islam. In an illuminating work Merchant Capital in Islam, Ibrahim (2011) delineates the context in which merchant capital emerged in Arabia and played pivotal role in the expansion of the Islamic territory. Only [by taking into consideration merchant capital] can we understand the rise of Mecca, the development of its institutions, including those found in Islam, and the foundation of Islamic society within a perspective of historical continuity conditioned by the demands of merchants and merchant capital. Merchant capital is that fraction of capital that is generated purely through exchange, whether merchants controlled the means of production, as in Yemen, or not, as in Mecca. It is the earliest form of capital and ‘appears to perform the function par excellence of capital.’ Merchant capital in the Meccan context also meant power—political power in the sense that merchants harnessed their wealth in the mobilization of force to influence the course of events and social relations in a manner to suit their interests. The development of merchant capital largely depended on the human element, since, after all, exchange was between a buyer and a seller of artisan-produced commodities (Ibrahim 2011).

Among other virtues of ethics and morality: equality, justice, fairness, brotherhood, mercy, compassion, solidarity, and freedom of choice are fundamentals for a society that cherishes Islamic values. Islam teaches that everyone must be treated equally before law, and their rights must be upheld justly and without prejudice. Islam presents the notion of ummah (people) at different levels. For example, as all human beings are from one father and mother, Adam and Eve, as part of the humanity are brothers and sisters. That is Islam’s humanity-orientation. Islam also expects the believers to be a brotherhood (ukhuwwah). This brotherhood is based on the Golden Rule: “None of you will have faith till he wishes for his brother what he likes for himself.” (Sahih al-Bukhārī 1966, Kitāb al-Imān, #13). Islam urges its followers to embrace compassion as their second nature, because God Himself is the Most Compassionate, the Most Gracious, and He wants the believers to reflect kindness and compassion as essential to their personality. As Prophet Muhammad (p) has taught: “Allah is Kind and Lenient and likes that one should be kind and lenient in all matter.” (Sahih al-Bukhārī 1966, Kitāb al-Istitābah, 6927). For a healthy and dynamic society, Islam expects its adherents to value solidarity. Not only that the believers should be united in everything good, but also seek common grounds with others for the greater good. “Cooperate with one another in goodness and righteousness, and do not cooperate in sin and transgression. And be mindful of God.” (The Qur’an, 5:2) Furthermore, Islam teaches all these values in the framework of freedom of choice, and all these values have implications for business and economy as well. That is where the relationship between competition and cooperation becomes dynamic, interlinked and above all a matter of seeking a balance. The spirit of positive competition and malice to none, is highly valued and upheld. An Islamic market is characterized by certain norms that take care of the interests of all concerned in marketplace. Among the rules of ethical discipline in Islamic commercial transactions is to shun non-market intervention to control or

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

259

manipulate market price (Bashar 1997). Given that, Islam grants essential freedom to traders provided they strictly follow the relevant ethical codes of Islam. Once during the time of Prophet Muhammad (p) it is reported that prices of commodities increased dramatically. Narrated Anas ibn Malik, the people said: Messenger of God! Prices have shot up, so fix prices for us. Thereupon the Messenger of God (p) said: “God is the one Who fixes prices, Who withholds, gives lavishly and provides, and I hope that when I meet God, none of you will have any claim on me for an injustice regarding blood or property” (Abu Dawud, Sunan, #36).

On another occasion, narrated Abu Huraira (r): A man came and said: Messenger of God! Fix prices. He said: “(No), but I shall pray”. Again, the man came and said: Messenger of God! Fix prices. He said: “It is but God Who makes the prices low and high. I hope that when I meet God, none of you has any claim on me for doing wrong regarding blood or property” (Abu Dawud, Sunan, 3450).

The Qur’an mentions: Believers! Do not exchange your property in wrongful ways unless it is in trade by mutual agreement. Do not kill one another. God is All-Merciful to you (The Qur’an, 4:29).

Moral, empathic, and service-oriented foundation of business is what Islam calls for and the Prophet (p) and his early community exemplified (Ghazanfar 2006). …anyone can observe that Allah … is not arbitrary in His commandments, neither permitting things in order to be indulgent to people nor prohibiting them in order to make their lives miserable. Rather, He has legislated for them what is in their own best interest, safeguarding their lives, intellect, property, morals, and honor and guiding them toward success in this world and in the Hereafter by being ethical (Mohammed 2013).

14.3.2 Business Perspective Interestingly, in framing its message to its faithful adherents the Qur’an frequently invokes a business perspective. God wants people to offer their lives and property in His path, which essentially includes serving the humanity and fellow creations in general. The unequivocal statement of the Qur’an, You are the best nation that ever existed among humanity. You command people to good and prohibit them from evil, and you believe in God. Had the People of the Book accepted the faith (Islam), it would certainly have been better for them. Some of them have faith, but most of them are evil doers. (The Qur’an, 3:110). This is Islam’s definitive humanity-orientation, and quite notably on another occasion the Qur’an frames this engagement as beneficial mutual exchange. God has purchased the souls and property of the believers in exchange for Paradise. They fight for the cause of God to destroy His enemies and to sacrifice themselves. This is a true promise which He has revealed in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an. No one is truer to His promise than God. Let this bargain be glad news for them. This is indeed the supreme triumph (The Qur’an, 9:11).

260

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

Even the notion of life after death is presented in a business-nuanced framework. God addresses the believers: Believers, shall I show you a bargain (or trade or transaction) which will save you from the painful torment? (The Qur’an, 61:10)

These Qur’anic verses and the Prophetic traditions (ahādith) establish the business orientation of Muslim societies and emphasize the critical role of business in shaping and developing the economy and the society toward positive betterment. Thus, businesses having the leadership in reshaping and supporting the society and economy to move in the desirable direction is a key convergence point for CC vis-a-vis Islam. Indeed, the four key characteristics of CC (conscious leadership; stakeholder orientation; conscious value-based culture; higher purpose, beyond pursuit of profit) (Anderson 2015) not only have no conflict with Islam, but also are commonly shared. A number of important works have highlighted the various aspects of Islam and its history that are convergent with the positive aspects of Capitalism (Rodinson 1973; Cizacka 2011). Indeed, some scholars of history have gone so far as finding the roots of Capitalism in Arab-Islamic history and civilization (Heck 2006; Koehler 2014; Labib 1969). Some of them argued that during the eighth–twelfth centuries business techniques and forms of business organization were employed included partnership (Mufāwadha and Mudhāraba) capital (al-Māl), capital accumulation (Namā al-Māl), trusts (Awqāf) and so on. Acknowledging those convergences, it is important to note that Islam in fact calls for a moral economy (Jan and Asutay 2019; Tripp 2006). Furthermore, just as CC focuses on the role of business and the real economy, away from financialization as a phenomenon of financial Capitalism, Islam also calls for a focus on the real economy, promoting the well-being and sustainable development (Lapavitsas 2013; Fontana et  al. 2019; Farooq and Selim 2018). In the next segment, we delineate the beliefs, values and parameters pertaining to Islamic business that help further explore the areas of convergence and divergence between CC and Islam.

14.4 Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence In exploring the convergence and divergence, it is important to note that such exploration is in reference to the normative Islam as delineated in the Qur’an and Sunnah (the Prophetic practices and traditions), not in reference to the practices that are often in contrast with the norm. Also, notably, Muslims themselves have certain variation of thoughts regarding an Islamic economic system, some leaning closer to Socialism while others to Capitalism or market economy. Before delving into details, it is pertinent to note a few premises about Islam that are relevant to our theme here. As Muslims’ belief about Islam as the complete and universal version of a primordial faith that was revealed many times before through Prophets (P), including Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus it holds: (a) every human

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

261

life extends beyond this world and there are consequences of his faith and actions in this world that would be subject to accountability to God on the Day of Judgment; (b) Islam provides holistic guidance in terms of some key fundamental principles, values and parameters broadly for its followers’ life, covering their business and finance aspects as well (Farooq and Hadi 2020); (c) Islam recognizes the transformational potential of human beings and thus does not accept the fixed, rigid or fossilized conception of human beings and their behavior as homo economicus as upheld by mainstream economics, especially in the context of Capitalism that functions according to the rules of selfishness (Farooq 2011). From the perspectives of CC, it is acknowledged that self-centered and profit-maximizing behavior has been conceptualized based on a “narrow view of human nature” (Mackey and Sisodia 2014). Keeping these premises in mind, let us now deal with a number of key normative aspects that can help us appreciate the convergence and divergence between Islam and CC.

14.4.1 Fairness and Justice CC builds on the principle of fairness, rule of law and justice in all its facets of business and corporate decision-making with a central premise that businesses should serve all significant stakeholders. “Fairness is an essential quality in dealing with all stakeholders …” (Mackey and Sisodia 2014). This is consistent with the Qur’anic emphasis on fairness as a key human concern. Believers, be the supporters of justice and they testify to what you may have witnessed, for the sake of God, even against yourselves, parents, and relatives, whether it be against the rich or the poor. God must be given preference over them. Let not your desires cause you to commit injustice. If you deviate from the truth in your testimony, or decline to give your testimony at all, know that God is Well Aware of what you do (The Qur’an, 4:135). . We sent Our Messengers with clear evidence (to support their truthfulness) and sent with them the Book and the Balance so that people would maintain justice. We sent down iron - in which there is strong power and benefit for the people - so that God would know who would help Him and His Messenger without seeing the unseen. God is All-Powerful and Majestic (The Qur’an, 57:25). God commands (people) to maintain justice, kindness, and proper relations with their relatives. He forbids them to commit indecency, sin, and rebellion. God gives you advice so that perhaps you will take heed (The Qur’an, 16:90).

Keeping in mind the pursuit of ‘Adl (justice), Naqvi (1981) identifies four axioms that serve as the foundations of an economy based on Islamic principles and values: 1) Unity (Monotheism that provides a unified approach to life), 2) Equilibrium (seeking balance in many conflicting goals and interests), 3) Free will (establishing and preserving freedom and choice) and r4) Responsibility (a sense and framework of accountability for everyone in their respective roles and decisions). Such axioms are important to recognize and operationalize, where in the present world order, economic ideologies among erstwhile opposing camps are moving towards some convergence (Ahmad 2010). Indeed, based on their own practical experience there

262

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

is a tendency to seek moderation and balanced way, as there is neither pure Capitalism nor pure Socialism any longer. Furthermore, in practice, nowadays no society is purely capitalist or socialist, instead, most of the modern economies are known as mixed economies that combine the elements of a market and planned economy.

14.4.2 Rendering to the Stakeholders Their Due A key precept of CC is to have a stakeholder-oriented approach (Fyke and Buzzanell 2013). It is indeed widely recognized that a stakeholder approach compared to shareholder-centered approach is more relevant and sensible in the long run. This aspect is quite compatible with Islamic perspective. In Islam, there are many people, groups and institutions that have rights on someone, who might be close in relationship or far, direct or indirect. As long as someone is affected by our own decisions and acts, some defined parties are recognized in Islam as those with rights and thus they are stakeholders. Islam teaches that whether those who have the right on us can claim or are able to secure their rights, because of our ultimate accountability to God, we should proactively try to give or rather deliver to everyone what is their due. This is beyond “do no harm”, which is also upheld by CC; rather Islam insists that anything that is right of or due to others, we better settle in this world because we are going to have to settle it on the Day of Judgment and settling there would fundamentally be costly and with potentially serious or even eternal consequences. God commands you to return that which had been entrusted to you to the rightful owners. Be just when passing judgment among people. God’s advice is the most noble. He sees and hears everything (The Qur’an, 4:58).

From the CC perspectives, in making sound decisions all the stakeholders involved should be taken into consideration and their concerns and rights are addressed. Of course, it is not an easy challenge. However, even when all such relevant stakeholders are paid attention to, from an Islamic perspective generally there is a commonly missing stakeholder at the table where decisions are made. In Islam, adhering to the guidance of God requires Taqwa (God-consciousness) in everything Muslims do. Being conscious of God essentially involves keeping in mind His guidance as given in the form of divine revelation (i.e., the Qur’an), the exemplary life of the Prophet (p) to follow and trying to understand what God’s expectation is, or what might please Him by serving others with fairness, care and empathy. Though even many Muslims fail to consider the role of this missing stakeholder, Islam teaches that every human’s decision should be as if God is always present at the table and watching what people say and do (Ahmad and Mobin 2015). This exceptional role of the missing stakeholder can be a powerful motivator to adopt the approach of “servant leadership”, a type of leadership which Greenleaf (1977) first coined in his essay, ‘The Servant as a Leader’ and has been used by people rather widely. According to him,

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

263

servant leadership embraces ten main features: empathy, listening, awareness, healing, conceptualization, persuasion, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the development of people, and building community (Greenleaf 1977).

This involves being empathetic regarding others, being a source of healing and solution rather than conflict and problem; being inspiring and persuasive rather than authoritarian and dominating; and being a steward of those whom he serves than just a leader or boss. This type of leadership is very much convergent with the Islamic notion of “evolved for mankind (The Qur’an, 3:110).” Indeed, from Islamic viewpoint, serving God is essentially serving fellow human being and creations, which is beautifully illustrated in the following Prophetic tradition that he has attributed to God. Abu Huraira (r) reported Allah’s Messenger (p) as saying: Verily, Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, would say on the Day of Resurrection: O son of Adam, I was sick, but you did not visit Me. He would say: O my Lord; how could I visit you whereas you are the Lord of the worlds? Thereupon He would say: Didn’t you know that such and such servant of Mine was sick, but you did not visit him and were you not aware of this that if you had visited him, you would have found Me by him? O son of Adam, I asked food from you, but you did not feed Me. He would say: My Lord, how could I feed you whereas you are the Lord of the worlds? He said: Didn’t you know that such and such servant of Mine asked food from you, but you did not feed him, and were you not aware that if you had fed him you would have found him by My side? (The Lord would again say:) O son of Adam, I asked drink from you, but you did not provide Me. He would say: My Lord, how could I provide you whereas you are the Lord of the worlds? Thereupon He would say: Such and such of servant of Mine asked you for a drink, but you did not provide him, and had you provided him drink you would have found him near Me (Sahih Muslim, #2569).

The above-mentioned Prophetic narration illustrates how Islam connects the concept of worshipping and serving God to serving the humanity and the fellow creations. A particular event from the life of Prophet (p) illustrates the notion of servant leadership. Before he became a Prophet (p), he was well known as a noble and trustworthy person. The Arab Bedouin society was tribalistic and prone to conflict and violence. At one stage there was a fire that partially destroyed the structure of the Ka’ba, the House of God, and the clans of the then Mecca undertook a renovation project. A feature of Ka’ba was the Black Stone and it had to be temporarily removed during the renovation. As it was undertaken without much forethought and planning, when the renovation was completed, the clans were about to engage in fight over which clan will have the honor to set the Black Stone in its place. To avoid bloodshed involving the House of God, they agreed on an indirect solution: they would wait for the next person to enter the gate and entrust the decision with him as their arbitrator. It just happened that the next person to enter was Muhammad (p), 35 years old at that time. He simply could have decided on his own and assign the task to one of his favorites or through a random choice. However, he was a unique person and leader of a different kind. He solved the problem without hurting

264

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

anyone, where happiness of one group would be at the expense of others. He honored all the Meccan clan leaders and asked them to bring a piece of cloth and then put the Black Stone at the center of it. He then asked one representative leader from each clan to hold the corners of the cloth, so that they can carry the Stone to the designated place. Muslims are supposed to follow the same kind of win-win attitude and perspective in dealing with people, reflecting empathy and stewardship.

14.4.3 Competition and Cooperation (Ta’āwun) One of the core ideas and values of Capitalism in general and CC in particular is the role and virtue of competition. The founders of CC Mackey and Sisodia (2014) aptly make the case for competition: One of the beauties of free-enterprise capitalism is that it motivates businesses to provide greater value, higher quality, and better service all the time. Competition forces us to ­continuously improve, innovate, and to be more creative—or be left behind. To thrive, we have to offer customers new products, services, and value that our competitors don’t.

Without this appreciation of competition, human society will deprive itself of a fundamentally positive dynamic. Islam also teaches that at certain level there is need for competition, especially in good or positive things. Muslims are instructed by God, the Creator to compete to attain His pleasure, also to recognize that their ability and reward are from Him, and their intentions are for Him. In the language of the Qur’an: Everyone pursues his goal. Compete with each other in performing good deeds. Wherever you are, God will bring you all together. God has power over all things (The Qur’an, 2:148). Believers! Do not disrespect the reminders of God, the sacred months, the animals brought for sacrifice, or what is marked for sacrificial offering or the people heading to the precinct of the Sacred House to seek the favor and pleasure of their Lord. Once the restrictions of ihram are over, you may hunt. Do not let the hostility of a group of people keep you away from the Sacred Mosque or make you express animosity. Co-operate with each other in righteousness and piety, not in sin and hostility. Have fear of God; He is stern in His retribution (The Qur’an, 5:2). Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab (r): The Messenger of Allah (p) commanded us one day to give Sadaqah [charity]. At that time, I had some property. I said: Today I shall surpass Abu Bakr if I surpass him any day. I, therefore, brought half my property. The Messenger of Allah (p) asked: What did you leave for your family? I replied: The same amount. Abu Bakr brought all that he had with him. The Messenger of Allah (p) asked him: What did you leave for your family? He replied: I left Allah and His Apostle for them. I said: I shall never compete you in anything (Abu Dawud, 123).

The above-mentioned report indicates how people should be competing in anything that is good and beneficial, or at least things that comply with “do no harm”. When we sincerely compete in such framework where appropriate, and find ways to cooperate where warranted and possible, the overall results are expected to be positive. However, there are also areas where we as human beings need to cooperate rather than compete, because in many areas cooperation proved to be the best condition to

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

265

perform the task, as underlined by self-perception and cognitive results (Balconi and at el. 2017). CC also fundamentally values cooperation wherever relevant. Mackey and Sisodia (2014) explain: No complex, evolving, and self-adapting organization can be adequately understood merely through analyzing its parts and ignoring the full system. The business is more than just the sum of the individual stakeholders. It is also the interrelationship, the interconnection, the shared purposes, and the shared values that the various stakeholders of the business cocreate and coevolve together. The mortar that connects the bricks is as important as the bricks. When we fully comprehend the larger business system in action, with all the interdependencies and opportunities for voluntary cooperation for mutual benefit that exist within it, it can be beautiful and even awe-inspiring. Thus, there needs to be a good balance and delicate synthesis between competition and cooperation, which is clearly upheld by Islam. The Qur’an says that man was created as His Khalifah (agent, successor, inheritor, vicegerent, representative) on earth. When your Lord said to the angels, “I am appointing someone as my deputy on earth,” they said (almost protesting), “Are you going to appoint one who will commit corruption and bloodshed therein, even though we (are the ones who) commemorate Your Name and glorify You?” The Lord said, “I know that which you do not know” (The Qur’an, 2:30).

In an Islamic economy, the idea of man as God’s representative on earth provides businessmen a feeling of co-operating with fellow human being for the interest of whole mankind. Thus, the Qur’anic guidance enables man to conserve and use prudently all the resources of the earth that God has bestowed upon mankind. Therefore, the idea of cooperation, wherever possible, is integrally related to the concept of altruistic human side, in contrast with the selfish homo economicus side. There is a robust and growing literature illuminating the positive and beneficial role of altruism in human society (Kolm and Ythier 2006). CC also recognizes and affirms the value and relevance of altruism in our life (Gagnon 2018). Islam has a rather enlightening twist to the notion of altruism, as it frames altruism as a self-interested behavior. One who acts righteously does so for his own benefit and one who commits evil does so against his own soul. To your Lord you will all return (The Qur’an, 45:15).

14.4.4 Anti-concentration and Spreading Ownership of Capital ICW have always been major concerns from the perspective of justice and care. However, only during the recent decades the concern has earned prominence not only in global public discourse in general, but also in economics in particular. Indeed, a number of leading economists, including a number of Nobel Laureates’ works and contributions, are particularly focused on identifying ICW as a central economic problem and also as a pivotal contributor to economic and financial crisis.

266

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

Some of the key contributors to this highlighting of ICW are Nobel Laureates Joseph Stiglitz, Angus Deaton, Amartya Sen as well as other economists such as Muhammad Yunus (Nobel Laureate in Peace) and Thomas Piketty (Deaton 2015; Stiglitz 2014; Sen 1995; Piketty 2017; Yunus 2007). Mackey and Sisodia (2014), who coined and popularized the CC, seem to downplay the importance of ICW as part of their reformist critique of Capitalism, but other exponents and advocates of CC show better awareness and understanding about pernicious effects of high degree of ICW (Schwerin 1998). Islam takes a strong position against ICW with many attending harmful effects. Whatever God grants to His Messenger (out of the property) of the people of the towns, belongs to God, the Messenger, the kinsfolk, the orphans, the destitute and to those who may become needy while on a journey, so that it will not circulate only in the hands of rich ones among them. Take only what the Messenger gives to you and desist from what he forbids you. Have fear of God; God is severe in His retribution (The Qur’an, 59:7).

Indeed, Islam does not regard a believer believer whose stomach is full, while the neighbors to his side go hungry (Al-Bayhaqi 1994). Islam has mandated a specific percentage of their Nisab (a threshold, or specially calculated level of wealth) as Zakah to take care of some specific categories of people to address their needs, who might be left behind by the normal development in the economy or those who have special needs (Ahmad et  al. 2006). Indeed, while Islam does not discourage, let alone repudiate, the pursuit of profit and opulence, it sets a rather high expectation from those who are blessed in this world with wealth. (Muhammad), … “they also ask you what they should spend (in God’s cause and for the needy)”. Say: “What is surplus (after you have spent on your dependents’ needs)”. Thus does God make clear to you His Revelations, that you may reflect. (The Qur’an, 2:219)

Regarding countering concentration of wealth, often there is an emphasis on redistribution, which is important and relevant. However, that is basically after the fact. ICW occurs due to structural problems in the socioeconomic structures and relationships. Capitalism without relevant regulation and structural reform tends to facilitate and foster such concentration, especially through the capital market activities. Indeed, as argued by Joseph Stiglitz (2014), a Nobel Laureate in economics, inequality is neither inevitable nor is it any essential feature of Capitalism. While Islamic principle of anti-concentration has not been made functional in any modern economy, as the contemporary trends toward concentration and the emerging literature viewing such concentration as a key economic concern are corroborating the life enhancing the Qur’anic wisdom and admonition. As explicated above, there is a good deal of convergence between CC and Islamic guidance for economic dimension of life. However, in a few important aspects Islam and its conceptualization of the economy and business go beyond CC. This is partly because Islam is not just for the economy or business, but holistic or all-inclusive guidance for the entire spectrum of life for both individual and collective level. Islam is all-inclusive in the sense that based on the belief in Tawhid (the indivisible oneness concept of monotheism: unity of God), the life is considered an integrated

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

267

whole, where belief and practice, body and spirit, laws and values, form and substance, individual and society are all interrelated and interdependent. As Islam provides its guidance in the form of principles, values, norms, and parameters like an alphabet of essential guidance, those are to be treated and utilized by human beings as building blocks of detailed and comprehensive guidance for human life, the details and operationalizing part of which are left to human ingenuity and imagination.

14.4.5 Higher Purpose as Part of a Distinct World View While there is a clear sense of purpose in CC, that still is worldly and primarily focused on the material aspects. CC does recognize the importance of leaders with “emotional and spiritual” maturity, but even in this regard there is an important practical philosophical issue. Let us consider the good intention of CC-inspired leaders to seek to pursue “higher purpose”. However, this purpose is basically reforming businesses to rise above their preoccupation with selfish profit without taking into consideration their role to serve the fellow human beings and to show care for our planet. However, why should they take on or value such a higher purpose? Is there really any accountability beyond what one sets for oneself and to the laws and regulations within which one functions? From an Islamic perspective, while as human beings we should search for and heed to our inner call to serve others, there is also an accountability to our Creator, and Sustainer Whom we will face on the Day of Judgment. As part of that accountability, if our life was based on serving God, which essentially means serving the humanity and taking care of this planet, while doing no harm to the fellow creations, there is reward for this through salvation and being assigned divine blessing in the form of the heaven. Contrarily, the failure in this regard would be treated as disobedience to God and thus cause to suffer God’s condemnation and punishment. When our inner call to be good and to do good is synchronized with the sense of accountability and the aspiration for divine approbation, it is generally more powerful as motivator and guide. However, it should also be pointed out merely the issue of accountability does not necessarily or magically translate into responsible or caring conduct, as evidenced in Muslim societies. It needs to be emphasized that economic aspects of Islam are discussed here from a normative perspective, while the reality of the Muslim societies is far from the norm. Furthermore, the conceptualization of Islamic economic system can vary among Muslims. Regardless, Islam does require operationalizing the notion of service to others in this world, and in some key respects the specific ideas behind CC can be quite relevant and helpful for business community in the Muslim world as well.

268

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

14.4.6 Transformational Potential of Human Beings One of the reasons why mainstream economics has failed badly is because it is based on the economists’ construct of the selfish homo economicus, a fossilized, imaginary character that is not just normalized but also neither can be transformed into something better, nor is there a recognized need for such transformation. The higher purpose to which CC calls requires some major transformation of human beings, especially the businesses. Mackey and Sisodia (2014) point out the fact that we all have the potential for positive transformation because even: “a person’s IQ does not easily change very much after adulthood begins, while emotional, spiritual, and systems intelligences can be developed and enhanced all our lives.” This is a highly positive and hopeful thing because it is only through such transformation that we can gain the kind of business leadership that commits to pursue the higher purpose and passionately and persistently try to deliver accordingly. However, such transformation must go beyond just the leadership; rather, the entire society, including customers, employees and the shareholders, also be part of the transformation. As explained earlier, due to a lack of accountability at a higher level, such transformation may not be easy. Yet, the fact that CC requires such transformation of business leaders for higher purpose is another convergence with Islamic aspiration, though at a much narrower level.

14.4.7 Harmonizing the Role of the Private Sector and the Government While CC and Islam share the business-orientation and business-led changes with a human touch, as some of the works have pointed out that CC has not incorporated the role of government in due proportion. O’Toole and Vogel (2011) argue that the proponents of CC seem to not have paid due attention to the vital role of governments in harmonizing business and corporate interests with the common good and public interests. Relevant role of government, especially where the government is based on rule of law, representation, and accountability, is paramount and key to attain success toward inclusive development and shared prosperity. Without appropriately functioning government, Capitalism has turned into “crony Capitalism” and become a conduit for rampant rent-seeking behavior, where corporate businesses are taking advantage of regulatory capture and trying to augment their profits not in proportion to their contribution to the economy (Zywicki 2015; Farooq 2019). While the prevailing condition of the Muslim world generally does not reflect the normative Islam, Islamic principles seek a balance between freedom at the individual and corporate level as part of the private sector, while allowing for strong and empathic governance (and the public sector), more in line with “servant leadership”.

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

269

14.4.8 Conscious Capitalism Is Still Capitalism CC is to reform Capitalism to smooth out its rough edges and free its spirit to succeed in a human-centered way, where such human-centeredness is another convergence with Islam. However, while the economy is conceived in the framework of four factors of production, the reality is that there is only one human factor, which consists of labor and, indirectly, the entrepreneur. While the economic relationships involve ownership of all the factors, conceptually and practically Capitalism, in its mainstream, dominant version is still a “capital”-centered story and it is the owners of capital that dominate this system, and hence it is called CAPITALism. In any system where capital dominates, after the rough edges are smoothed out, would it still be CAPITALism? To have a human-centered approach, where the labor is not just entitled to its wages, but also to a share in profit requires a much more fundamental reformulation of thought with a different nomenclature, representing its authentic substance and symbolism. The vision of CC to have a higher purpose and serve the humanity does not quite seem to resonate with a system – named Capitalism  - where the notion and spirit are based on dominance of one specific factor: capital. Islam incorporates the virtues of Capitalism, without falling into the trap of the one-factor domination. That also explains why there is considerable convergence with CC, as the latter envisions Capitalism without its rough edges. Malkawi (2010) makes the case how Islam can help us move in the direction where capitalistic virtues are not sacrificed, but rather preserved on a more holistic and effective foundation. Similar case is also made by Tripp (2006) in his book Islam and the Moral Economy: The Challenge of Capitalism.

14.5 Conclusion Capitalism as a system persists as the dominant economic system, where parallel to its positive dynamics of freedom, market-orientation, entrepreneurial spirit and innovation, continue to run into conflict with the underlying relentless profit-­seeking bias without conscientious and “conscious” regard for the effects on the people and the planet. Thus, as part of the reform movement within Capitalism, CC has earned a special place and recognition as it tries to transform the businesses into entities pursuing a higher purpose. Based on its particular vision and the operational objectives, it has huge potentials to make a difference to the lives of people and the planet, especially in a context where our planet is facing an existential threat. To build a broader synergy with various societies of the world, one needs to identify common grounds for seeking the common interest. In this chapter, we focus on a particular world religion (way of life), Islam, and explore the areas of convergence and divergence. As a comprehensive way of life, Islam’s scope is much wider than any economic system and business philosophy, such as CC.  However, there are some key areas of convergence which can be mutually beneficial. A few areas where

270

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

CC might not go as far as it should, are identified, where a comprehensive way of life like Islam provides a more holistic framework. Yet, for a long period Muslims have not been successful in operationalizing their objectives in this world. With the common ground of humanity-orientation to reorient business leadership and enterprises to serve the people and take care of the planet, there is a great need to better understand the mutual perspective and forge areas of productive collaboration and engagement.

References Ahmad, A.U.F. 2010. Theory and Practice of Modern Islamic Finance: The Case Analysis from Australia. Florida: BrownWalker Press. Ahmad, A.U.F., and M.A. Mobin. 2015. Promoting Maqāsid al-Sharī‘ah and Achieving Sustainable Economic Development: The Potential of Proposed Two Tier Mudārabah Business Model on Cash Waqf. Media Syari’ah 17 (1): 1–36. Ahmad, A.U.F., M.K.  Hassan, and A.K.M.  Shahed. 2006. Zakāh and Re-distributive Justice in Islam. Journal of Muamalat and Islamic Finance Research 3 (1): 1–21. Anderson, R.M. 2015. The 4 Principles of Conscious Capitalism, Entrepreneur, June 1, Retrieved March 4, 2021 from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/246478. Ashford, R., and R. Shakespeare. 1999. Binary Economics: The New Paradigm. University Press of America. Balconi, M., and at el. 2017. Why to Cooperate is Better than to Compete: Brain and Personality Components. BMC Neuroscience 23 (68): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12868-­017-­0386-­8. Bashar, M.L.A. 1997. Price Control in an Islamic Economy. Journal King Abdul Aziz University: Islamic Economics 9: 29–52. Bayhaqi, Aḥmad ibn al-Ḥusayn Bayhaqī. 1994. As-Sunan Al-Kubra [The Great Sunan] Bayrut : Dar al-Kutub al Ilmiyah. Bower, J., H. Leonard, and L. Paine. 2011. Capitalism at Risk: Rethinking the Role of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Bukhārī, M.I. 1966. Sahih al-Bukhari. Karachi: Muhammad Sarid. Cizakca, M. 2011. Islamic Capitalism and Finance: Origins, Evolution and the Future. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Deaton, A. 2015. The Great Escape: Health, Wealth and the Origins of Inequality. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Eggers, W., and P. Macmillan. 2013. The Solution Revolution: How Business, Government, and Social Enterprises Are Teaming Up to Solve Society’s Toughest Problems. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Farooq, M.O. 2011. Self-Interest, Homo Islamicus and Some Behavioral Assumptions in Islamic Economics and Finance. International Journal of Excellence in Islamic Banking and Finance 1 (1): 52–79. Retrieved March 4, 2021 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers. cfm?abstract_id=1740729. ———. 2019. Rent-Seeking Behavior and Injustice/Exploitation (Zulm) Beyond Riba-Interest Equation. ISRA International Journal of Islamic Finance 11 (1): 110–123. Farooq, M.O., and F.  Hadi. 2020. Islam and Business: Beliefs, Values and Norms. In Islamic Business Administration: Concepts & Strategies, ed. Minwir al-Shammari, Mohammad Farooq, and Hatem al-Masri, 3–17. Macmillan. Farooq, M.O., and M. Selim. 2018. Conceptualization of the Real Economy and Islamic Finance: Transformation beyond the Asset-Link Rhetoric. Thunderbird International Business Review 61 (5): 685–696.

14  Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergence and Divergence

271

Fontana, G., C. Pitelis, and J. Runde. 2019. Financialisation and the New Capitalism? Cambridge Journal of Economics 42 (4): 799–804. Frankel, C., and A. Bromberger. 2013. The Art of Social Enterprise: Business as if People Mattered. British Columbia: New Society Publishers. Fyke, J., and P. Buzzanell. 2013. The Ethics of Conscious Capitalism: Wicked Problems in Leading Change and Changing Leaders. Human Relations 66 (2): 1619–1643. Gagnon, Louis. 2018. The Rise of Conscious Capitalism, Forbes, September 20, Retrieved 4 March, 2021 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesnycouncil/2018/09/20/ the-­rise-­of-­conscious-­capitalism/?sh=4401ac2d39b7. Ghazanfar, S.M. 2006. Islamic Civilization: History, Contributions, and Influence. London: Scarecrow Press. Greenleaf, R.K. 1977. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. New York: Paulist Press. Haykal, M.H. 2008. The Life of Muhammad. Selangor: Islamic Book Trust. Heck, G.W. 2006. Charlemagne, Muhammad, and the Arab Roots of Capitalism. New  York: Walter de Gruyter. Howes, L. 2014. 5 Secrets to Building a Business  – with Heart, Entrepreneurship, Retrieved August 5, 2020 from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/236171. Ibrahim, M. 2011. Merchant Capital and Islam. Austin: University of Texas Press. Ibrahim, F. 2012. Capitalism versus Planet Earth: An irreconcilable Conflict. Muswell Press. Jan, S., and M. Asutay. 2019. A Model for Islamic Development: An Approach in Islamic Moral Economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Kelso, L., and M. Adler. 2017. The Capitalist Manifesto. Hauraki Publishing. Koehler, B. 2014. Early Islam and the Birth of Capitalism. New York: Lexington Books. Kolm, Serge-Christophe, and J.  Ythier. 2006. Handbook of Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity: Foundations. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Kotler, P. 2015. Confronting Capitalism: Real Solutions for a Troubled Economic System. New York: AMACOM. Labib, S. 1969. Capitalism in Medieval Islam. The Journal of Economic History 29 (1): 79–96. Lapavitsas, C. 2013. The Financialization of Capitalism: ‘Profiting Without Producing. City 17 (6): 792–805. Legault, M. 2012. Conscious Capitalism: Leaders and Organizations with a World View. Integral Leadership Review 12 (2): 1–9. Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2014. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Mackey, J., S.  Mcintosh, and C.  Phipps. 2020. Conscious Leadership: Elevating Humanity Through Business. Portfolio/Penguin. Malkawi, M. 2010. Fall of Capitalism and Rise of Islam. Xlibris. Mohammed, J.A. 2013. Business Precepts of Islam: The Lawful and Unlawful Business Transactions According to Shariah. In Handbook of the Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics, ed. C. Luetge. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­94-­007-­1494-­6_6. Montgomery, John. 2012. Great from the Start: How Conscious Corporations Attract Success. New York, NY: Morgan James Publishing. Naqvi, S.N.H. 1981. Ethics and Economics: An Islamic Synthesis. Leicester: Islamic Foundation. O’Toole, J., and D.  Vogel. 2011. Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism. California Management Review 53 (3): 60–76. Piketty, T. 2017. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Rodinson, M. 1973. Islam and Capitalism. New York: Pantheon Books. Schwartz, Tony 2013. Companies that practice ‘Conscious Capitalism’ perform 10x better, Harvard Business Review, Retrieved March 4, 2021 from https://hbr.org/2013/04/ companies-­that-­practice-­conscious-­capitalism-­perform. Schwerin, D. 1998. Conscious Capitalism: Principles of Prosperity. New York: Routledge. Sen, A. 1995. Inequality Reexamined. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

272

M. O. Farooq and A. U. F. Ahmad

Sisodia, R. 2009. Doing Business in the Age of Conscious Capitalism. Journal of Indian Business Research 1 (2/3): 188–192. Smith, A. 1761. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. 2nd ed. London: A. Millar. ———. 1827. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. University of Edinburgh Press. Smith, F. 2016. Lessons fromA Decade of Conscious Capitalism, Forbes. Retrieved March 4, 2021 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/fredsmith/2016/11/11/lessons-­from-­a-­decade-­of-­conscious-­capi talism/?sh=5f2b57072e0c. Stiglitz, J. 2013. The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future. New York: W. W. Norton. ———. 2014. Inequality is not inevitable, New York Times. Retrieved March 4, 2021 from https:// opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/inequality-­is-­not-­inevitable/. Tripp, C. 2006. Islam and the Moral Economy: The Challenge of Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yunus, M. 2007. Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism. Hachette. ———. 2011. Building Social Business: The New Kind of Capitalism that serves Humanity’s Most Pressing Needs. Public Affairs. ———. 2017. A World of Three Zeros: The New Economics of Zero Poverty, Zero Unemployment, and Zero Net Carbon Emissions. Public Affairs. Zywicki, T. 2015. Rent-Seeking, Crony Capitalism, and the Crony Constitution. Supreme Court Economic Review 23: 77–103. Mohammad Omar Farooq is an Associate Professor, Department of Accounting and Finance at Gulf University, Sanad, Bahrain. He served as the Acting Dean of Faculty of Business and Financial Sciences at Royal University for Women, Bahrain and the Head of the Center for Islamic Finance at Bahrain Institution of Banking and Finance before joining the University of Bahrain. His primary research interests include: economic development, financial institutions, history of economic thoughts and Islamic economics, finance, banking, law, and history. He has a keen interest in gender economics and genocide studies and contributed to these areas as well. His scholarly works have been published in Journal of Economic Issues, International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, International Journal of Social Economics, Review of Islamic Economy, Arab Law Quarterly, History of Economic Ideas, and Journal of Islamic and Muslim Studies. E-mail: [email protected].  

Abu Umar Faruq Ahmad is currently an adjunct Professor of Islamic Finance at United International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Featured in the 2018 and 2019 ISLAMICA500 Global Leaders of the Islamic Economy, Dr. Ahmad’s additional accomplishments include Associate Professorships at Islamic Economics Institute (IEI), King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia); at INCEIF – The Global University of Islamic Finance in Malaysia; Universiti Brunei Darussalam in Brunei; and Assistant Professorship at a Hamdan Bin Mohammed Smart University in the United Arab Emirates. Prof. Ahmad’s research interests include: Sharī‘ah compliance of Islamic banks’ products and structures, the opportunities and challenges of Islamic finance, case studies of Islamic banks and financial institutions, Islamic insurance and reinsurance, Islamic microfinance, Sukuk, and dispute resolution in Islamic banking and finance, among others. Prof. Ahmad is also serving currently as the Chairman of the Sharī‘ah Supervisory Board at Islamic Cooperative Finance Australia Ltd., as well as the Sharī‘ah Audit Executive at Islamic Bank of Australia Group. E-mail: [email protected].  

Chapter 15

Islam and Conscious Capitalism Omar Hemissi and Khaldoun Dia-Eddine

15.1 Introduction Islam is the most recent monotheistic religion of mankind. Revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in 610 A.D. by the Archangel Gabriel (Jibril), this religion managed in two decades to spread throughout the Arabian Peninsula, a large part of the Arab world and several regions of Asia and Africa. Today more than 1.5 billion people on earth are Muslims. To understand this widely spread religion and to be able to identify its relationship with conscious capitalism, it is useful to briefly go back over its genesis, its foundations and to explain the rules and principles that preside over the establishment of a new attitude of believing Man. Islam is based on the principle that “there is no God but ALLAH” and that “Muhammad is the messenger of ALLAH”. This foundation which is the basis of belief is the first and main pillar of the five pillars of Islam, along with the other four pillars which are: prayer, zakat (almsgiving), fasting in the month of Ramadhan, and pilgrimage. The Qur’an represents the fundamental source that highlights the constitution of religion and its anchoring in the behaviors of believers. The first source of interpretation of the Qur’an is the Sunnah, which deals with the practical rules defining the right attitudes, the behavior of the good Muslim, the principles governing relations and transactions, the orientations, recommendations and laws laid down and practiced by the Prophet Muhammad transmitted mainly through his

O. Hemissi (*) École Supérieure de Commerce of Algiers (ESC), Koléa, Algeria e-mail: [email protected] K. Dia-Eddine Zurich University for Applied Sciences (ZHAW), Zürich, Switzerland © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_15

273

274

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

sayings “Hadiths” and his actions. These two sources soon became a type of constitution to which jurisprudence or “Fiqh” (the set of interpretations and opinions given by scholars) gave a practical character, which may open the door to some deviations from an original utopian picture, since Fiqh is subject to interpretations. From this structure – which will be completed later – Islam remains a religion that evolves and adapts. Change is in the genetic code of Islam since it includes among others a synthesis of the previous monotheistic religions with additions adapted to new life conditions. Indeed, within the temporal and geographical presence of Islam, it has to deal with issues of belief, personal behavior, relationships with others, transactions, and good daily practices while adapting to different contexts; this has contributed to the broadening of the spectrum of this religion and its visibility and has increased its malleability not only in the conceptions and attitudes of individuals, but also in the practices of nations and in their relations with other nations. This has been translated in commerce -as a main activity for centuries-, by laws that have made it possible to establish a new economic order with its conditions (Ishaque 1983), mechanisms and requirements to be observed and respected by traders, while enshrining the principle of entrepreneurial freedom, within the framework of the lawfulness of capital accumulation and its profitability. Such developments are the milestones of a new era, indeed of a nascent civilization which, while encouraging individual initiative, establishes an order based on equity, equality of opportunity, morality, and respect for the rights of others. It is undeniable that Islam as a religion has formed the ethical path for institutions (Facchini 2007). This is not strange to the modern universal vision of religion found in the works of eminent thinkers who marked the twentieth century (Hireche and Douidi 2016), including (Yochi Fukuyama 1961) who proposes to apprehend religion through the following four dimensions: cognitive, cultural, creedal and devotional. While King (1967), takes a broader view to evoke religion through: personal commitment, contribution to the actions of the congregation, personal religious experience, the individual’s ties to his or her congregation, commitment to meditate on his or her belief, openness to the wider spread of religion, tolerance and intrinsic orientation, financial behavior and attitude, knowledge and discussion of what religion is about. This vision makes a clear link between economy and religion, which is in line with the direction of modern development of capitalism and society. It has become evident – especially after the financial crisis – that a great gap exists between social and corporate values and behaviors (Minto 2016). This has reinforced the existence of new forms of capitalism, including conscious capitalism. Conscious capitalists believe that the role of business goes far beyond job creation, wealth generation and capital accumulation. They believe that organizations using new business models can help solve many social and environmental problems based on four principles: A goal that goes beyond profit (higher purpose), while taking into consideration the concern of stakeholders, beyond shareholders, through conscious leadership, which develops a conscious culture in its company (Sisodia 2009).

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

275

This vision of contemporary capitalism and this capacity of Islam to develop and adapt to new contexts, leads us to wonder about the compatibility of the principles, values, and laws of Islam with this conscious capitalism, and in what way can Islam support and advance the cause of conscious capitalism? This will be done by presenting the precepts of Islam as well as their sources and the tools – including legal and economic configurations  – derived from the interpretations and practices accepted in general and in relation to capital in particular, and then to establish links between the precepts of Islam and conscious capitalism by comparing them before understanding the elements of interaction and convergence between the two models. A critical approach to the Islamic economy and finance will conclude the analysis.

15.2 Islam: A Path to the New Human Condition In 571 CE, Muhammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim was born in the Arab tribe of Quraysh which occupies much of the Holy Place region of Makkah. At the age of 40, the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), receives the Archangel Jibril who tells him that God has chosen him as the messenger and founder of Islam, in the continuity of the line of Abraham (SAWA). The messenger was invested with the mission of urging people to return to the right path, after having strayed from the precepts given to them by the leaflets of Abraham, the Torah, and the Bible. In his journey, Muhammad (SWAS) mapped out a new path that combines the way of worshipping God (the spiritual) and submitting to His Laws with the way of behaving as a believer in one’s intrinsic attitude and in one’s relationships and transactions with one’s neighbor (the temporal). The term “Muslim” in its deepest sense refers to submission to God, which means that the fundamental message is to lead believers to follow the path of God in their acts, practices, and relationships. The death of the Prophet leaved the field open to interpretations that have multiplied in very different Muslim regions with very different changing conditions that have become more complicated and accelerated over the centuries by bringing the spiritual and the temporal face to face. Since that time, even the most recent writings have not been able to dispel the confusion that is largely made between the spiritual and the temporal, between fundamental laws and interpretations, but also between the institutional laws that govern the business world and those that animate any private initiative, as is the case in the Western capitalist world. Some modern contributions, often classified as being contrary to Islamically commonly accepted classical tendencies (Bennabi 1946, 1949; Soroush 1998; Arkoun 1982; Rahman 1970, 1984; Amin al-Khûli 1965; Khalafallâh 1982; Abû Zayd 1990; Charfi 1991; Esack 1997) may present exceptions even if they remain partial, the same can be said of other modern contributions that have remained in a more conservative line despite their work on renewal (Khurshid 1980; Chapra 2014; Qahf 2015; Al-Sadr 2000, El-Gamal 2006; Al-Qaradawi 1990; Attiyah Jamal Al Din 1993; Khan 1994; etc.…), the debate is therefore not closed and the challenges are many and diverse.

276

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

Fig. 15.1  Framework for the links between elements influencing the economic context

To achieve our goal which is limited to the economic sphere, we will undertake to deal with the individual in Islam, the objectives to be achieved according to the principles of Islam, the legal system that generates laws and rules. The following diagram shows the framework and the relevant points for our study and the links between them (Fig. 15.1).

15.2.1 The Individual in Islam Although Islam advocates a community-based approach, the individual remains at the center of the system in Islam. The individual is the creation of God who has put at his disposal everything around him. In return, the individual has received a mandate to manage this legacy with all the privileges and responsibilities that this implies. Man is the vicegerent of God on earth (Al-Bar and Chamsi-Pasha 2015) “Behold thy Lord said to the Angels: I will create a vicegerent (khalifa) on earth” (Qur’an 2:30). The individual by this mandate becomes the centerpiece, since he is at the same time: the decision-maker and the executor, the actor and the addressee of action, the producer and the consumer; which makes him a being with needs, aspirations and interests on different levels and which can change over time. It is this individual who has the “task of creating the contours of state, society and religiosity” (Sambur 2009). The following figure summarizes this (Fig. 15.2). These individual interests are marked by the prevailing external conditions and together will influence the attitudes and behaviors of this individual with the tensions generated.

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

277

Fig. 15.2  The Individual and his multitude of interests from Islamic perspective

The basis of the action of this individual – as a believer – is this link with the creator that goes through the “Niyyah” (intention) expressed or felt by this individual actor/entrepreneur. The Prophet said: “Truly, the deeds are only according to the intentions, and to every man is that which he has intended”. (Al Bukhari, N. D.). This means that consciousness denotes a right perception, even a conviction that enables man to adopt good attitudes and have good thoughts (Hajjy 2014; Sayadi 2011). It directs the faithful towards righteousness and offers them to discern good from evil. In many verses, acting according to the principles and values dictated by one’s conscience is a path to the Creator to earn His reward, (Qur’an, 65:2–3): “ Such Is the admonition given To him who believes In God and the Last Day. And for those who fear God, He (ever) prepares A way out, And He provides for him from (sources) he never Could imagine. And if Anyone puts his trust In God, sufficient is (God) For him. For God will Surely accomplish His purpose: Verily for all things Has God appointed A due proportion.” We can also speak of awareness to refer to the initial phase of any project of change or process used by individuals to find the path of righteousness and what its principles and ideals dictate (Bennabi 1946; Arkoun 1982). Another basis of Islamic ethics is the middle way, the Prophet Muhammad asked Muslims for moderation in all matters, he described Islam as the way of the middle (Rice 1999). “In the end, all the economic activity of Islam, being subject to the question of halal and haram, licit and illicit, depends therefore on the moral and social values that the individual must respect in his different activities” (Comar 1995). The action of the Muslim, will be in line with four main dimensions that correspond to the interests mentioned above: the ritual dimension that defines the worship practices, the doctrinal dimension that leads each believer to meditate on

278

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

his existence, his link to his Creator and his link to other individuals and to the cosmos around him, then, the intellectual dimension that allows the use of knowledge, finally, the emotional dimension built on the purification of the soul and its refinement for a pure worship of God that strengthens the structural and material links.

15.2.2 The Islamic Legal System The Islamic legal system formally sets the framework for translating principles into reality. It develops the fundamental laws and governs the relationships and interactions and transactions between individuals on the one hand and between individuals and the institutional system on the other hand, as well as the Rights of God over His subjects. Indeed, the doctrine in Islam, from the legal point of view, is thus deployed on two main fields; the field of worship practices that defines the link between God and His subjects, called “Fiqh Al ‘Ibadat” or jurisprudence of the practice of worship (Al Djaziri 2003) which will be used rather in a pedagogical way and the field of relations and transactions that defines the rules and conditions of establishment and functioning of the links between individuals, called “Fiqh Al Mu’amalat” or jurisprudence of relations (Zaharuddin 2008). The legal system known as “Shari’a” is based on building a society in which the basic needs and interests of the individual are protected from harm (Mehboob 2010) and promoting the fulfillment of aspirations and refinements – optimally – for all society members. It formally generates injunctions, laws and rules is characterized by its fixed and variable components, it takes into consideration sacred texts, jurisprudence, customs, and other possible sources (Fig. 15.3) while following well-established methodologies that allow both rigor and flexibility, making it always valid in space and time (Al Hunaity 2015). These injunctions and laws apply -among others- to family laws, criminal laws, constitutional laws, and international laws as well as economic laws. For this latest, it covers many aspects like trade and commercial transactions, hoarding, capital accumulation, capital growth, as well as to the management of assets in general and the rights of the community over the destination of these assets and the income generated by their exploitation. The legal status of the acts derives from this legal system as a whole. According to the consensus among scholars (Zaydan 1976), there are five legal statuses: permissible or licit (Mubah), recommended (Mandûb), obligatory (Fard), detestable or undesirable (Makrûh) and prohibited or illicit (Harâm). The same act may be licit as it may become illicit depending on the context in which it is found. For example: Ramadan fasting in general is an obligatory act but may become forbidden if it leads a sick person to death, it may be undesirable if a pregnant woman or a person suffering from a chronic disease performs it and it leads them to an advanced state of fatigue that could harm their health.

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

279

Fig. 15.3  The Islamic legal system

15.2.3 Socio-Economic Configuration in Islam and Economic Instruments What interests us particularly in this chapter is the second area of the “Mu’amalat” that gives shape to the Islamic economic system, by determining the rules that define the norms as well as the instruments of its proper functioning. However, these rules are issued within the framework of a specific socio-economic configuration that generates the basis of Islamic economic theory with its main principles. This configuration deals with wide-ranging set of issues, such as commercial transactions, property rights, incentive system, allocation of resources, types of economics freedom, system of economic decision-making and proper role of the government. “The over-riding objective of the system is social justice and specific patterns of income and wealth distribution and consequently economic policies are to be designed to achieve these ends”. (Khan 1992). The Islamic economic system, and therefore the rules of the Mu’amalat, fit into this Islamic socio-economic vision with the following characteristics (Khurshid 1980):

280

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

• The moral aspect that individual and collective economic motives are constrained by the moral bounds demarked by Islam • Fulfillment of the basic needs of all the inhabitants of the state, which implies the complete eradication of absolute poverty from society • The human dimension is the main aspect of economic enterprise in Islam. Islam wants to establish a ‘Balanced and Just Distribution of Income’. According to Islam, all humans are equal in respect of their origin; Hence, each one has an equal right to acquire their sustenance from Allah’s bounty. However, if someone, for whatever reason, fails or loses his ability to acquire sufficient provisions, he has a right to share in the earnings of others. • Along with private and public sectors, where Islam permits the right of private ownership, Islam stresses voluntary activities to maximize the moral and social welfare of people, with no individual economic motives. The needed instruments to reach the above objectives are: “economic policy, development planning, instruments of taxation, fiscal and monetary management, parameters of incomes and wages and investment, housing policy, education policy and patterns of consumption (Khurshid 1980). It should be noted in this regard that Islamic financial Framework based on the principles and values of Islam has been proposed in recent years as an alternative approach to conventional finance to reinforce precisely this conscious behavior (Muhammad Bilal Zafar and Ahmad Azam Sulaiman 2019) that motivates the company to exploit instruments and mechanisms that promote development in solidarity with stakeholders and sustainable growth driven by the federation of resources and the pooling of energies of all parties. Transactions (Muamalat) are thus built on these principles and values. To make this feasible we propose the following pillars (Fig. 15.4). These pillars are used to reach the objectives of Islamic Economy and are subject to the basic principles and general rules explained later. But, for these pillars to play their roles, each of them will have more specific principles relating to it, they will also be -due to the nature of the principles- different -to a certain extent- from the instruments of a conventional economy. Thus, Islamic finance -as example- has a specific engineering that distinguishes it from so-called conventional finance (Boudib 2019). In recent years, it has proposed itself as an alternative approach to conventional finance to reinforce precisely this conscious behavior that motivates the company to use instruments and mechanisms that promote development in solidarity with stakeholders and sustainable growth driven by the federation of resources and the pooling of energies of all parties. Within this framework we can cite certain principles that contribute to achieving these goals such as the prohibition of interests, the prohibition of excessive or impossible to measure risk (called Gharar), the prohibition of gambling, investment in non-licit sectors, hoarding, monopoly, and rules concerning contracts, or goods in trade, etc. (Guéranger 2009). On the other hand, the distribution of profits and losses between partners is the basis of financial transactions, a proximity between

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

281

Fig. 15.4  Pillars of the socio-economic vision in Islam

financial transactions and the real economy is sought, a better relationship with exchange of information and experience between partners is encouraged. Social solidarity, known as takaful, should be the rule in insurance models; the notions of “Hiba” (donation) or “Qard Al Hassan” (interest-free credit) can also be used during transactions, they demonstrate a negation of the search for quick and personal profit since the remuneration of such acts (return on investment) would be made also in the afterlife (Alrifai 2015). The ultimate societal goal being a more equitable and inclusive justice according to the precepts of Islam, without neglecting the legitimate benefit of the economic partners.

15.3 Principles and Values of Islamic Economy To understand the relationship between the Islamic socio-economic order and the Islamic economic system, one must understand the related fundamental principles and values in Islam. These principles were summarized by Causse-Broquet (2012): “The principle of the lieutenancy of goods [Istikhlaf], the principle of equivalence, or social justice and solidarity, and the principle of controlled economic freedom. The limits to economic freedom are imposed by the respect of certain balances: the role of money, the place of the labor factor, the neutrality of time and the “sequentiality” of the economic process. ». Al Tariqui (2009), for his part, lays down the economic principles in Islam on dual ownership, conditional freedom, and social solidarity.

282

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

Khurshid, goes into more details and considers that the Islamic socio-economic order “covers all spheres of society on the basis of the principles of justice, equality and mutual prosperity” (Khurshid 1980). Justice represents one of the basic values of Islam in general and more specifically here for the relationship between people throughout economic processes and value chains. In a Holy Hadith, God says: “I have forbidden injustice to Me and I have forbidden it between you” (Badi 2002). Furthermore, the Prophet instructs all bosses, saying: “Give your worker his due before his sweat dries!” (Ibn Mâjah 2007). This indicates the place of equity and justice in the relationship between bosses and employees and beyond that between economic actors. This justice is transformed in the context of a society into social justice, which represents one of the most important societal principles of Islam, because social justice comprises three elements: an equitable distribution of wealth, social security, and protection of the vulnerable from the strong (Baht 2019). Tawhid, or unity, represents a value that has two faces, one that expresses the fact that God is the sole creator of the universe, and the other that indicates that human beings are equal partners. In business it means cooperation and equality of effort and opportunity (Rice 1999). The notion of property is fundamental in Muslim law. It must be understood within the framework of this lieutenancy or mandate given to the individual by his creator. This initially limits the notion of property. For absolute ownership is based on the principle that everything belongs to the Lord and that his subjects dispose of it during their lifetime as manager or lieutenant (Istikhlaf) to make good use of it and to serve their neighbor (Akkâm 1996). Thus, the Qur’an (53,31) says: “Yea, to God belongs all That is in the heavens and on earth”. It is in this context that private property is consecrated. According to the Malekite tendency, which is one of the four main currents of thought in Islam, “the fundamental principle is the free and full disposal of one’s property” (Al-Muattaa of Imam Malik, quoted by Al Siouti 2014). The only limit lies in abusing one’s right to the detriment of others. Heritage also enjoys the greatest protection; individual ownership is possible by inheritance, but also by donation or simply by the acquisition of a property, it is also possible with certain conditions to appropriate a vacant or ownerless property by takeover. No distinction is made between women and men in the ownership or use of individual property. Many other verses enshrine the principle of individual ownership and even motivate individuals to be innovative to help meet the expectations of the community, while enjoying their own freedom. Collective property, also known as public property, on the other hand, is anything that is shared by the collective of the community and which could not in any way be appropriated by a specific person or group, such as water, hills, and rivers. The management of these goods is entrusted to the community, according to the mechanisms in place. In the case of a conflict of interest between the private and the collective, the collective takes precedence. In short, the notion of ownership in Islam remains a key principle that places the entrepreneur or merchant at the center of his community and conditions the

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

283

prosperity of his activity by his commitment to serve this community. Hence the principles of mutual prosperity and solidarity. In the Qur’an (49,10) it is said that “ The Believers are but a single Brotherhood”. In this sense, the principles of fairness, transparency, brotherhood and solidarity are emphasized, while greed, speculation, lies, fraud (e.g. in trade: price, weight, quantity and quality -as stated in Qur’an (83,1–5)) are banned; in short, any act that could cause harm. In the same sense, solidarity represents a basic principle of Islam, as it has a particular character, in view of its participation in building a human relationship in the first place and a community relationship in the second place. Many verses and Hadiths highlight this human value. From the outset, God says to His followers: “Help ye one another in righteousness and piety but help ye not one another in sin and rancor: fear God: for God is strict in punishment” Qur’an (5:2). This verse can also be understood in the sense of cooperation in establishing a work or finishing a task. Likewise, in his preaching, the Prophet recalled on many occasions the four circles of solidarity: personal, family, social, and finally human solidarity in its universal sense. In the Qur’an, as in the tradition of the prophet, this solidarity is not only material, but also intellectual and spiritual (Al Luwaiheq 2015). It is in this sense that solidarity is formally defined as a form of contribution by the holders of surplus or wealth from economic goods and activities. That said, forms of solidarity are not limited, the only limits to its diversity are contexts, imagination, and needs. It can be between individuals and institutions or between institutions or individuals, as it can be between countries or groups. This is how the Waqf, which represents financial solidarity and social cooperation between members of the community (Baqutayan et al. 2018) or solidarity insurance (Takaful) were created, for example. Freedom of enterprise is based on the principle that human beings are born free and dignified and that freedom is a natural aspect of being human (Sambur 2009). This goes hand in hand with the capacity for self-control and responsibility confirmed by the Qur’an (17,84): “Everyone acts according to his own disposition”. This entrepreneurial freedom is framed by rules and conditions laid down by the Qur’an and the Sunnah that govern not only the acts performed, but also the relational links between the entrepreneur and the surrounding system, including the state. Thus, the source of funds, the legality of the activity, the probity of the capital holder and the contribution of the activity to the community are fundamental elements that characterize the framework in which any capital holder enjoys the freedom to engage in any activity likely to generate a return. It is essential to remember that the notions of economic freedom and entrepreneurial freedom remain at the heart of Muslim economic life despite these limits and together form the basis of the economic configuration which in turn unfolds in two main aspects; the first is profit-­ making while the second is non-profit-making (Samdani and Fatima 2014; Nikonova et al. 2015). The injunction to work and invest is part of the injunctions of the Qur’an as well as those of the Sunna. Is it not said in the Qur’an (62,10): “ And when the Prayer Is

284

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

finished, then may ye Disperse through the land, And seek of the Bounty of God”? which Al Qurtubi interprets (Al Qurtubi 1964): “Spread in the land to trade and dispose of your needs”. Similarly, in the Hadith, Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) said: “ No doubt, one had better take a rope (and cut) and tie a bundle of wood and sell it whereby Allah will keep his face away (from Hellfire) rather than ask others who may give him or not”. (Al Bukhari N.D 561). In fact, work is not only a right but a duty, for idleness and “parasitism” are not tolerated, hence the importance of what Allah says in the Qur’an (9105): “And say: “Work (righteousness): soon will God observe your work and His apostle and the believers: soon will ye be brought back to the knower of what is hidden and what is open: then will He show you the truth of all that ye did.”. And the Prophet (pbuh) tells his companions: “Whoever among you does any work must complete it with quality” (Al Tabarani 1995, 901). This shows the place of work as an activity which, by its intrinsic value, helps to determine the value of the one who does it properly. Work and effort are thus magnified to form the basis of all remuneration, whether spiritual, material or purely financial. The Prophet, in several Hadiths, has encouraged initiative and motivated effort that brings returns in the broadest sense of the word for the individual and for the community.

15.4 Elements of Convergence Between Conscious Capitalism and the Values and Precepts of Islam To begin with, it is essential to recall that “Muslim law is in its structure, categories and concepts entirely original in comparison to other legal systems” (David 2002). On the basis of the principles and values mentioned above, it is possible to say that there is a great compatibility between Islam’s principles and values and those of capitalism, especially “European” capitalism better known as the social market economy. Several studies confirm this. In a detailed research entitled, “Fundamentals of an Islamic Economic System compared to the Social Market Economy“, the prof. Dr. Volker Nienhaus says: “the formal restrictions, which stem from the requirements for Shariah-conformity, do not prevent the construction of a sophisticated and efficient financial system and capital market – without which the social market economy could not function” and he added: “Islamic economic systems are indeed compatible with the concept of the social market economy“(Nienhaus 2010). In another research Indra de Soysa from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology writes: “Islam, on the other hand, though showing a small negative effect on legal security and property rights for women especially, seems to support economic freedom on every other component area, interestingly in the area of access to sound money, freedom to trade, and lower business regulation” (De Soysa 2019). Also, another study concludes that: “the Islamic economy has demonstrated a favorable outcome that considered “the dynamism of capitalism“(Ahmed 2019).

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

285

This does not prevent us from saying that the compatibility between Islam and capitalism is not perfect, as Lena Rethel notes in her article (Rethel 2019): “(…) pointed to instances of dissimilarity, deviance and defiance – in terms of the range of participants, sources of authority and scope for reasoning”. One should also not forget some basic principles that Islam has designed for transactions in general and financial transactions more specifically, such as the prohibition of interest, unbridled speculation, etc. But the differences do not only concern these points; they can also be generated, in a more general way, by the “atomistic” approach (Rahman 1984) of the arguments found in the Islamic literature that link the capitalist economy to the Islamic other. That said, conscious capitalism is grafted onto the capitalist system, and fully adheres to its principles and objectives (conscious capitalism, N.D.) but sees a need for change and evolution. This addition is based on 4 principles that conscious organizations apply: 1. Have higher goals that serve, align and integrate the interests of all their key stakeholders. 2. They become aware of the interdependencies that exist between all stakeholders and discover and exploit synergies from situations that otherwise seem full of compromises. 3. They have conscious leaders who are driven by a desire to serve the goals of the company, all the people the company touches and the planet we all share together. 4. Have trusting, authentic, innovative and caring cultures that make working for the company a source of personal growth and professional fulfillment. They strive to create financial, intellectual, social, cultural, emotional, spiritual, physical and ecological wealth for all their stakeholders. In the Table 15.1, the additions of conscious capitalism have been categorized and subcategorized and detailed on the basis of several references, specifically an article published in the magazine Bilan (Fiorucci 2019) as well as others (Argyris and Schon 1974; Heilbroner et al. 2008; Hyman and Baptist 2014). In this table, the values and indications mentioned in the “Islamic” column are based on verses from the Qur’an or the Hadiths of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in order not to overload the table with the interpretations and opinions of Muslim scholars and experts. As developed earlier, the Islamic economy offers wide scope for capital formation and development. Freedom of initiative, conditional freedom of capital accumulation, diversity of activities, association of capital and business development are all areas that mark points of convergence between the two systems: capitalist and Islamic, particularly with regard to the fundamental principles and rules of operation in respect of ethics and deontology in transactions. In addition to this, the above table demonstrates in a striking manner that the principles laid down by the conscious capitalists are largely covered by the injunctions of the Islamic system, which shows that its bases are also the bases of all declinations of Islamic laws and ethical values.

286

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

Table 15.1  Comparison between values of conscious capitalism and Islamic values (Authors’ compilation) Capitalist values and principles Islamic position (values and principles) Principle I To follow a higher Worshipping God through the regency and the Istikhlaf principle purpose (explained earlier) (Muslim Ibn Hajjaj 2000) Principle II a-Conscious leadership (impact) Recognizing of and According to Muslim the Prophet said: “…Adhere to that which is adhering to contexts beneficial for you…” (Muslim Ibn Hajjaj 2000, 100) and opportunities b-Leadership conscient (motivation) Leading other with Al Bukhari and Muslim reported that the Prophet said: “All of you are responsibility guardians and are responsible for your subjects.” (Al Bukhari N.D. and Muslim Ibn Hajjaj 2000, 652) Self trust and Qur’an (12,87): “Never Give up hope of God’s Soothing Mercy: truly No conscience one despairs of God’s Soothing Mercy, except Those who have no faith” Self control Qur’an (3134): “Those who spend (freely), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon (all) men;- for Allah loves those who do good”  Establish a Prophet said: “Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed after direction him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest” (Ibn Mâjah 2007, 207)  Influence others Qur’an (16, 125): “Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and to follow beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious…”  Pursue change Qur’an (13,11): “… Verily never Will God change the condition Of a people until they Change it themselves (With their own souls)”  Personal Under the Chapter: Encouraging Livelihood by (working with) Hands and engagement Abstaining from Begging, (Al Bukhari N.D. 561) reported the Prophet’s hadith: “It is better for anyone of you to carry a bundle of wood on his back and sell it than to beg of someone whether he gives him or refuses”  Complete Qur’an (51,21): “As also in your own Selves: will ye not Then see ?” self-awareness Qur’an (2286): “On no soul doth God place a burden greater than it can bear.” Under the Chapter: Moderation in worship, Al Bukhari reported the Prophet’s hadith: “Your Lord has a right on you, your soul has a right on you, and your family has a right on you; so you should give the rights of all those who has a right on you” (Al Bukhari N.D.75) Qur’an (25,63): “And the servants of (God) Most Gracious are those Who walk on the earth In humility, and when the ignorant Address them, they say, “peace!””  Self guidance At Tirmidhi reported from the prophet (At Tirmidhi, N.D., 2646): “Whoever takes a path upon which to obtain knowledge, Allah makes the path to Paradise easy for him.” (continued)

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

287

Table 15.1 (continued) Capitalist values and principles  Authenticity

 The duty to contribute to changes Principle III Stakeholder consideration Financial

Islamic position (values and principles) Al Bukhari (Al Bukhari N.D., 34) reported the Prophet saying: “Whoever has the following four (characteristics) will be a pure hypocrite and whoever has one of the following four characteristics will have one characteristic of hypocrisy unless and until he gives it up: Whenever he is entrusted, he betrays, Whenever he speaks, he tells a lie, Whenever he makes a covenant, he proves treacherous, Whenever he quarrels, he behaves in a very imprudent, evil and insulting manner” Muslim (Muslim Ibn Hajjaj 2000) reported the Prophet saying: “Whoever amongst you sees an evil, he must change it with his hand; if he is unable to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is unable to do so, then with his heart; and that is the weakest form of Faith”

https://quranyusufali.com/25/ https://sunnah.com/bukhari:1968 Muslim (Muslim Ibn Hajjaj 2000, 1531a) reported the Prophet saying: “Both parties in a business transaction have the right to annul it so long as they have not separated; except in transactions which have been made subject to the right of parties to annul them”. (i.e., the seller and the buyer speak the truth, the seller with regard to what is purchased, and the buyer with regard to the money) Intellectual In the Qur’an (23,8): “Those who faithfully observe their trusts and their covenants” Social In the Qur’an (33,58): “And those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly, bear (on themselves) a calumny and a glaring sin” Environmental In the Qur’an (7,85): “…Give just measure and weight, nor withhold from the people the things that are their due; and do no mischief on the earth after it has been set in order: That will be best for you, if ye have Faith” Principle IV: Conscious culture Trust through Qur’an (5,8): “…and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve justice to wrong and depart from justice. Be just” Trust through Abu Dawud (Abu Dawud N.D., 1672) reported that the Prophet said: “… recognition and if anyone does you a kindness, recompense him…” Authenticity Qur’an (61,2) says: “Ye who believe! Why say ye that which ye do not?” Innovative Qur’an (30,8) says: “Do they not reflect in their own minds? Not but for just ends and for a term appointed, did Allah create the heavens and the earth, and all between them…” Caring In the book of Virtue, Enjoining Good Manners, and Joining of the Ties of Kinship, Muslim (Muslim Ibn Hajjaj 2000, 2586a) reported that the Prophet said: “The similitude of believers in regard to mutual love, affection, fellow-feeling is that of one body; when any limb of it aches, the whole body aches, because of sleeplessness and fever.”

288

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

15.5 Critical Analysis As mentioned above, the theoretical framework of Islamic tradition is very well developed in term of value, ethics, and completeness. Despite that, a critical analysis is needed in order to make the previous comparison with conscious capitalism reflecting the actual facts. In our opinion  – without going into a deep analysis or repeating some issues mentioned earlier in this paper – the major differences are coming from the following points: The capitalism in general has a much older continuous and established experience on organizational level as well as the interaction with political structures and system. This gives to the capitalism an operational and structural maturity, which is not the proper of the Islamic system. In addition to that, the international system and network is so intricated that it is difficult to the Islamic financial institution to perform according to their principles, they have to compromise and at the same time reduces the capacity of proving their differences. Another related aspect is the lack of the human resources leading the establishment of a modern framework since most of the financiers and economists working for the Islamic system had their education in the traditional economy and finance. Hence, the lack of intellectual independency in products development and exploration of new venues. This phenomenon in addition to the way how Islamic financial institutions are constructed, lead to have a lack of persons supervising the Islamic financial activities. The Islamic financial institutions are mostly private ones; therefore, there are – as any economic enterprise  – benefit driven, this leads that they select for their activities the ones which have quick returns to the shareholders. Through this approach, they are contradicting the heart of the Islamic values as well as deviating from the conscious capitalism view. In addition, the Islamic system rules and regulations were not codified as unique stable references. It is a point which has its advantage in term of liberty of choice for individuals, but it is a disadvantage when it comes to the level of a unified guidelines in a society. This has also a perverse consequence, it delays the capacity of adaptation to new conditions, which is one of the essential characteristics of modern economy. Also, this leads to have some unclarities about the governance supervising the Islamic institutions.

15.6 Conclusion To make one’s capital bear fruit is a perfectly accepted goal in Islam, as long as the attainment of this goal is deployed in strict compliance with the fundamental rules of the Shari’a and the lawful practices that characterize transactions between individuals and economic entities. Ethics and morality are principles that transcend the

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

289

restrictive frameworks of the Law. In Islam, the entrepreneur, investor, trader, or any other actor in the economic world first abide by the principles governing their behavior as Muslims, before submitting to the requirements of secular or worldly law. Conscious Capitalism also implies an awareness of the individual who presides over the acts and attitudes he or she undertakes in his or her relationships and transactions with others. This is an element of convergence between the precepts of Islam and the characteristics of conscious capitalism. Having said that, it should nevertheless be mentioned that Islamic laws, rules and values in the organization of socio-economic activities go much further than conscious capitalism. It has been brought above that they have much in common with the social economic system (which is capitalist in nature), which leads us to say that the Islamic economic system supports the approach of conscious capitalism while having more pronounced and notably broader scope. The 4 principles of conscious capitalism indeed provide a framework to guide the behavior and practices of individuals and organizations. However, these principles would benefit from being combined with other values, which do not necessarily correspond to the orientations advocated by liberal capitalism. The values and precepts building the Islamic system can constitute a source of reference and inspiration to offer conscious capitalism a path towards continuous improvement. In this context, it is easy to note that the contributions of conscious capitalism are increasingly considered in the contemporary economic world. This system is thus an alternative model capable of participating in the moralization of the economic world, which easily converges with the orientations of the Islamic economic system. Thus, the prospects for the development of a conscious economy, based on ethics and morality, inspired by the precepts and values of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, can be a reference in terms of human behavior in solidarity, justice, and efficiency. Could this be achieved? In the framework of what steps and on the basis of what initiative and methodology to avoid the current ideological drifts and economic interests? These are questions that will be worth analyzing further and deepening.

References Abu Zayd, N.H. 1990. Le discours religieux contemporain. Mécanismes et fondements intellectuels. Traduit de l’arabe par Nachwa al-Azhari and Edwige Lambert, avec la collaboration d’Iman Farag. Égypte/Monde arabe, (3). http://journals.openedition.org/ema/243; https://doi. org/10.4000/ema.243. Akkâm, F. 1996. Des fondements de la propriété dans la jurisprudence musulmane. Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée 79 (1): 25–41. Al-Bar, M.A., and C.P. Hassan. 2015. Islamic Perspective. In Contemporary Bioethics. Heidelberg New York: Springer Cham. ISBN 978-3-319-18428-9 (eBook) https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­18428-­9

290

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

Al Bukhari, Abdullah Muhammad bin Ismail, N.D., Sahih Al Bukhari (Translated english version by Muhsin Khan), 1st edition Edited by: Mika’il al-Almany Al Djaziri, A. 2003. La Jurisprudence dans les quatre courants (‫)الفقه عىل املذاهب ا ألربعة‬. Djeddah: Maison des Livres de la Science. Al Hunaity, Stability and Flexibility in Islamic Shari’a Between Renovation and Opening, Jordan University 2015, in Arabic: ‫ امحد احلنيطي‬.‫الثبات واملرونة يف الرشيعة الاسالمية بني التجديد والانفتاح د‬ ‫ اجلامعة الاردنية عامن‬2015 ، 2 ‫ العدد‬42 ‫اجملدل‬. ‫جمةل علوم ادلين والقانون‬ Al Khûli, A. 1965. Les pionniers de la renaissance en Islam. Le Caire: Autorité Générale du Livre, (Original Version: 1965 ‫ القاهرة‬،‫ الهيئة العامة للكتاب‬،‫ اجملددون يف إالسالم‬،‫)�أمني اخلويل‬. Al Lluwaiheq, A.M. 2015. Concept and Scope of Social Solidarity in Islam. Al Alwakah Network (original title: ‫)مفهوم ونطاق التاكفل الاجامتعي يف الاسالم‬. Al-Qaradawi, Y. 1990. Islamic awakening between rejection and extremism. Herndon, VA, USA: International Institute of Islamic Thought. Al Qurtubi, Mohamad Shamsuddine, AlJame’ liahkam Al Qur’an (Tafsir Al Qurtubi), Dar Al Kutub Al Masriyah. 2nd edition. 1964. ‫ �أبو عبد هللا‬:‫ اجلامع ألحاكم القر�آن = تفسري القرطيب املؤلف‬:‫الكتاب‬ ‫ �أمحد الربدوين‬:‫هـ) حتقيق‬671 :‫محمد بن �أمحد بن �أيب بكر بن فرح ا ألنصاري اخلزريج مشس ادلين القرطيب (املتوىف‬ ‫م‬. 1964 - ‫هـ‬1384 ،‫ الثانية‬:‫ القاهرة الطبعة‬- ‫ دار الكتب املرصية‬:‫وإ�براهمي �أطفيش النارش‬ Al Turaiqi, A. 2009. Economy, Bases, Principles and Goals. KSA: Al Juraisi for advertisement, Riyadh. (Original version: ‫ �أسس ومبادئ‬،‫ الاقتصاد الاساليم‬،‫عبد هللا عبد احملسن الطريقي‬ 2009 ‫ اململكة العربية السعودية‬، ‫ الرايض‬، ‫ مؤسسة اجلرييس‬،‫)و�أهداف‬. Al-Sadr, M. B. 2000. Our Economics (Iqtisaduna). London, Bookextra, 21.08.2000. Al-Tabarani Sulaiman Abu Alqassem. 1995. Arabic-Free translation.‫– دار احلرمني‬ ‫وحمسن احلسيين‬ ‫عوض هللا‬. ‫ ملعجم أالوسط للطرباين حتقيق طارق بن‬1995‫ا‬ Alrifai, T. 2015. Islamic Finance and the New Financial System: An Ethical Approach to Preventing Future Financial Crises. Wiley. Minto, Andrea. 2016. The Spirit of the Law Over Its Letter: The Role of Culture and Social Norms in Shielding Cooperative Banks from Systemic Shocks. Law and Financial Markets Review 10 (1): 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2016.1154298. Argyris, C., and D.A.  Schon. 1974. Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness. Jossey-Bass. Arkoun, M. 1982. Lectures du Coran. Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose. Atiyah Jamal Al-Din, The Islamic banks between the freedom and the organization and the theory and the application (University institution) N.D.; ‫ البنوك الإسالمية بني احلرية‬، ‫جامل ادلين عطية‬ ‫ املؤسسة اجلامعية‬.‫والتنظمي التقومي والاجهتاد النظرية والتطبيق (ط‬. Attiyah, H. 1993. Roots of organization and management problems in Arab countries: Cultural or otherwise? In Proceedings of the First Arab Management Conference. UK: Bradford University Badi Ahmed Dr. 2002. Sharh Arba’een An Nawawî Commentary of Forty Hadiths of An Nawawi. http://fortyhadith.iiu.edu.my/. Retrieved January 2021. Baht Bilal Ahmed. 2019. Social Justice in Islam and Human Rights, Ph.D Research Scholar, School of Education and Behavioral Sciences,University of Kashmir, Kashmir India, https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/339016328_Social_Justice_in_Islam_and_Human_Rights. Retrieved 01.12.2020. Baqutayan, S.M.S., A.S. Ariffin, M.I.A. Mohsin, and A.M. Mahdzir. 2018. Waqf Between the Past and Present. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 9 (4): 149–149. Bennabi, M. 1946. Le phénomène Coranique, Editions Algériennes En-Nahda, 207 p. ———. 1949. Les conditions de la renaissance. ANEP: Problème d’une civilisation. Alger. Éd. Boudib, Y. 2019. La finance islamique. In regards sur l’économie algérienne. Thème N°57: Rubrique: Analyser. Causse-Broquet, G. 2012. La finance islamique; Eyrolles, Collection Marchés – Finances, 2nd edition, p. 29. Chapra, M.U., and R. Whaples. 2008. Islamic economics: What It Is and How It Developed. Eh. Net Encyclopedia.

15  Islam and Conscious Capitalism

291

Chapra, M.U. 2010. Islamic Economics: What It Is and How It Developed. In Whaples. Robert. EH.net: Encyclopedia of Economic and Business History. Retrieved 10 July 2013. Chapra, M.U. 2014. Morality and Justice in Islamic Economics and Finance. Edward Elgar Publishing. Charfi, A. 1991. ‫ «[ إالسالم و احلداثة‬L’Islam et la Modernité »]. Tunis: Maison tunisienne de l’édition. Comar-Obeid, N. 1995. Les contrats en droit musulman des affaires. Economica, Paris, p. 42 Conscious Capitalism, N.D., Official Site of Conscious Capitalism. https://www.consciouscapitalism.org/credo. Retrieved 02.12.2020. David Fiorucci, (2019), Leadership Conscient, Bilan Magazine, Switzerland, https://www.bilan. ch/opinions/david-­fiorucci/leadership-­conscient. Retrieved 05.12.2020. David, R., C. Jauffret-Spinosi. 2002. Les grands systèmes de droit contemporains. Paris: Dalloz, P 349. De Soysa, I. 2019. Is Islam Compatible with Free-Market Capitalism? An Empirical Analysis, 1970–2010. Politics and Religion 12 (2). El-Gamal, M.A. 2006. Islamic Finance. Law, Economics, and Practice, edition, 188. Esack, F. 1997. Qur’an, Liberation and Pluralism: An Islamic Perspective of Interreligious Solidarity Against Oppression. Oxford. ISBN 1-85168-121-3. Facchini, F. 2007. Islam and Private Property. hal-00270475. Fukuyama, Y. 1961. The Major Dimensions of Church Membership. Review of Religious Research 2 (4): 154–161. Guéranger, F. 2009. Finance islamique: une illustration de la finance éthique. Dunod. Hajjy, A. 2014. L’éthique économique en Islam au prisme du concept de besoin. Heilbroner, Robert L. 2008. Capitalism. In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, ed. Steven N.  Durlauf and Lawrence E.  Blume, 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi. org/10.1057/9780230226203.0198. Hireche, A., and H.  Douidi. 2016. Influence de la religion sur les motivations entrepreneuriales chez les étudiants musulmans; cas des étudiants algériens. Management international/ International Management/Gestiòn Internacional 21 (1): 72–88. Hyman, L., and E.E. Baptist. 2014. American Capitalism: A Reader. Simon and Schuster. Ibn Mâjah Muḥammad ibn Yazīd. 2007. Sunan Ibn Mâjah, English translation of Al-Khattab Nasiruddine, Maktaba dar-us-salam, Riyad. Ishaque, K.M. 1983. The Islamic Approach to Economic Development. Voices of Resurgent Islam. Oxford University Press. Khalafallah, M.A. 1982. Le Coran et les problématiques de notre vie contemporaine. Le Caire: Société Arabe des Etudes, des Editions et de la diffusion. (Original version: ‫محمد‬ ‫ القاهرة‬،‫ املؤسسة العربية لدلراسات والنرش والتوزيع‬، ‫ القر�آن ومشالكت حياتنا املعارصة‬،‫�أمحد خلف هللا‬ 1982 ، 230 ‫)ص‬. Khan, M.A. 1992. Theoretical studies in Islamic banking and finance. Theoretical Studies in Islamic Banking and Finance. ———. 1994. An Introduction to Islamic Economics. Vol. 15. International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). Khurshid, A. 1980. Economics Development in a Islamic Framework. Djedda: International Center for Research in Islamic Economics, Studies in Islamic Economics. King, M. 1967. Measuring the Religious Variable: Nine Proposed Dimensions. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion: 173–190. Mehboob, UL-HASSAN. 2010. Islamic Approach of Economics: Some Discourses on Khurshid Ahmad’s Vision of Socio-Economic Order, Self-Reliance and Economic Development. Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies 3 (2): 216–240. Muhammad Bilal Zafar, and Ahmad Azam Sulaiman. 2019. CSR Narrative Under Islamic Banking Paradigm. Social Responsibility Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-­09-­2018-­0230. Muslim ibn-Hajjaj. 2000. Al Jami us-sihah, translation of Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, Kitab Bahwan. Nienhaus, V. 2010. Fundamentals of an Islamic Economic System Compared to the Social Market Economy. KAS International Reports 11: 77.

292

O. Hemissi and K. Dia-Eddine

Nikonova, T., K.  Igor, and S.  Liliya. 2015. Principles and Instruments of Islamic Financial Institutions. Procedia Economics and Finance 24: 479–484. Qahf, Monzer. 2015. Islamic Economic Development, Policy and Public Finance and Sustainable Development, Kindle, ASIN: B01069FZ3G, Published by Monzer Kahf. Rahman, F. 1970. Islamic Modernism: Its Scope, Method, and Alternatives. International Journal of Middle East Studies 1-4: 317–333. Rahman, F. 1984. Islam and modernity: Transformation of an intellectual tradition, Vol. 15. University of Chicago Press. Rethel, L. 2019. Corporate Islam, Global Capitalism and the Performance of Economic Moralities. New Political Economy 24 (3): 350–364. Rice, G. 1999. Islamic Ethics and the Implications for Business. Journal of Business Ethics 18 (4): 345–358. Sambur, Bilal. 2009. Islam, Liberty and Pluralism, Al Hikmat, Volume 29. PP. 35–58. Samdani, Gulam and Tanveer Fatima 2014. Islamic Banking and Finance: Principles and Practices. Marifa Academy, Practical guide Link: https://islamicbankers.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/ marifas-­practical-­guide-­to-­islamic-­banking-­and-­finance.pdf. Retrieved October 2020. Sayadi, A. 2011. L’islam face à la liberté de conscience. Etudes 414 (5): 643–654. Sisodia, R.S. 2009. Doing Business in the Age of Conscious Capitalism. Journal of Indian Business Research 1 (2/3): 188–192. Soroush, Abdulkarim. 1998. Évolution et dévolution du savoir religieux (en anglais), Kurzman, Ch. (édition): Islam libéral, Oxford. Zaharuddin Abdul Rahman. 2008. Money, You and Islam. November 1, 2008 by True Wealth Sdn Bhd. ISBN 9789833364657. Zaydan, A.K. 1976. The Compound of Usul-Al Fiqh, Baghdad, (Original Version: ، ‫الوجزي يف �أصول الفقه‬ ‫مؤسسة قرطبة‬. Omar Hemissi is a professor at the École Supérieure de Commerce of Algiers (ESC, Algeria) and associate professor at the École Nationale d’Administration. His main fields of research include governance and growth strategies, institutional context, social responsibility, change management, national identity, and organizational identity.  

Khaldoun Dia-Eddine after 30 years work as development engineer and international manager joined the Zurich University for Applied Sciences, School of Management and Law (Switzerland), as senior lecturer and consultant. He is the scientific director of the Museum of Civilizations of Islam in La-Chaux-De-Fonds (Switzerland). His main fields of research include Islamic finance, communication, negotiation and education, sustainability, and cross-cultural management.  

Chapter 16

Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective Sofiane Baba and Shoeb Mohammad

16.1  Introduction Amidst the ecological disasters and social crises that seem to characterize the business world in the twenty-first century, the re-imagining of capitalism and the traditional economic paradigms that underlie it has become a central focus in both scholarly and mainstream discourse (Henderson 2020; Piketty 2013). Having attracted increased attention in recent years (Frémeaux and Michelson 2017; Kassel et al. 2020), Conscious capitalism (CC hereinafter) adds a voice to this discussion (Sisodia 2011). CC has been conceived as an “evolving paradigm for business that simultaneously creates multiple kinds of value and well-being for all stakeholders: financial, intellectual, physical, ecological, social, cultural, emotional, ethical, and even spiritual” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  32). CC centers on four interconnected tenets which “represent the essential elements of an integrated business philosophy that must be understood holistically to be effectively manifested”: higher purpose, stakeholder interdependence, conscious leadership, and conscious culture (Mackey 2011). CC’s ultimate objective is to “make substantial contributions over time to solving many of the world’s problems” (Mackey 2011, p. 89). As a theory of business that is largely normative, fundamental to the use of CC by managers and members of an organization is its moral justification at the individual level. Religion is a particularly powerful source of moral values in society. Religion has an enormous influence on moral behavior, providing “moral guidance” The original version of the chapter has been revised: The first name and last name of the chapter author Shoeb Mohammad was published incorrectly which has been corrected now. A correction to this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_25 S. Baba (*) École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada e-mail: [email protected] S. Mohammad Faculty of Administration, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Canada © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022, corrected publication 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_16

293

294

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

and “moral motivation” to its constituents (Steinberg 2020, p.  77).  It’s  scope is undeniable, with 84% of the world’s population adheringe to religious faith (Hackett and Stonawski 2017). To the extent that a religious perspective and CC are compatible, religion can be a source of moral justification for CC since “religious beliefs, whether of obviously practical import or not, are meant not just to be believed but to be lived, to orient behavior, attitudes, and actions toward oneself and others” (Tanner 2019, p. 5). It is therefore surprising that the extant research has not paid significant attention to the compatibility of CC and religious values to uncover a strong, normative justification for CC. In this chapter, we explore the compatibility of Islam and CC. In doing so, we contribute to research on the influence of religions on organizations and management, an area understudied despite the central importance of religion in nearly all societies (Tracey et  al. 2014, p.  3). As the world’s fastest-growing faith (Lipka 2017), followed by 24% of the world’s population, Islam is among the world’s most influential religions. Furthermore, Islam‘s compatibility with CC is deserving of examination since the religion is most prevalent outside of the western world, whereas the ideas of CC have their origins in the west. As such, in Muslim-majority countries, Islam can be a source of moral justification for the ideas of CC if economic actors perceive alignment proximity between their religious beliefs and the ideas proposed by CC. An Islamic perspective on CC is also historically relevant, considering that Islam values acts of entrepreneurship (Gümüsay 2015) and that “among the world’s great religious leaders, the Prophet Muhammad was the only businessman” (Yusof et al. 2014, p. 136). By the conclusion of this chapter, we uncover areas of compatibility and difference between CC and Islam to establish an Islam-centered moral justification for CC, as well as its limitations. Our chapter is structured as follows. Firstly, we briefly introduce Islam and some of its fundamental values and review the literature at the intersection of Islam and business. Secondly, we offer a fine-grained analysis of the four pillars of CC through the lens of Islam, focusing on how Islamic values can shape our understanding of CC as a conceptual domain and practical tool. Thirdly, we examine three key differences between Islamic values and CC managing and organizing: the unit of analysis, the heterogeneity of Islam, and worldviews. Lastly, we conclude by highlighting how CC and Islamic values can be thought of as complementary rather than competing or identical views. In sum, we posit that Islam can provide individuals a strong moral justification for CC implementation.

16.2 Overview of Islam The teachings of Islam apply to all facets of the life of a Muslim, including the domain of business. They are derived from two key sources. The most important primary source is the Quran, the original revelation of Islam dictated to Prophet

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

295

Muhammad (peace be upon him,1‘pbuh’ hereinafter). The Quran contains “the words of God in 114 surahs (chapters) with over 6,000 āyāt (verses; singular: āyah) gradually revealed over a period of 23 years around 600 AD” (Gümüsay 2015). The second primary source is the Sunnah (or Hadith), which refers to the words, actions, or approvals of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), thought to be a form of revelation (in meaning) to the Prophet (Beekun and Badawi 2005). The significance of Hadith is rooted in the fundamental belief that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the exemplar of conduct that every Muslim should strive for. Other sources of Islamic teaching include Ijma’, the consensus amongst a group of people such as scholars or a specific Muslim community, and qiyās, which refers to reasoning by analogy, but both are ultimately informed by the Quran or Hadith. The Quran and Hadith provide guidance to Muslims for living a moral life by prescribing both specific rules and ethical principles to live by. They are also the normative sources of Islam that we base much of our analysis on in this chapter.2 A key ethical principle in Islam is justice (adl). Muslims are taught to uphold justice across all situations no matter who is involved, with the Quran going as far as to state: “O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both” (Quran, 4:135).3 A key dimension of justice is the idea of balance (qasd). Islam teaches Muslims to maintain a balanced life by engaging in activities proportionately and avoiding extremes. Being just also encompasses allotment (qist), where justice is equated specifically to allotting people their fair due in agreements and exchanges. Ihsan, which means to do excellent things, is another ethical principle that holds significance in Islamic teachings. Ihsan is commonly understood as achieving excellence in a general sense, including one’s work or vocation, as well as benevolence, in the sense of being kind to others irrespective of obligation. Ihsan is considered a central Islamic principle since it “focuses on behavior for the love of the God…” (Beekun and Badawi 2005, p. 135) and is therefore clearly linked as a form of worship. As an ethical principle in Islam, trust (Amanah) is centered on the relationship between the individual and God. God entrusts individuals to act in accordance with the moral precepts of Islam since doing so benefits the world around them. As such, individuals should consider themselves as God’s trustee, granted life on Earth to act in his will. These underlying concepts of Islamic ethics remain constant over time and settings since the sources from which they are derived (Quran and Hadith) are themselves unchanging. The role of the individual as the trustee of God is so imperative in Islam that acting in God’s will itself is considered a form of worship. As such, any act with the right intentions that does not go beyond prescribed limits is potentially an act of  ‘Peace be upon him’ (pbuh) is an Arabic phrase of veneration used by Muslims whenever a prophet is mentioned, in writing or verbally. 2  Note that we rely on various translations of the Quran to convey what we feel is the most relevant and clear meaning for the purpose of this chapter. 3  When referring to specific chapters and verses in the Quran, we will use the convention aa:bb, where aa denotes the chapter and bb denotes the verse. 1

296

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

worship, as the concept of worship in Islam is holistic and does not compartmentalize the aspects of human living (Beekun and Badawi 2005). For instance, worship entails rituals such as the five daily prayers and fasting during the month of Ramadan, but also encompasses genuine acts of kindness since ihsan “focuses on behavior for the love of the God…” (Beekun and Badawi 2005, p. 135), and is therefore clearly linked as a form of worship. Upholding the ethical values prescribed by Islam is thus a requirement of Muslims in all aspects of life, including the context of business. The Quran’s explicit focus on business-related conduct is apparent from the fact that the word amal (work) and iman (faith) appear+ in conjunction in more than 50 verses. Islam’s ethical precepts can also be linked to prohibitions and encouraged practices that have a clear and direct impact on business. For example, the values of balance and fairness are clearly linked to the prohibition against charging or paying interest, in light of the power of interest for benefitting the wealthy while exploiting the underprivileged. Similarly, Zakat, the Islamic system of giving alms, requires all capable individuals, including business owners, to give 2.5% of their accumulated wealth to charity on a yearly basis in support of a more equitable and fair distribution of wealth in society. Islam has received great attention in the past decades from a variety of scholars in the fields of entrepreneurship, business, and management. These studies have looked at how Islam empowers women entrepreneurs in conflict zones (Althalathini et  al. 2021), how it shapes corporate social responsibility (Koleva 2020), how it translates into business practices within family firms (Kavas et  al. 2020), how it influences corporate governance (Ghafran and Yasmin 2020), its perspectives on leadership (Celik and Alan 2007; Mir 2010), as well as entrepreneurship and business models (Hassan 2021). This paper thus extends this increasing body of knowledge by exploring how Islamic values can provide a moral justification for CC. We suggest that the Islamic values discussed in this chapter are universal in scope, similar though perhaps formulated differently  than in other religions and spiritualities. While pluralism in Islam (Emon 2012; Von Grunebaum 1962) is not core to our chapter, we would like to make some clarifications to inform our overall perspective. Islam attaches great importance and value to the monotheistic religions that preceded it, namely Judaism and Christianity. Tolerance, inclusiveness, and pluralism are inescapable dimensions of the Quran and the Islamic spirit. This is reflected in the latest known speech of Muhammad (pbuh): “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety (taqwa) and good action.” Similarly, it is worth mentioning that believers in inclusive Islam recognize the existence of “both one Islam and many Islams.” (Bakar 2010, p. 13). Here, the reference to “one” Islam involves the religion emanating from the divine revelation to the prophet Muhammed (pbuh), while the “many Islams” acknowledge the “many ways and forms of submission to God” (Bakar 2010, p. 13).

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

297

16.3 Converging Ideals and Values Between Conscious Capitalism and Islamic Principles In what follows, we explain how Islamic principles are concurrent with the four tenets of CC. It should be noted that we examine each tenet of CC in proportion to their coverage in their original source, “Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business (Mackey and Sisodia 2013). For this reason, we devote considerable attention to the relationship between Islamic values and stakeholder integration.

16.3.1 Higher Purpose The foundational values of Islam have much in common with CC, since neither is centered purely on a profit motive but a desire to serve a higher purpose. In the case of CC, the higher purpose is the betterment of society. Fundamental to doing so is to prioritize virtuous goals above profitability: “Just as all other professions in our society have purposes besides maximizing profits – doctors heal the sick, teachers help educate people, architects design buildings, and lawyers promote justice – so too should business” (Mackey 2011, p.  83). Paralleling the ideals conveyed by Plato, CC suggests that to better society, businesses should center their purposes on the timeless ideal of The Good (service to others), The True (furthering human knowledge), The Beautiful (Excellence and the creation of beauty) and The Heroic (doing what is right and improving the world). Purposes centered on these ideals better society in different ways – those in alignment with the Good improve the lives of others through high-quality products, The True through advances in knowledge, The Beautiful through making life more enjoyable, and The Heroic by solving intractable problems that involve a significant undertaking and risk. As companies pursue these ideals, the lives of individuals are improved. The end result is profitability, since individuals reward companies in turn. In the case of Islam, higher purpose is rooted in honoring an individual’s trusteeship with God. The dichotomy between the concepts of Dunya and Akhirah, both appearing 115 times in the Quran (counting various prefixes), is useful for understanding how this higher purpose translates into moral motivation and behaviors. Dunya refers to everyday life on Earth, consisting of the temporal world and its earthly concerns and possessions, while Akhirah refers to life in the hereafter (after death), which is everlasting. The ultimate goal of a Muslim is to reach Jannat (heaven), which is conditional on living in Dunya in a way that fulfills an individual’s trusteeship with God. “Indeed, the righteous will be in gardens and pleasure” (Quran, 52:1, Sahih International). Implicit in the dichotomy between Dunya and Akhirah is therefore a trade-off – an individual should forego worldly desires that are displeasing to God in the shorter term, during life on Earth, in order to fulfill their trusteeship with God and be rewarded with a prosperous life in the hereafter.

298

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

Individuals are expected to use all manner of their being bestowed upon them– mind, body, and soul – to please God, which means to engage in actions that result in the betterment of oneself and society around them. Furthermore, the Quran promises accountability for how an individual spent their life in Dunya, stating that on the Day of Judgement, individuals “will most surely be called to account for [what you did with] the boon of life” (Quran, Muhammad Asad, 102:8). Daily life on Earth is thus a test of the individual’s ability to live truthful to Islamic values and avoid temptations: “Who has created death and life, that He may test you which of you is best in deed. And He is the All-Mighty, the Oft-Forgiving” (Quran, Mohsin Khan, 67:2). From the perspective of CC, higher purpose is to better society, while in Islam, serving God in a broad sense entails serving society. From both perspectives, profitability is considered a diversion when it runs contrary to the prescribed higher purpose. A key criticism of traditional capitalism levied by CC is that financial profitability and shareholder value creation are often at odds with value creation for the broad range of a company’s stakeholders. Not only is this considered morally incorrect from the perspective of CC, but it is also questionable from an instrumental perspective as it can damage the long-term reputation and goodwill of a company. In the Quran, worldly life is described as being an “illusion” (Quran, Abdul Haleem, 3:185;) and “diversion” (Quran, Sahih International, 57:20), in part for its ability to lure individuals away from a god-centric life to one in which material possession is a driving factor. To that end, excessive profitability for the firm and its shareholders that negatively impacts its other stakeholders could be considered a diversion of this world that Islam warns against, as it goes against Islamic values of equity, balance, and arguably even fairness. Individuals who manage businesses should therefore set and achieve objectives considered lawful from an Islamic perspective, and furthermore, consider the virtue that Islam prescribes to service to society when operating their business.

16.3.2 Stakeholder Integration Integrating the needs of the complete set of a firm’s stakeholders in setting business strategy is central to CC. The CC perspective considers the needs of a wide array of both internal (employees, investors) and external (customers, suppliers, communities, nature, competitors and others such as activists, unions, media, and governments) stakeholders. Conscious businesses “treat satisfying the needs of all their major stakeholders as ends in themselves, while traditional businesses often treat their stakeholders other than investors as the means to achieving their ultimate goal of profit maximization” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 69). In doing so, conscious businesses “are explicitly managed for the simultaneous benefit of all of their stakeholders… a conscious business aligns the interests of all stakeholders, so that what is good for one is good for all” (Sisodia 2011, pp. 98–99). We suggest not only that Islamic values are in alignment with the CC perspective on stakeholder integration, but offer insight on how stakeholder interdependence

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

299

can be approached by organizations. We focus on five specific Islamic principles that lay the foundations of what should be the interdependence of stakeholders in businesses: Shūrā (consultation), ‘Qasd (balance), ‘Adl (justice), Ihshane (benevolence), and ‘Amanah (trustworthiness). Shūrā (consultation) encourages individuals and businesses to consult stakeholders affected by their decisions in a systematic manner. An entire Sura in the Qu’ran is dedicated to consultation (Sura 42, Ash-Shūrā). In referring to the recipients of the benefits of the afterlife, an excerpt from the Sura reads: “Those who hearken to their Lord, and establish regular Prayer; who (conduct) their affairs by mutual Consultation; who spend out of what We bestow on them for Sustenance” (42:38, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). In regard to ‘qasd, the principle of living a balanced life, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) suggested to “do good deeds properly, sincerely and moderately… Always adopt a middle, moderate, regular course, whereby you will reach your target (of paradise)” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Hadith 470). Islam emphasizes the importance of moderation (also called ‘wasat for middle) in belongings, faith and dealing with others: “And be moderate in thy pace and lower thy voice…” (31:19, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). The importance of justice (‘Adl) in Islam is unequivocal, with the principle included amongst God’s 99 names (Al-‘Adl – The Just).4 Accordingly, the fair and equitable treatment of individuals is clearly prescribed: “Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and liberality to kith and kin, and He forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion…” (16:90, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). The importance of ihshan (benevolence), which we previously explained as being intrinsically good to others, is illustrated in Sura Ar-Rahman (The Compassionate) in the Quran, in which God asks, “Is there any Reward for Good  – other than Good?” (55:60, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). Benevolence is not confined to those we love but extends to all whom we interact with. Responding to the question, “Which Islam is best?”, the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) said, “to feed the hungry and to greet with peace those you know and those you do not know” (Hadith, from Al-Bukhari: 28). While we previously explained Amanah in terms of an individual’s role as the trustee of God, the concept also encompasses acting in good faith with others and adopting trustworthy behavior, which is highly valued in Islam. Surah Al-Mu’minun illustrates the concept (The Believers) by underlining the importance for believers to be accountable to themselves, their relatives and those they interact with: “O ye that believe! Betray not the trust of Allah and the Messenger, nor misappropriate knowingly things entrusted to you” (Qu’ran, 8:27, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). The importance of trust, especially when engaging with others, is also reinforced in another Surah: “Allah doth command you to render back your Trusts to those to whom they are due” (Qu’ran, 4:58, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). These Islamic principles thus offer clear moral guidance on how businesses should integrate the needs of stakeholders in their daily decisions and activities.  In Islam, the 99 names of God (Asma-al Husna or “Allah’s Beautiful Name’s) are attributes of God that are mentioned in the Quran. They are a part of Islamic thought to foster remembrance of God. 4

300

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

To illustrate this, we will focus on three groups of stakeholders that are considered by Mackey and Sisodia (2013): the environment, communities, and employees. Islam considers the natural environment as a gift from God: “The Earth is green and beautiful, and Allah has appointed you his stewards over it. The whole earth has been created a place of worship, pure and clean” (Hadith, Sahih Muslim). As such, Muslims should enjoy these gifts given to them by God but be moderate in their consumption and avoid waste: “eat of their fruit in their season but render the dues that are proper on the day that the harvest is gathered. But waste not by excess; for Allah loveth not the wasters” (Qu’ran, 6:141, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). These Islamic values clearly converge with the idea that “conscious businesses think caringly, creatively, and strategically about the environment… treat[ing] it with the same respect and attention they give to the others” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 139). Regarding community, every Muslim is responsible for fostering harmony, justice, equality, and the honor and dignity of individuals. Muslims are thus custodians of God’s will on Earth: “He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do it, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough to do it, (even) then he should (abhor it) from his heart, and that is the least of faith.” (Sahih Muslim 49a, Hadith 79). For instance, through zakat (obligatory charity), Islam dictates how Muslims can help fight poverty in their communities: “Alms are for the poor and the needy, and those employed to administer the (funds)” (Qu’ran, 9:60, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). Islam and CC are thus in clear alignment regarding the importance of community: “the community stakeholder is one of the core constituents for a conscious business [as] businesses exist within local communities, national communities, global communities…” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 123). Moreover, CC emphasizes that businesses treat their employees in an excellent manner, with purposeful work environments that challenge and encourage their team members to learn and grow,” being a key ideal of CC (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 98). In parallel, Islamic principles emphasize that employees be treated with respect, benevolence, and generosity. Compensating employees up to the commitments and their merit is vital in Islam: “Give just measure and weight, nor withhold from the people the things that are their due…” (Qu’ran, 7:85, Abdullah Yusuf Ali). Employers should also make a concerted effort to support their employees: “Help the worker in his work. The one who works for Allah will not be disappointed” (Al-Adab Al-Mufrad, Book 9, Hadith 191).

16.3.3 Conscious Leadership According to Mackay and Sisodia (2013), it is imperative that companies be led by conscious leaders in order to embody the spirit of conscious capitalism. The decision-­making of conscious leaders is value-driven, which ensures that a company stays true to its vision in morally ambiguous situations where alternative actions each have their respective trade-offs. In following a value-driven approach,

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

301

conscious leaders act as the trustees of the business, maintaining a balance between its short and long-term success. Conscious leadership is said to have a distinctly spiritual dimension, allowing for a level of introspection that enables a leader to discover and stay motivated to pursue a higher purpose. From the perspective of Islam, leaders should behave according to the teachings of Islam, as dictated by Quran and Hadith, to exhibit Islamic moral character (adab) (Beekun and Badawi 2005). Thus, leaders are expected to embody Islamic values, for doing so with integrity ensures that the leader fulfills his or her role as trustee of God, resulting in behaviors that positively benefit both internal and external stakeholders as well as the world more broadly. Islamic leadership is inherently spiritual by nature since it is defined by the higher purpose of acting in a manner that is pleasing to God. For this reason, piety and fear of God (Taqwa) is key characteristic is a cornerstone of Islamic leadership that allows for gaining the trust and respect of their followers since it ensures the leader’s directives will be in alignment with Islamic values (Mir 2010); the Quran states that “Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you” (Quran, Yusuf Ali, 49:13). Due to the emphasis on adherence to values and fulfilling a higher purpose in conscious capitalism and Islam, the two perspectives lend themselves to the servant leadership style. Servant leaders are stewards of their organization, possessing a central motivation that goes beyond self-interest, which is to serve (Luthans and Avolio 2003). The core of servant leadership is to help an organization’s followers achieve personal growth and well-being and then lead to expanding service to individuals and institutions (Dierendonck 2011). Conscious leaders are cognizant of how service helps organizations realize their highest potential (Mackey and Sisodia 2013), allowing to cultivate a workforce with a developed knowledge and skill set that is also devoted to the organization and its purpose. Furthermore, the betterment of all stakeholders, both inside and outside the firm, drives conscious capitalism. In Islam, the importance of servant leadership is illustrated in Hadith. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is known to have said that “a ruler who, having obtained control over the affairs of the Muslims, does not strive for their betterment and does not serve them sincerely shall not enter Paradise with them” (Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Hadith 4502). A leader’s service to their followers is in line with numerous Islamic values, including benevolence. Hadith narrates that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) stated that wherever possible, forgiveness is better than punishment: “It is better for a leader to make a mistake in forgiving than to make a mistake in punishing” (Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1011). Key characteristics of servant leadership (Greenleaf 1977) are also encouraged in Islam and demonstrated by the Prophet (pbuh). Humility is illustrated in Islam through the custom of not requesting or seeking leadership or authority but instead being led into positions of power by society on the basis of piety and expertise (Mir 2010). The Prophet  (pbuh) demonstrated humility by working alongside his followers despite clearly possessing the authority of a leader, such as when he was seen digging the trench alongside his companions like an ordinary labourer at the battle of the trench (Khan 1998). Servant leaders are keen listeners that identify the will of their followers in decision-making, which is

302

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

characteristic of the principle of Shura (described above) that the Prophet (phub) followed in decision-making. Stewardship is another key characteristic of servant leadership, which assumes a foremost commitment to serving the needs of others. Referring to an individual’s responsibility for the people they oversee, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is reported to have said that “every one of you is a shepherd and is responsible for his flock” (Sahih Muslim 1829a). Furthermore, as a steward, he exhibited another key characteristic of servant leadership which is commitment to the growth of others. The Prophet (pbuh) understood and appreciated the value of knowledge, having been recorded in Hadith as saying that “Seeking knowledge is an obligation on every Muslim” (Sunan Ibn Mājah, 224) and that “Whoever follows a path in pursuit of knowledge, Allah makes his way easy to paradise” (Sunan Ibn Majah, 225). He imparted these beliefs to his followers, instituting “learning as an incumbent duty upon his people” and “thus established a definite educational policy for Islam” (Semaan 1966).

16.3.4 Conscious Culture Conscious culture and management is the fourth tenet of CC. It relates to the way conscious organizations are infused with values that “help them adhere to their higher purpose and maintain a harmony of interests across stakeholders.” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 216). The mnemonic TACTILE summarizes the fundamentals of conscious culture: trust, accountability, caring, transparency, integrity, loyalty, and egalitarianism. The Islamic values we discussed above are consistent with what CC conceptualizes as conscious culture. It is worth recalling that Islamic values are overarching and prescribe appropriate behaviour in all aspects of life (Hoque et al. 2014). Thus Islamic values can influence organizational cultures, defined as “a set of shared mental assumptions that guide interpretation and action in organizations by defining appropriate behavior for various situations” (Ravasi and Schultz 2006, p. 437). Although the sources of Islam are not specific about organizational cultures, they provide some normative guidance in alignment with the essence of conscious culture and management. For example, although Islam does not specifically mention the idea of decentralization and empowerment of employees in an organization as epitomized in CC, the Qu’ran is clear on the importance of consultation. Islam values consensual decisions, rather than unilateral decision-making and compliance (Quran, 3:159). Other values essential to the Muslim faith are also convergent with those of conscious culture: excellence, sense of initiative, and continuous learning, among others (see Beekun and Badawi 2005; Hoque et al. 2014). We will now explore three of these values. First, the pursuit of excellence is considered by God as an act of worship in Islam. The Prophet (pbuh) said, “Verily, Allah loves that when anyone of you does something he does it perfectly” (Al Bukhari). Accordingly, merit and earning fair due is an important value in Islam: “And that man shall have nothing but what he strives for” (Quran, 53:39, Shakir). Second, the Qu’ran is explicit about the

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

303

importance for individuals to take initiative. God even claims that he will not help individuals unless they already help themselves: “surely Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change their own condition” (Quran, 13:11, Shakir). Third, continuous learning and increasing one’s knowledge are also greatly valued in Islam. In the Quran, God encourages the Prophet Muhammad to increase his knowledge of the revelation by saying: “O my Lord! Increase me in knowledge” (Quran, 20:114, Shakir). The Prophet (pubh) also suggests that “one who treads a path in search of knowledge has his path to Paradise made easy by God…” (Hadith, Riyadh us-Saleheen: 245). As a more general, overarching value in Islam, self-development is highlighted through the concept of jihad. Nowadays, jihad is most commonly associated with violence and extremism perpetrated by few individuals who are not in any way representative of Islam, as we hope to have shown in this chapter by exploring some of the fundamental values of Islam (for a detailed discussion, see Marranci 2006; Mohammad 1985). In reality, jihad in Islam has a very rich connotation, relating to “struggle” and “striving” in a praiseworthy sense that conforms with God’s guidance. It also relates to “doing one’s utmost to achieve something” (Mir 2010, p. 71). Of the different forms of jihad, the most important, according to the Sunnah, is that of jihad against oneself (jihad nafs). The constant effort aimed at purifying ones heart and soul is  considered as the “Greatest Struggle” (Jihad Al-Akbar) by the Prophet (pbuh). Efforts towards righteousness and spiritual elevation brings one closer to the right divine path and away from bad behavior, stealing, lying, deceit, and futility on Earth. Applied within business settings, jihad nafs encourages all individuals to act with integrity and make the organization a common good for the collective well-being, according to the teachings of Islam.

16.4 Conscious Capitalism and Islam: Convergent but Different In what follows, we argue that despite their convergence, CC and Islam are also quite different in terms of  four aspects: the level of analysis, worldviews, stakeholder salience, and the reason for action. These differences highlight the limitations to the convergence of the two perspectives  but also how they can are complimentary to one another.

16.4.1 The Level of Analysis Islam’s message, as described in the Quran, is directed squarely at individuals. Organizations in and of themselves are not directly addressed in the Quran, let alone corporations, a relatively contemporary form of organizing not present during the

304

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

time in which the message of the Quran was revealed. Therefore, Islamic values and teachings largely permeate organizations to the extent that individuals act in accordance with the teachings of Islam in their capacity as employees or owners of a company. On the other hand, the tenets of CC are discussed primarily in regards to organizations as a monolithic entity. The one exception is conscious leaders, who are expected to be firm supporters of CC and represent, foster, and transmit its values throughout the organization. The precise behaviors that individuals within the organization are supposed to engage in are not clearly defined by CC. Top managers’ responsibility is to translate the broadly-defined principles of CC into a statement of the organization’s missions or values, which is further translated into concrete actions that members of the organization are to take in the daily course of their work. The Quran’s direct communication with its followers may be more conducive to ensuring that owners and employees act according to Islamic values relative to CC for two reasons. First, Islam’s focus on rules along with values creates clearer directives on the sorts of behaviors that are encouraged and prohibited. In comparison, CC does not have a rule-based focus. Second, by being transmitted directly to individuals, Islam’s message may be more motivating to individuals than are individual-­level directives translated from broader corporate mission or value statements, which often fail to connect with members of an organization in a deep and meaningful way due to being overly generic and lacking in substance (Stevens et al. 2005). It is worth mentioning that while CC is a perspective that targets businesses as a unit of analysis, Islam is akin to a broader philosophy for life that, to a large extent, does not prescribe business conduct. As such, the ability of Islamic values to manifest within an organization is likely contingent on top managers making the connection between the values of the organization and those of Islam.

16.4.2 Worldviews CC, as implied by its name, promotes the virtues of capitalism, going as far as to explain a “heroic nature of capitalism” that fundamentally changed the world and set it on a course for exponential development over the course of centuries (Mackey and Sisodia 2013). While denouncing some business practices that are often linked with the “dark side” of capitalism, such as excessive corporate bonuses and a blinding focus on shareholder value maximization, CC does not directly preclude aspects of capitalism that are not in agreement with Islamic principles. For example, usury (or Riba in Arabic) is strictly prohibited in Islam, even at low-interest rates: “Those who devour usury will not stand except as stand one whom the Evil one by his touch Hath driven to madness. That is because they say: “Trade is like usury,“ but Allah hath permitted trade and forbidden usury” (Quran, Yusuf Ali, 275: 81). Strictly speaking, corporations, as they are envisioned in CC, would not be

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

305

sustainable without engaging in contemporary interest-based lending practices. For example, investments into suppliers required for the win-win scenario advocated by CC often require some sort of conditional lending agreement to ensure the supplier’s loyalty. Therefore, managers looking to implement CC in an Islamic context may need to ensure lending practices they use are permissible in Islam, such as those structured around profit sharing and joint ownership (Kayed and Hassan 2011). Another way that organizations adhering to CC may be at odds with Islamic values is if they sell products or services prohibited or strongly discouraged for consumption in Islam that are commonplace in non-Islamic contexts. This may include the sale of alcohol, pork, or marijuana. Therefore, one of the limitations of CC in Islamic contexts is the lack of restrictions around the sale of products or services that are considered illicit, since such businesses would be in misalignment with Islamic principles even if considered socially responsible based on the central tenets of CC.

16.4.3 Stakeholder Salience: Who Really Counts Most? Another significant point of divergence between CC and Islam is stakeholder salience (i.e., the relative importance of stakeholders to the firm that determines the attention they garner from decision-makers) (Erdiaw-Kwasie et  al. 2017; Neville et al. 2011). CC defines stakeholders as “all the people who impact and are impacted by a business” and emphasizes the importance of stakeholder management because “every business has stakeholders, whether or not it thinks of them that way” (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p.  69). Furthermore, CC advocates  for a humane approach to managing stakeholders in which they are honored first as people before treated according to the role they happen to be playing (Mackey and Sisodia 2013, p. 72). The key issue with CC’s perspective on stakeholder management is that it implies, rather vaguely, that all stakeholders are considered important and deserving of attention from conscious businesses without any priority ranking. O’Toole and Vogel (2011, p. 67) reflect on this skepticism: “we also are skeptical of the commitment of Conscious Capitalism firms to treat all their stakeholders equally and fairly. This goal is laudable but often difficult to realize in practice.” Contrary to this all-encompassing view of stakeholder management, Islam is much more explicit regarding stakeholder prioritization. Islam gives particular importance and priority to the most vulnerable people in society. In this chapter, we rely on the following definition by Mechanic and Tanner (2007, p. 1220): “vulnerability, the susceptibility to harm, results from an interaction between the resources available to individuals and communities and the life challenges they face…”. The Qur’an commonly  stresses the importance of looking after  three distinct populations: orphans, widows, and the poor. In regards to orphans, God promises Hell to “those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans” (Quran, Yusuf Ali, 4:10). Of course, Islam condemns all types of theft in the Qur’an, but it is rarely so severe and explicit for an act of theft,

306

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

demonstrating the importance of taking care of orphans. The Prophet (pbuh) said that “the best house among the Muslims is the house in which orphans are welltreated. The worst house among the Muslims is the house in which orphans are ill-treated.” (Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 137, Book 7, Hadith 137). Another hadith also conveys this idea: “Orphans will stand to be at an even greater disadvantage. They not only need support, but they need guidance and care. Both the holy Quran and the prophet urge us to pay special attention to such situations” (Sahih Muslim 2983, Book 42, Hadith 7108). Similarly, the Quran and Hadith state that the poor should receive special attention. Islam recognizes the social difficulties of poverty, including social rejection and social self-exclusion, resulting from shame, especially in traditionally collectivist Muslim societies. The Prophet (pbuh) defined the poor as “not the one who asks a morsel or two (of meals) from the others, but the poor is the one who has nothing and is ashamed to beg from others” (Sahih alBukhari 1476, Book 24, Vol. 2, Hadith 554). Interestingly, the Quran often groups the poor and orphans together in its verses, as in Surah Al-Insan: “And they give food out of love for Him to the poor and the orphan” (Quran, Shakir, 76:8). Similarly, various hadiths also group the poor and widows when highlighting the need for Muslims to remain attentive to their needs: “The person who strives on behalf of the widows and poor is like those who strive in the way of Allah and like those who fast in the day and pray at night” (Hadith, Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 131, Book 7, Hadith 131). In sum, our central argument is not that Islam prioritizes some stakeholders at the expense of others. All human and living beings are important in Islam. That said, unlike CC, Islam pays special attention to the vulnerable, who are more likely to be in difficult situations. This is, in our view, an important distinction to make, as it is reasonable to assume that businesses do not have unlimited resources to allocate across stakeholders. Islam is more prescriptive, and thus clearer, on how stakeholders should be prioritized.

16.4.4 The Reason for Action A final divergence between CC and Islam lies in the approach: while the first is value-focused (i.e., what conscious businesses should do in an ideal world), the latter is more rule-focused (i.e., what individuals must do during their life). In light of decades of the same profit-at-all-costs driven economy and its detrimental consequences to the society and the environment, despite the existence of “responsible businesses” going as far back as the nineteenth century, value-focused directives can easily be criticized as wishful thinking. To say that we must act virtuously is therefore not enough for real transformation to take place. From our perspective, why one should act in a certain way, especially when guided by a legitimized moral framework, is paramount for ensuring desired behavior. In their critique of CC, O’Toole and Vogel (2011, p.  73) highlight the importance for CC proponents to “make clearer distinctions between “shoulds,” “cans,” and “wills”; otherwise, they

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

307

risk continually engaging in the fallacy of composition.” The normative nature of CC tends to ignore context-related matters since virtuous behaviors based on individual values and choices cannot be universal. While Islam has a good deal of values and precepts regarding desired behavior, what clearly distinguishes Islam from CC is its ability to impose rules for ensuring positive interactions between individuals. This can be argued for all religions. It is a more restrictive framework, in the sense that divine rules will guide the behavior of individuals, with the belief that in the hereafter, those who behave according to these rules will be rewarded, and vice versa: “That Day, the people will depart separated [into categories] to be shown [the result of] their deeds. So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it. And whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it” (Quran, Saheeh International, 99:6–8). As explained earlier in the chapter, Muslims believe in the afterlife, and this conviction guides their behavior and actions daily. Their ideal is to live on Earth per the divine and prophetic teaching. Paradise would therefore be reserved for those who have lived by remaining faithful to God. This includes respecting what is permitted and prohibited for Muslims, which in Islamic terminology is referred to as ‘halal’ (authorized) and ‘haram’ (forbidden). This dichotomy is, in fact, somewhat of a simplification since moral guidelines for Muslims revolve around five categories: fard (what is mandatory), mustahabb (recommended), mubah (permitted), makruh (disliked), and haram (forbidden). Through these five categories, Islam offers clear guidance on what should be done, what could be done, and what must be done. Through the five categories of moral guidelines, every Muslim is encouraged to adopt virtuous behavior and avoid negative behavior. This is an essential difference compared to the CC approach, which can be considered somewhat naive for assuming that businesses will engage in desired behaviour without clear guidelines or consequences beyond those that are legal.

16.5 Conclusion The purpose of this chapter was to compare and contrast Islam and CC to evaluate their compatibility. In particular, we argued that fundamental values of Islam and CC are in convergence. We illustrated specifically how the four tenets of CC are expressed in Islamic teachings through various concepts and ideas. In contrast, we have also shown that Islam and CC diverge on a number of important issues, which we will avoid repeating here as they have been amply discussed above. We would like to conclude this chapter with three key messages. 1. Islam and CC are not competing nor identical views, but complementary. Islam and CC cannot be considered competing insofar they share common values of charity, inclusion, social justice, mutual aid, environmental protection, helping the poor, and a higher purpose beyond the material. Similarly, they can

308

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

not be identical views because of two fundamental differences. First, they emerged in socio-historic contexts that are, to say the least, radically different. Islam emerged in a context where the market economy and capitalism as we know them today had not yet been theorized, let alone legislated. CC, in comparison, emerged in a context of moral crisis of capitalism. It proposes the market approach as a solution to the crisis of capitalism, provided that the actors are “conscious.” Second, their essence and aim are also radically different. Islam is a divine revelation for humanity, aimed at unifying life on Earth around an ideal of worship of the Creator, while CC is a human invention for an audience of business leaders aimed at creating a prosperous and sustainable economy. Hence, it is not appropriate to compare the two on specific details and nuances, which we did not aim to do. Rather, we aimed to compare the two in regards to their overall business implications. Considering these fundamental differences, we posit that Islam and CC are complementary in at least three respects. (a) Islam provides a more deep-rooted spiritual basis for a higher purpose beyond materiality. A key weakness of the CC perspective is that it largely relies on a normative motivation of individuals to fulfill its higher purpose of bettering society. As explained above, one of the fundamental beliefs in Islam is that all potential actions should consider life in the hereafter and an individual’s trusteeship with God. (b) When Islam refers to the economic field, it does so in relation to individuals and their role in broader society. In contrast, CC largely neglects the individual (it is quite briefly explored in the leadership section) and addresses businesses as the main unit of analysis. We believe that a more micro understanding of conscious businesses through an exploration of the role of the individuals is essential to better understanding how and why businesses can be conscious. Islam does exactly this in regards to individuals by exploring their moral accountability (c) Finally, it is hard to de-socialize businesses. CC is often criticized for focusing on a purely market-based approach to solving problems that, from the perspective of many, have themselves been generated by neoliberal, market-­ based thinking. For example, CC tends to overlook the role of government, the third sector, and the social and even political embeddedness of business. In our opinion, this produces a narrow view of why companies should be more conscious. On the other hand, Islam offers a more encompassing moral anchoring of conscious businesses by having a holistic view of social and economic life. Indeed, Islam offers a framework to structure social life around harmonious values, which should make it possible to avoid  the extreme of market-dominated society. 2. Islam provides a stronger moral rationale for the ideas of CC. As we explained above, the CC approach can in some ways be considered wishful thinking. Furthermore, the approaches, discourses, and theories pertaining to responsible business that preceded it (CC may even be at least half a century late) arguably have not resulted in much progress towards producing genuinely responsible

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

309

business (Mazutis 2018). As recognized by Mackey and Sisodia (2013, p. 291), CC is often associated with a range of other concepts, including natural capitalism (Hawken et al. 1999), triple bottom line (Norman and MacDonald 2004), shared-value (Porter and Kramer 2011), and creative capitalism (Kinsley and Clarke 2009), just to name a few. Furthermore, other so-called “innovative” concepts pertaining to capitalism were also theorized in the past decades, including human capitalism (Lindsey 2013), moral capitalism (Young 2003), ethical capitalism (Fridenson and Takeo 2017), responsible capitalism (Cormack and Goodman 2009), and socially responsible capitalism (Savall et  al. 2018). Unfortunately, all these theories on how to reform capitalism have not prevented its course towards a more socially and environmentally unfriendly world (Henderson 2020; Piketty 2013). Perhaps one reason for the lack of effectiveness of approaches for reforming capitalism is that the crisis of capitalism is in part a moral crisis, to which spirituality and religion, including Islam, can contribute by providing a clearer moral orientation. Alongside its moral grounding, Islam’s rule-based focus (in comparison to the value-focus of CC) provides a stronger basis for accountability that can help foster CC in organizations. 3 . Muslim countries should be fostering conscious capitalism. Connecting CC to Islamic values can help accomplish this. Philippe d’Iribarne’s research in the 1990s demonstrates the potential of this approach. In his study of successful factories operating in developing countries, d’Iribarne shows how “Sgs-­Thomson in Morocco and Danone in Mexico provide exemplars of ways in which corporate cultures can promote productive, efficient, and interpersonally supportive communities by building upon deep-seated local values that give these communities special meaning to members” (d’Iribarne 2002, p. 243). The Sgs-Thomson example is particularly striking. The subsidiary had poor performance scores compared to other subsidiaries around the world. Top management decided to implement new processes inspired by the “total quality management” movement. A few years later, this subsidiary has become one of the most efficient and functional in the world (d’Iribarne 2007). This was largely due to the outstanding ownership of the “total quality management” spirit by employees, who realized how consistent, if not similar, the values of this managerial approach were to the values promoted by their Islamic religious beliefs. The example of SGS-­Thomson illustrates how translating the values of CC to align with Islamic beliefs will resonate with muslims and thus encourage the adoption of CC in Islamic contexts.

References Althalathini, D., H. Al-Dajani, and N. Apostolopoulos. 2021. The Impact of Islamic Feminism in Empowering Women’s Entrepreneurship in Conflict Zones: Evidence from Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-­021-­04818-­z. Bakar, O. 2010. Exclusive and Inclusive Islam in the Qur’an: Implications for Muslim-Jewish Relations. Journal of the Interdisciplinary Study of MonotheisticReligions 5: 4–15.

310

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

Beekun, R.I., and J.A.  Badawi. 2005. Balancing Ethical Responsibility among Multiple Organizational Stakeholders: The Islamic Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 60: 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-­004-­8204-­5. Celik, G., and Y. Alan. 2007. Fethullah Gülen as a Servant Leader. The International Journal of Servant-Leadership 3 (1): 247–265. Cormack, S.P., and R. Goodman. 2009. Responsible Capitalism: Essays on Morality, Ethics and Business. London: FIRST. d’Iribarne, P. 2007. Islam et management: Le rôle d’un univers de sens. Revue Française de Gestion 2 (171): 141–156. Dierendonck, D.v. 2011. Servant Leadership: A Review and Synthesis. Journal of Management 37 (4): 1228–1261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310380462. d’Iribarne, P. 2002. Motivating workers in emerging countries: universal tools and local adaptations†. Journal of Organizational Behavior 23 (3): 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.142. Emon, A.M. 2012. Religious Pluralism and Islamic Law: Dhimmis and Others in the Empire of Law. Oxford University Press. Erdiaw-Kwasie, M.O., K. Alam, and M. Shahiduzzaman. 2017. Towards Understanding Stakeholder Salience Transition and Relational Approach to ‘Better’ Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case for a Proposed Model in Practice. Journal of Business Ethics 144 (1): 85–101. Frémeaux, S., and G.  Michelson. 2017. The Common Good of the Firm and Humanistic Management: Conscious Capitalism and Economy of Communion. Journal of Business Ethics 145: 701–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-­016-­3118-­6. Fridenson, P., and K. Takeo. 2017. Ethical Capitalism: Shibusawa Eiichi and Business Leadership in Global Perspective. London: University of Toronto Press. Ghafran, C., and S.  Yasmin. 2020. Ethical Governance: Insight from the Islamic Perspective and an Empirical Enquiry. Journal of Business Ethics 165: 513–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-­019-­04170-­3. Greenleaf, R. 1977. Servant Leadership. New Jersey: Paulist Press. Gümüsay, A.A. 2015. Entrepreneurship from an Islamic Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 130: 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-­014-­2223-­7. Hackett, C., and M.  Stonawski. 2017. The Changing Global Religious Landscape. Retrieved from https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-­content/uploads/sites/11/2017/04/07092755/FULL-­ REPORT-­WITHAPPENDIXES-­A-­AND-­B-­APRIL-­3.pdf Hassan, Y. 2021. A decade of research on Muslim entrepreneurship. Journal of Islamic Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-­12-­2019-­0269. Hawken, P., H.  Lovins, and A.  Lovins. 1999. Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution. New York: Little: Brown & Company. Henderson, R. 2020. Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire. New York: PublicAffairs. Hoque, N., A.  Mamun, A.  Mohammad, and A.  Mamun. 2014. Dynamics and Traits of Entrepreneurship: An Islamic Approach. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development 10 (2): 128–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD-­04-­2013-­0027. Kassel, K., S.F.  Mitchell, and G.N.  Abord-Hugon. 2020. A Comparative Analysis of USA Enterprise Support Organizations for Conscious Capitalism and Conventional Capitalism. In Research Handbook on Start-Up Incubation Ecosystems, ed. A.  Novotny, E.  Rasmussen, T.H. Clausen, and J. Wiklund, 239–253. Elgar. Kavas, M., P. Jarzabkowski, and A. Nigam. 2020. Islamic Family Business: The Constitutive Role of Religion in Business. Journal of Business Ethics 163: 689–700. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-­019-­04384-­5. Kayed, R.N., and M.K. Hassan. 2011. The Global Financial Crisis and Islamic Finance. Thunderbird International Business Review 53 (5): 551–564. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.20434. Khan, F.R. 1998. Prophet Muhammad: History and Character of His Life. Writers Inc. International. Kinsley, M.E., and C. Clarke. 2009. Creative Capitalism: A Conversation with Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Other Economic Leaders. New York: Simon & Schuster.

16  Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective

311

Koleva, P. 2020. Towards the Development of an Empirical Model for Islamic Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from the Middle East. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10551-­020-­04465-­w. Lindsey, B. 2013. Human Capitalism: How Economic Growth Has Made Us Smarter–And More Unequal. Princeton University Press. Lipka, M. 2017. Muslims and Islam: Key Findings in the U.S. and Around the World. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-­tank/2017/08/09/muslims-­and­islam-­key-­findings-­in-­the-­u-­s-­and-­around-­the-­world/. Luthans, F., and B.J. Avolio. 2003. Authentic Leadership: A Positive Developmental Approach. In Positive Organizational Scholarship, ed. K.S. Cameron, J.E. Dutton, and R.E. Quinn, 241–258. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Mackey, J. 2011. What Conscious Capitalism Is: A Response to James O’Toole and David Vogel’s “Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism”. California Management Review 53 (3): 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.53.3.83. Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism : Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Marranci, G. 2006. Jihad Beyond Islam. Routledge. Mazutis, D. (2018). Much Ado About Nothing: The Glacial Pace of CSR Implementation in Practice. In Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social Responsibility (Business and Society 360, Vol. 2), ed. J. Weber and D.M. Wasieleski, 177–243. Emerald. Mechanic, D., and J. Tanner. 2007. Vulnerable People, Groups, and Populations: Societal View. Health Affairs 26 (5): 1220–1230. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.26.5.1220. Mir, A.M. 2010. Leadership in Islam. Journal of Leadership Studies 4 (3): 69–72. Mohammad, N. 1985. The Doctrine of Jihad: An Introduction. Journal of Law and Religion 3 (2): 381–397. https://doi.org/10.2307/1051182. Neville, B.A., S.J.  Bell, and G.J.  Whitwell. 2011. Stakeholder Salience Revisited: Refining, Redefining, and Refueling an Underdeveloped Conceptual Tool. Journal of Business Ethics 102 (3): 357–378. Norman, W., and C. MacDonald. 2004. Getting to the Bottom of “Triple Bottom Line”. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (2): 243–262. O’Toole, J., and D.  Vogel. 2011. Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism. California Management Review 53 (3): 60–76. Piketty, T. 2013. Le Capital au XXIe siècle. Paris: Éditions du Seuil. Porter, M.E., and M.R.  Kramer. 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review 89 (1/2): 62–77. Ravasi, D., and M. Schultz. 2006. Responding to Organizational Identity Threats: Exploring the Role of Organizational Culture. Academy of Management Journal 49 (3): 433–458. https://doi. org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.21794663. Savall, H., M.  Péron, V.  Zardet, and M.  Bonnet. 2018. Socially Responsible Capitalism and Management. Routledge. Semaan, K. 1966. Education in Islam, from the Jahiliyyah to Ibn Khaldun. The Muslim World 56 (3): 188–198. Sisodia, R.S. 2011. Conscious Capitalism: A Better Way to Win: A Response to James O’Toole and David Vogel’s “Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism”. California Management Review 53 (3): 98–108. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.53.3.98. Steinberg, D. 2020. The Multidisciplinary Nature of Morality and Applied Ethics. Springer. Stevens, J.M., H.K. Steensma, D.A. Harrison, and P.L. Cochran. 2005. Symbolic or Substantive Document? The Influence of Ethics Codes on Financial Executives’ Decisions. Strategic Management Journal 26 (2): 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.440. Tanner, K. 2019. One of the World’s Most Celebrated Theologians Argues for a Protestant Anti-­ Work Ethic. Yale University Press.

312

S. Baba and S. Mohammad

Tracey, P., N.  Phillips, and M.  Lounsbury. 2014. Taking Religion Seriously in the Study of Organizations. In Religion and Organization Theory, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 41, ed. P. Tracey, N. Phillips, and M. Lounsbury. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Von Grunebaum, G.E. 1962. Pluralism in the Islamic World. Islamic Studies 1 (2): 37–59. https:// www.jstor.org/stable/20832630. Young, S. 2003. Moral Capitalism: Reconciling Private Interest with the Public Good. Berrett-­ Koehler Publishers. Yusof, M., L.M.  Nor, and J.E.  Hoopes. 2014. Virtuous CSR: an Islamic Family Business in Malaysia. Journal of Family Business Management 4 (2): 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JFBM-­07-­2013-­0016. Sofiane Baba is an Assistant Professor of Strategic Management at the École de gestion, University of Sherbrooke (Quebec, Canada). Professor Baba’s research focuses on better understanding the processes, strategies, practices, and projects through which organizations can contribute to making this world more sustainable, just, and inclusive. His empirical research is primarily qualitative and focuses on various contexts, namely SMEs, large complex organizations, and philanthropic organizations, both in Canada and in North Africa. His scholarly works have been published in the Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Cleaner Production, Journal of Management Inquiry, International Journal of Project Management, M@n@gement, and Management International.  

Shoeb Mohammad is an Assistant Professor of Strategic Management and Entrepreneurship in the Faculty of Administration, Lakehead University (Canada). Shoeb’s research examines the contextual influences and broad implications of unethical behavior of firms from varying perspectives, with a key focus on emerging markets and innovation. Current topics he is exploring include the implications of the institutional environment of emerging markets on the unethical behavior of firms, how corruption in emerging markets affects firm innovation, and the social evaluations firms receive when involved in scandals. His scholarly works have been published in Business Ethics: Environment and Responsibility, International Journal of Project Management, and Journal of Business Venturing Insights.  

Chapter 17

A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual, Organizational, and Systemic Transformation David A. Palmer and Joseph F. McCormick

17.1 Introduction How can wealth be concentrated, invested, and deployed in a manner that is conscious and in harmony with, as opposed to being destructive of, the general social good? In this essay, we will reflect on these questions from the perspective of the writings and experience of the Baháʼí Faith, whose teachings are well known for their central focus on a spirituality oriented toward social transformation. How do these teachings relate to Conscious Capitalism? Core Baháʼí principles include the free and independent search for truth; the spiritual essence of human nature; the oneness of humanity; the abolition of racial, ethnic, national and religious prejudices; the equality of women and men; the harmony of science and religion; service to humanity as our highest calling; promotion of agriculture and commerce; work in a spirit of service as a form of worship; the abolition of extremes of wealth and poverty; and consultative governance that releases the power of individual initiative while promoting the common good. The Baháʼí teachings envision the gradual emergence of a world commonwealth in which these principles will be realized.1 This essay is a reflection on how these principles relate to  The Baháʼí Faith is based upon the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh (1817–1892) and after his passing, his son ʻAbdu’l-Bahá (1844–1921). Over his lifetime, Bahá’u’lláh revealed hundreds of tablets and dozens of volumes, among which the Kitáb-i-Íqán (Book of Certitude) and Kitáb-i-Aqdas (Most Holy Book) are the core sources of religious doctrine and law respectively. By the mid-twentieth century, the Baháʼí Faith had spread to every country across the globe, from tribal communities to urban territories (Smith 1987). For Baháʼís, the entirety of Bahá’u’lláh’s revelation, along with 1

D. A. Palmer University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China J. F. McCormick (*) Independent Researcher, Shanghai, China © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_17

313

314

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

the ideals of Conscious Capitalism. We begin with a brief discussion on how the features of modern capitalism have emerged in history, causing reactions, conflicts and challenges leading to the rise of Conscious Capitalism, and noting how this story intersects with the history of the Baháʼí Faith at several pivotal periods. We then outline the story of Conscious Capitalism since its inception and discuss more recent insights of Michael Strong based on an interview we conducted with him in Jan. 2022, highlighting where the Baháʼí teachings converge and diverge with his vision. This sets the stage for our exploration of a Baháʼí approach to Conscious Capitalism, through a reflection on the experience of two Baháʼí business leaders whom we interviewed for this purpose. A Baháʼí approach, we suggest, involves redefining the meaning of capital to cover its social and spiritual dimensions, and sees the business organization as operating within both a microenvironment of individuals and a macro-­ environment defined by the socio-­ political system. Thus, building a “conscious capitalist enterprise” involves a dual process of spiritual transformation at the levels of the individual and of the social system. Ultimately, only rebuilding the social order on spiritual foundations will create the conditions for the full flourishing of a spiritually and socially conscious form of capitalism.

17.2 The Rise of Conscious Capitalism Michael Strong, who worked closely with John Mackey from the earliest stages of the Conscious Capitalism movement, defines conscious capitalism as “capitalism aware of its consequences” (Interview with the authors, 24 Dec. 2021). It may be helpful to begin by looking back in history to try to trace the evolution of the key features of capitalism. Prior to the Reformation, in the European context, concentration of wealth was governed largely by hereditary stewards of treasuries. These stewards themselves were governed by strict familial and social expectations all bound by the rigid morality of the Roman Catholic Church. After the Renaissance and Reformation, Church moral control began to wane. With the rise of the joint-­stock trading corporation in Holland and England followed by the revolution of scientific and technical innovation, forms of social organization for extracting wealth from the concentration of human labor and for the transformation of natural resources allowed for the accumulation of riches to a degree unimaginable in previous eras.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s writings and the guidance of Shoghi Effendi Rabbani (1897–1957, known as the Guardian) and, since 1963, the Universal House of Justice, the elected world governing council of the Faith, constitute the body of authoritative texts of the religion. In this chapter, the “Baháʼí teachings” or “Baháʼí writings” refer to these authoritative texts. Other than quotations from these writings and factual statements about the Baháʼí teachings, the ideas in this chapter represent the personal interpretation of the authors. For a compilation of authoritative Baháʼí texts related to economics, see Houshmand Badee (2000).

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

315

Stewardship, or the responsibility for the consequences of the deployment of capital, began to be distributed to many “shareholders.” At first this small circle of shareholders appointed a general manager as steward. With the expansion of stock exchanges in the seventeenth century, shareholding in ventures expanded from small circles of individuals and families to numbers of shareholders in the hundreds and then thousands. Today the number of shareholders in many corporations is in the millions. This process of diluting individual moral responsibility for the consequences of deploying capital may be the largest contributing factor to the socially and ecologically destructive effects of capitalism. The corporation, the primary vehicle used to deploy capital, is an old form of joint endeavor that creates a new body—corpus, corporate person—capable of fulfilling a chartered purpose. In older times this charter was granted by a sovereign or the Church and thus held to a moral standard for the conduct of the corpus. The corporation was thus accountable to the sovereign or Church. If the behavior became destructive the charter could be revoked and/or reissued on new terms. In other words, kings and Church leaders delegated part of their authority as trustees of the realm to the corporation, with the intention of closely governing these legal entities that had the capacity to disrupt their domain. With the advent of the modern joint stock company form in the trading nations of England and Holland primarily, combined with the advent of exchanges for the trading of equities, and the growth of a commercial body of law that gave trading companies immunities and legal preferences not enjoyed by natural persons, the stage was set for the corporation to, in time, transcend moral constraint and abuse the power conferred on it by the state. This abuse may best be exemplified by the East India Company (EIC), the prototype of the multinational corporation and primary architect of the British Empire. In its single-minded pursuit of “return on investment” the EIC, as one of the major actors in the tea and opium trade, actively promoted drug addiction in China, and drew British armies and fleets into wars of colonial conquest and punishment to protect the drug trade. Meanwhile the Royal African Company and similar companies enslaved tens of millions of Africans, powering the industrial revolution with forced labour on cotton plantations (Beckert 2014). Adam Smith himself wrote a scathing critique of the joint stock form in his Wealth of Nations, writing to his publisher of his intent to expose ‘the Absurdity and hurtfulness of almost all our chartered trading companies’ (quoted in Ross 1995, p. 353). According to the EIC historian Nick Robins, the rise and fall of the EIC “highlighted to contemporaries— notably Adam Smith and Edmund Burke—three fundamental flaws in the corporate metabolism: first, the corporate drive to market domination and monopoly; second, the inherent speculative dynamic of shareholder-owned businesses; and third, the absence of effective mechanisms for bringing companies to account for malpractice overseas.” (Robins 2007, p. 31). The worst abuses of capitalism became evident by the second half of the nineteenth century—child labor, dangerous working conditions, company towns, commercial intelligence networks, war profiteering, monopolization, the strategic elimination of competition, the disruption of free markets, and extreme income

316

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

disparities. The result was a general awakening of the need to more effectively protect society for the unconscious, socially irresponsible deployment of capital, exemplified by the work of Karl Marx in the second half of the nineteenth century. It was during this period that the Baháʼí Faith was born and spread in Persia and the Ottoman empire through the teachings and persecutions of two prophetic figures, the Báb (1819–1850) and Baháʼu’lláh (1817–1892) (Smith 1987). This was a time when the middle East was just beginning its integration into the commercial markets of modern capitalism, leading to the unravelling and collapse of ancient empires. The Báb was himself a merchant, while Baháʼu’lláh hailed from a propertied aristocratic family. Baháʼu’lláh’s son and successor ʻAbdu’l-Bahá (1844–1921), in a treatise on civilization addressed to Persian intellectuals, advocated the adoption of modern science and industry, while at the same time criticizing the greed and materialism of the West (ʻAbdu’l-Bahá 1875). When ʻAbdu’l-Bahá was released from Ottoman captivity in 1908, it was the peak of the conflict between the ideologies of socialism and capitalism. Remarkably, the Baháʼí teachings were welcomed and embraced across the entire ideological spectrum in the West. On his 1912 tour of America Abdu’l-Bahá not only met with leaders like Andrew Carnegie, was hosted by the Hearst family and spoke to the assembled body of Stanford University but was also invited to speak by socialist workers’ groups, the 4th Congress of the NAACP in Chicago, as well as religious congregations of every denomination. To all audiences, he emphasized the Baháʼí teachings of the oneness of humanity. He did not align himself with any of the competing ideological currents of the day and affirmed the contributions of rich and poor, labor and capital, man and woman, black and white to the development of civilization (Stockman 2012). Over the twentieth century, albeit in fits and starts, there was a gradual rise in awareness about the excesses of capitalism and the need to develop more socially conscious forms. Many of the abuses mentioned earlier were mitigated in the 1930s through more integrative mechanisms between the government, labor unions, and capital. In the 1940’s and ‘50’s the corporate world pushed back, however, as it sought to build a world war, cold war and post war consumer economy. The 1960’s and 70’s saw yet another elevation as former “hippies” brought their social, environmental, and spiritual consciousness into business in a range of cultural, technical and organizational innovations. The 1980’s, however, witnessed a new pushback in the form of removing protections against corporate consolidation and neutralizing unions through “right to work” laws. And then, since the 2000’s, as the influence of large, consolidated enterprise on politics advanced unchecked, income disparities widened ever more, and free markets were further disrupted, there was growing doubt, even among many in America’s heartland, that capitalism as we have known it could solve the severe economic, environmental, demographic and technological disruptions on the horizon. In this context, in the early 2000’s a number of confluences gave rise to what has become a Conscious Capitalism movement, or a movement from exclusively one-­ bottom line “shareholder capitalism” which optimizes the business only for one metric, profit, to “stakeholder capitalism” which adds two more bottom

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

317

lines – people (employees, consumers, and communities) and planet. One segment of this movement in its early stages tended to identify with the values of the free market and individual liberty. Another segment tended to identify with communitarian social values and what have come to be known as green values. An exemplar of this latter segment is former Harvard Business School professor David Korten. In his books and articles about “The New Economy” he makes a clear distinction between “main street” values and “Wall Street” values (Korten 2009). Some advocates within both segments were also exploring personal growth and various forms of spirituality, including Asian spiritualities. At some point these ideologically different, but not incompatible communities began to cross-pollinate, drawn together by a mutual interest in consciousness raising spiritual explorations. The exemplars of this seem to be Michael Strong and John Mackey, who each had integrated a libertarian perspective with a green communitarian perspective, the original founders of the movement with the publication of Strong’s book, with foreword by Mackey, Be the Solution: How Entrepreneurs and Conscious Capitalists Can Solve All the World’s Problems (2009). In the foreword to Be the Solution, Mackey, the founder of Whole Foods Market, writes: “I first met Michael Strong through a mutual friend back in 2002. I liked him immediately. Michael was the first Libertarian I had met who was also idealistic and who shared my commitments to both economic and political freedom as well as personal growth, social responsibility, and environmental stewardship.” After a meeting in New Mexico at a resort once known by the Native Americans and later Franciscans as “the place of the fire of the angels”—because of the afternoon light on the mountain peaks—they formed an organization called FLOW. FLOW was not only about “liberating the entrepreneurial spirit for good” but also about the consciousness achieved when you become spiritually “present”, i.e. entering a “flow state.” To be in flow is to be completely involved in an activity for its own sake, using your skills to the utmost. It’s a state that opens doors to higher intelligence and creativity, an experience both men seemed to share. Be the Solution was their founding manifesto, their “most complete statement to date about what FLOW offers to the world.” (Mackey, in Strong 2009: Foreword, XIV). Michael Strong was a founding board member of Conscious Capitalism, Inc., the organization that emerged from FLOW, Be the Solution, and John Mackey’s subsequent book Conscious Capitalism (2014). According to the Conscious Capitalism website (consciouscapitalism.org), this community “believes business is good because it creates value, it is ethical because it is based on voluntary exchange, it is noble because it can elevate our existence, and it is heroic because it lifts people out of poverty and creates prosperity. Free enterprise capitalism is the most powerful system for social cooperation and human progress ever conceived. It is one of the most compelling ideas we humans have ever had.” Fifteen years later, we asked Strong if the principles had evolved and what he had learned since writing the Be the Solution manifesto. We also wanted to get a sense of where he saw it all going. He offered a shorthand definition of Conscious Capitalism: “capitalism conscious of its consequences.” He distinguished it from Corporate Social Responsibility which is more like “capitalism responding to its

318

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

critics” and outlined a typology of three tiers of capitalism: predatory or “a** hole capitalism,” “regular capitalism, and “Conscious Capitalism”. He described a tension within the movement between “guilty leftists” and “do-gooder libertarians” that is a challenge to resolve. Strong emphasized the importance of virtues education as a foundation for Conscious Capitalism, in which schools, following the Socratic tradition, should inculcate the pursuit of life-long happiness and well-being in the Greek sense of eudaemonia which encompasses the moral life and living well with others. But, under state-run education, the souls of the young are being shaped by materialism, consumerism, pornography and so on. The solution, for Strong, is the full privatization of education: allow a diversity of educational approaches to flourish and trust parents to know what is best for their children: they will choose the schools that develop childrens’ virtues, and which will out-compete other models. His views on Conscious Capitalism and virtues education reveal what he admits is his “zero trust in government,” dismissing government as a system to reward special interests. This is a systemic flaw in the institutional framework of the state, leading to subsidizing the rich and big corporations. Strong clearly believes externalities should be internalized, otherwise capitalism can be harmful. To accomplish this without relying solely on big government, there is a need for global, multilateral ad hoc governing structures of business, government, and civil society, so that businesses don’t simply find the jurisdiction that allows them to externalize. He cited the example of the success of multilateral treaties to monitor deep sea fisheries and referred to a 1990 book by Elinor Ostrom called Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action about how to create multilateral institutions to protect the commons. Another example he mentioned is environmental trusts in which trustees have a fiduciary duty to protect things like fisheries or even sectors of the sky. He also advocated using the principle of private property to protect the commons, such as by treating entities such as rivers as a legal person owning the resource. And he supported developing coalitions of “good actors” to minimize the possibility of the commons being captured by “bad actors.” Asked about how to coordinate decentralized initiatives in an increasingly interconnected world, Strong views ad hoc multilateral institutional arrangements and agreements designed to address specific problems as preferable to building a single world authority. Decentralization and autonomy is vital to making these ad hoc governing structures effective. It is on this point that we find a tension between Strong’s libertarianism and a Baháʼí approach. The Baháʼí faith emphasizes the importance of decentralization, local initiative, voluntary coordination, and subsidiarity, but within a planetary coordinating structure with legitimate, sovereign authority. The challenge within this framework is not an ideological polarization between advocacy of less or more government, but how to develop a unifying complementarity between localized autonomy and planetary coordination. As we propose a Baháʼí perspective on Conscious Capitalism in the following sections, it is on the question of global governance that, it seems, a Baháʼí perspective may be different from the way Conscious Capitalism has been understood by its

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

319

main initiators. That said, even though Strong personally disagrees with the Baháʼí vision of a future world commonwealth, he stressed, in an email response on March 30, 2022 to a final draft of this chapter, that “Conscious Capitalism as a movement or an organization has never made any statement one way or another on the issue of global governance. Thus it would be misleading to represent my brief comments on the topic as a ‘position’ held by Conscious Capitalism. …Conscious Capitalism as a movement and as an organization is perfectly silent on these issues.” Hence, as we discuss the emergence of a world commonwealth in the “systemic level” section below it should be clearly understood this is solely a Baháʼí perspective and is not in any way representative of the Conscious Capitalism movement.

17.3 Bahá’í Perspective: Individual and Organizational Level The proposal for a Conscious Capitalism raises the issue of the relationship between human consciousness and humanity’s economic system. More specifically, this raises the following questions: What is the purpose of human consciousness? What are the means for the development and expression of human consciousness? What economic system provides the best means for the development and application of human consciousness? From the onset, we should mention that the Baháʼí teachings do not include any comprehensive teachings on economic systems, capitalism or entrepreneurship. They do not formulate a detailed economic program or a blueprint of a future socio-economic system, nor do they endorse any specific socio-economic system whether capitalism, communism, or social democracy. That said, the Baháʼí writings state that “There is nothing in the teachings against some kind of capitalism; its present form, though, would require adjustments to be made.” (Shoghi 1973, p. 21). From a Baháʼí perspective, we might look at Conscious Capitalism from the angle of the relationship between the spiritual and material dimensions of reality. On this theme, the Baháʼí teachings contain a set of principles that all are invited to reflect on and to apply in the present circumstances of their lives. Many of these principles are directly relevant to the discussion of conscious capitalism. Some of them address the individual and can be applied by persons in any role or position in the current economic system. Others pertain to organizations and are especially relevant to the domains of organizational design, management, and leadership. And others concern the systemic frameworks of governance. These thus touch on three essential dimensions of conscious capitalism: the legal and institutional system within which economic activity is embedded; the organizational actors of economic life; and the individuals who operate within these organizational and institutional systems. Individual minds, organizations, and social systems can be conceived of material containers and mirrors of the divine spirit in this world. However, these containers

320

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

are distorted or even totally obscured by their imperfections. Given this reality, there are three approaches to pro-actively work on bringing the spirit into these material containers: The first is to fill the existing container with spirituality, without changing it. For example, to be an ethical business leader within the existing corporate structure and economic system, without making any effort to change it. Without changing the system, one tries to be a good person within it. The second is to improve the container. For example, as in the case studies we present below, to innovate aspects of the corporate design in order that it may become more “conscious”, aligned with spiritual principles. These improvements, however, don’t change the fundamental design of the container as a whole. The third is to build a new container, based on a new design that allows for the full expression of our spiritual nature, individually and collectively. Here, the new container does not refer to a new style of business within the existing capitalist system, but to transform the entire system. At this level, there is consciousness that the issue is systemic, and demands a systemic response. The Baháʼí teachings encompass all three levels, which are to be carried out simultaneously. Thus, Baháʼís, even as they exert themselves at the first and second levels, are actively engaged at the third level, of building a new container—in other words, a new socio-economic system, by laying the foundations of a new world order, as discussed further below. From this perspective, Conscious Capitalism can be seen as a way of designing processes to nurture the development of individuals, businesses, and systems of governance such that they may become be the most conducive to the flourishing of the noble expressions of the human spirit or consciousness. This involves nourishing the attitudes and dispositions of entrepreneurs and business leaders as individuals; nourishing a culture within the enterprise that encourages and facilitates the growth of these dispositions and capacities; and designing institutional forms of governance of a new world order that promote, rather than hamper, the creative expressions of this spirit.

17.3.1 Individual Level At the level of the individual, the Baháʼí teachings conceive of human nature as combining a spiritual and a material nature, which can also be understood as our “higher self” and “lower self,” or our “spiritual nature” and “animal nature”. We learn in the Baháʼí teachings that worship is far more than ritualistic or congregational practices: to worship God means to become conscious of and to make manifest the divine attributes hidden within the human and material worlds. Upon the inmost reality of each and every created thing He hath shed the light of one of His names, and made it a recipient of the glory of one of His attributes. Upon the reality of man, however, He hath focused the radiance of all of His names and attributes, and made it a mirror of His own Self (Baháʼu’lláh 1853–1892a).

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

321

These divine attributes constitute our true, spiritual wealth. Consciousness of this wealth enables us to become spiritually detached from greed and desire for material riches, resonating with similar teachings in the other major spiritual traditions. In these passages in the Hidden Words, channeling the Voice of God, Baháʼu’lláh writes: O Son of Man! Thou dost wish for gold and I desire thy freedom from it. Thou thinkest thyself rich in its possession, and I recognise thy wealth in thy sanctity therefrom (Baha’u’llah 1858a). O Son of Being! Busy not thyself with this world, for with fire we test the gold, and with gold we test Our servants (Baháʼu’lláh 1858b).

This spiritual detachment is part of a broader set of virtues that we are enjoined to cultivate in our lives: You must become distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accord, for love and justice. In brief, you must become distinguished in all the virtues of the human world — for faithfulness and sincerity, for justice and fidelity, for firmness and steadfastness, for philanthropic deeds and service to the human world, for love toward every human being, for unity and accord with all people, for removing prejudices and promoting international peace (‘Abdu’l-Bahá 1912a).

But these virtues and spiritual attitudes cannot be cultivated by separating ourselves from the material world: Baháʼu’lláh mandates that all should, in practice, busy themselves in this world, engaging in productive work: It is enjoined upon every one of you to engage in some form of occupation, such as crafts, trades, and the like. … Waste not your time in idleness and sloth. Occupy yourselves with that which profiteth yourselves and others. …. Hold ye fast unto the cord of material means, placing your whole trust in God, the Provider of all means. When anyone occupieth himself in a craft or trade, such occupation itself is regarded in the estimation of God as an act of worship; and this is naught but a token of His infinite and all-pervasive bounty (Baháʼu’lláh 1891). O My Servants! Ye are the trees of My garden; ye must give forth goodly and wondrous fruits, that ye yourselves and others may profit therefrom. Thus it is incumbent upon every one to engage in crafts and professions… Trees that yield no fruit have been and will ever be for the fire (Baha’u’llah 1858c).

Thus, at the individual level, the Baháʼí teachings stress that the cultivation of the highest virtues, moral standards, and spiritual qualities—even the worship of God Himself—requires a hands-on, productive engagement with the world through occupations, crafts, trades, or professions. Our purpose is to become conscious of the divine attributes concealed within ourselves and the world, and to transform ourselves and the world by developing these attributes and releasing their light and power in the world. This “worship” is at the same time spiritual, social, and material, in a manner that extends far beyond the realm of religion as conventionally understood. As Baháʼu’lláh wrote: The purpose for which mortal men have, from utter nothingness, stepped into the realm of being, is that they may work for the betterment of the world and live together in concord and harmony (Quoted in UHJ 2021).

322

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

Elsewhere, he stated, All men have been created to carry forward an ever-advancing civilization (Baháʼu’lláh 1853–1892b).

As we grow in maturity and wisdom, we learn to harmonize the material and spiritual sides of our nature. The body is the container and channel of the spirit in the material world; it is the lamp through which the light of the spirit shines. Thus, the goal of religion is not to avoid the world, but to live in the world; to illuminate the world through the action of our body—the manifestation of our virtues—in the world. Spiritual cultivation involves striving to consciously improve the transformative actions of the body in the world, in order that the world may become a better vessel of the spirit. The ultimate end of this process is to build what Baháʼu’lláh has called the “Most Great Peace” envisioned by the prophets and poets of old, described in the Baháʼí writings as a “global commonwealth” governed by the consciousness of the oneness of humanity: “the earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens” (Baháʼu’lláh 1880–81). This “new world order”, envisioned as operating on principles of justice, will enjoy a level of material prosperity unimaginable to humanity today, but in which material and spiritual civilization will develop in a balanced and harmonious manner.

17.3.2 Organizational Level Organizations can also be seen as containers or vessels through which the divine spirit flows into the world. The design of an organization, such as a business or system of governance, may help or hinder its capacity to be a vessel for the spirit. This depends not only on the ideals, motives, and moral qualities of the individuals in the organization, but also on the design of the system itself—how its structure and processes draw out the better or worse sides of our nature. What might a spiritually and morally grounded enterprise look like? The Baháʼí principles offer some insights on two dimensions of this question. The first pertains to those aspects that can be applied within currently existing corporate structures, while the second pertains to aspects that require a transformation of the broader legal, financial, and governmental framework, which define the core template of the modern corporate structure and purpose. In this section, we will deal primarily with the first aspect, while the following section on systemic change will deal with the latter. The organizational level of analysis is the primary focus of John Mackey’s book Conscious Capitalism. He and business professor co-author Raj Sisodia outline four principles in this regard: 1 . Focus the organization on a “Higher Purpose” beyond profits. 2. Orient on customers, employees, suppliers and community stakeholders in balance with shareholders.

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

323

3 . Emphasize a “we” rather than a “me” mentality in driving the business. 4. Create “Conscious Culture” by fostering a spirit of trust and cooperation among all stakeholders. There is a large field of organizational development—rooted in the study of group dynamics and organizational behavior that emerged from the 1960’s counter-­ culture—that brings innovative and even enlightened tools for personal growth, trust building and distributed intelligence into business settings. Senior leadership must also embody these values and actively support this softer aspect of their corporate culture. A business entrepreneur or manager seeking to apply Baháʼí principles in his or her enterprise might be concerned about the following dimensions: how can the enterprise become an environment within which a team of workers can grow spiritually, developing the spiritual qualities mentioned above, in terms of love, unity, justice, faithfulness, sincerity, serving humanity and advancing peace? How can it become a space within which the divine capacities and virtues of each person can be nurtured and find expression? How can it become a space within which, through their work, team members produce fruit that are beneficial to themselves and to humanity? An organizational culture inspired by Baháʼí principles might seek to express the following characteristics: –– Unity and cooperation: how can the relationships between all members of the organization be nurtured so that they are characterized by unity and cooperation, minimizing competition, backbiting, and factionalism? –– Love and nurturing: how can the organization create the conditions for its members to support the development and expression of the God-given qualities and capacities of each individual? –– Humility and service: while the Baháʼí teachings recognize the need for functional hierarchies in organizations, they also stress that the highest station a leader can aspire to is one of humble, selfless service to others, with no regard for personal fame, status or power. Thus, how can leadership be exercised in a manner that is empowering to others, serving their growth and development, while minimizing rank and distinction? –– Learning: the Baháʼí teachings on community building emphasize a cycle of action, reflection, consultation and action, in which collective knowledge is gradually developed, with all members contributing with a “humble posture of learning”. All of these characteristics of a Baháʼí-inspired organizational culture rest on the practice of consultation, which is a highly salient principle within the Baháʼí teachings. Consultation, here, refers to the collective exploration of all aspects of a problem, in which all members, coming from different backgrounds or experiences, contribute ideas and perspectives as gifts to the group rather than as adversarial debates, factional tactics or power play, and in which the ideas offered, and the final

324

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

solution arrived at in deliberation, are owned by all. The decisions reached through this process take into account not only interest of the group in question, but the interest of humanity as a whole. As stated by Baháʼu’lláh, Take ye counsel together in all matters, inasmuch as consultation is the lamp of guidance which leadeth the way and is the bestower of understanding (Baháʼu’lláh 1880–81).

A Baháʼí-inspired organizational culture would also strive to implement the principles of the equality between women and men, and the abolition of prejudice and discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality or religion, which are all strongly emphasized in the Baháʼí writings. How these various principles might be applied in practice will vary from organization to organization and from individual to individual, depending on local circumstances and the unique talents and personalities of organizational leaders and members. For the purpose of illustration, we interviewed two Baháʼí business executives who, each in his own way, has striven to put the Baháʼí teachings into practice in the organizations they lead.

17.4 Putting Principles Into Practice: Two Case Studies Sean2 is the recently retired former President of one of the largest divisions of a major multinational corporation. He was responsible for growing its operations in a major foreign market over 13-fold in about fifteen years, leading the company’s growth worldwide, ultimately taking charge of all emerging markets, and contributing to an eight-fold increase in its stock market capitalization during this same period. His division’s operations represented about 15,000 employees in a much larger global entity of over 150,000 employees with operations in over 100 countries. As a Baháʼí, throughout the entire period that Sean was growing this large division he was also engaged in service to the Baháʼí faith, both in terms of community building and through socio-economic development projects. Given that he had taken control in a distant foreign market at a time when sales were nearly flat and morale low, corporate headquarters on the other side of the world was willing to empower him to create and execute a turn-around strategy in a way that he saw fit. He therefore tried to apply Baháʼí principles to the management of his division. He more fully localized operations, decentralized decision making to the greatest extent possible, and hired and grew a diverse team that reflected and honored the local culture. He commented that his team didn’t just “parachute” in from headquarters in America for a couple of years then move on up their career ladder. They were, to as large an extent as possible, of, by, and for the communities that hosted their industrial operations. He clearly valued people as much as profits. He says “the team was energized to think of fresh new ideas that would genuinely solve the problems facing their  Name anonymized. Data based on online interview conducted on January 4th, 2022.

2

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

325

society at the grass roots.” Two strategies emerged as he progressed to guide his success: One was that they were organic to their home country and two that they were to become a market and innovation leader in their home country in the product categories in which they competed. He stated: “With these two strategies with our relentless focus on local empowerment and rigorous execution, we achieved our stellar growth without any acquisitions or the need for joint ventures. We set a goal to grow 20% annually from our anemic 4% growth, but with the changes we made, we surpassed this goal for many years.” At the heart of these strategies may be the Baháʼí ideal of unity. Prior to his taking over, the operation seems to have been disjointed and internally mistrusting with invisible walls of social rank that created unnecessary division and inefficiency. With the abilities of a facilitator, one of the most important leadership skills in the Baháʼí faith, he set about removing the walls and repairing the bridges in a culturally sensitive way (speaking the local language fluently), allowing people to maintain their dignity as he made internal adjustments. He then oriented everyone on a high star, the aim of becoming the best in every product class in which they competed (the Baháʼí ideal: “work as worship.”) Much of what he accomplished could be attributed to what the Guardian of the Baháʼí faith, Shoghi Effendi, and designer of its Administrative Order as “organic structure,” an organization that integrates the pragmatic goal-oriented value of efficiency with the value of caring for the needs of people in the process. However, Sean stressed that “results” are the leading drivers in a large corporation. He said that “capital is a coward,” meaning that it does not want to risk loss and thus naturally seeks the highest returns. At his former company returns were constantly scrutinized by Wall Street analysts and the most important metric of success was stock price (optimizing profit.) A myriad of institutions and an entire media culture has focused public attention on the measure of stock price: hence, as a corporate leader it is impossible to sidestep this metric regardless of how much “good” she or he would like to do. In other words, the corporate culture is such that if you don’t produce financial results, the enterprise will quickly find someone who will. Our second case is Bruce,3 a Baháʼí businessman whose views and experience may point toward another perspective for understanding what it means to be a conscious capitalist. He is a successful entrepreneur having built a hotel chain with over 2000 employees. In preparing for our conversation we reviewed his company’s “Culture Statement.” It made explicit reference to the company being guided by three bottom lines -people, profit, planet—rather than just one. The Statement focuses on creating an internal business culture that reflects Baháʼí principles of unity, service, and personal growth. This successful entrepreneur put great emphasis on creating the role of “Manager of Culture” which he entrusted to a Baháʼí community advisor whom he had met many years before, when this gentleman facilitated a weekend relationship-building retreat focused on bringing people together “on the personal and spiritual side.”

 Name anonymized. Data based on online interview conducted on January 11th, 2022.

3

326

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

Bruce recognized that this work could translate into organizational development, so he invited his future Culture Manager to enact the same experience for his, at the time, small company. For a while, the growing team came together every year or two, sometimes twice a year, to go through the tools and exercises that would become a cooperative culture building toolkit for working together and doing business. This toolkit became the heart of the business culture to which they later added another set of internal communications tools to further institutionalize—on a daily, shift by shift basis—a process among staff for building cooperation. Just as Sean had done in a completely different setting, Bruce found that time and effort building a healthy internal culture, the “people” bottom line (Baháʼí ideal: a culture of consultation) was the soil from which the eventual fruit of the “profit” bottom line emerged. Another example of “organic structure” that seems to consciously integrate the values of goal-oriented efficiency with those of process-oriented caring. As Bruce eases into retirement, another aspect of our conversation was how to preserve this culture once ownership was transferred from the entrepreneur/founder who held a firm moral compass, to a hired CEO and a board of directors. The transmission of a founder’s original intent/dream has traditionally been difficult. If the company or its assets go public or are acquired by a public entity, these cultures tend towards the single bottom line (i.e. profit only). The larger systemic and social concern is the consolidation of ownership that results after these transfers. When medium-size enterprises like this chain of hotels governed by the heart and spirit of a conscious founder are later consolidated into much larger public enterprises loyal only to creating “shareholder value” they can lose their “soul.” Moreover, at a certain scale of consolidation such corporations become so big as to become too economically and politically influential to control. They become de facto ungovernable by the jurisdictions that charter them. Bruce’s solution was to create what he termed a “Legacy Corporation” as a container for preserving his unique organizational culture as control was eventually transferred to a CEO and Board of Directors. He admitted he was still working on exactly what this would look like, but it sounded similar, at least in spirit, and maybe in legal structure, to a B-Corp, or Benefit Corporation (https://www.bcorporation.net/en-­us/). A B-corp is an emerging form of corporate person that seeks to bridge the for-profit motivation of providing return on investment with the non-profit motivation of doing social good. It is growing rapidly and has been adopted in the last couple of decades by over 4000 enterprises in 155 industries in nearly 80 countries.

17.5 Bahá’í Perspective: Systemic Level The two cases we have provided represent only two examples of how individual business leaders have attempted to apply Baháʼí principles in their work within a capitalist context, building their business in a manner driven by their spiritual consciousness. And yet, as successful as they were within their local context at creating

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

327

mutually empowering environments in an atmosphere of unity and consultation, if we expand our frame to look at the bigger picture, we might wonder about the broader effect of these efforts. The multinational corporation whose overseas division was led by Sean, for example, has a record, in America, of controversial practices in relation to the environment, occupational safety, the defense industry and political lobbying. While Sean led his own division in line with Baháʼí principles to the extent possible, the company as a whole could hardly be cited as an example of “Conscious Capitalism”. The same might be said of some of the major brands whose franchises Bruce operated in his company. The two cases we have discussed thus show both the possibilities and the limitations of what one individual can do to practice a spiritually inspired capitalism within a system that, overall, is based on principles sometimes radically opposed to spiritual values. While increasing the number of such individuals within the system and developing their capacities to apply spiritual principles will undoubtedly help, ultimately it is the foundations of the current capitalist system itself that need to be rebuilt. The Baháʼí work ethic can be compared to the Calvinist work ethic famously identified as a core cultural root of capitalism in Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Weber described a spirituality of “this-worldly asceticism” that enjoined a frugal life of hard work rather than depleting riches in the luxurious extravagance of Roman Catholic culture, leading to the accumulation of unspent earnings that could be rationally reinvested in ever profitable business ventures, forming the seeds of capitalism. But, argued Weber, over time, the calculative, rational accumulation and management of capital shifted from being a side effect of a spiritually oriented life to becoming the core concern and purpose of an increasingly materialistic socio-economic system known as capitalism. Part of the paradox of the so-called “Protestant ethic of capitalism” is that hardworking, frugal, morally upright people who care for their families and communities generate wealth as a side product of a virtuous life, but this wealth is then concentrated and managed within corporate structures that are designed to accumulate wealth as their sole or primary purpose, all too often sidelining moral or spiritual concerns. The problem with capitalism lies not at the individual but at the systemic level. This fact was notably stressed by Adam Smith himself, whose voice as the first critic of the corporate form as harming capitalism has been forgotten. As noted by corporate historian Nick Robins, Uniquely, Smith was emphatic in downplaying the actions of individuals as the root cause of the problems. ‘I mean not to throw any odious imputation upon the general character of the servants of the East India Company’, he wrote, stressing that ‘it is the system of government, the situation in which they are placed, that I mean to censure’ (Smith 1776: 692–93). The problem was one of corporate design (Robins 2007, p. 36).

When most of the economic activity and wealth production and management of a society takes place in and through such essentially amoral corporate structures rather than within the morally grounded lives of families and communities,

328

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

instrumental, calculative corporate values become the dominant values of the entire society. And when the relationship between the state and society becomes predominantly mediated by the relationships between the state and corporate entities, be it through corporate controlled media and cultural enterprises, corporate sponsorship and influence on the electoral and policy making process, or state promotion or regulation of corporate entities, corporate values and issues risk becoming the dominant values of the state itself. Thus, the nature of corporate organizations should be an essential concern for a Baháʼí-inspired discourse on Conscious Capitalism. In the Baháʼí teachings, the core concern is how to heal the world from the disease of the unbridled materialism of the current world order—a materialism which underpins all social systems prevalent in the world today, be they capitalist or socialist, and which has a corrosive effect on the spiritual lives and consciousness of all individuals. To the extent that the corporate form and the legal and political structures that underpin it are designed around material self-interest as the sole or primary motivator, they violate core Baháʼí principles related to human nature and social organization. As stated by the Universal House of Justice: The time has come when those who preach the dogmas of materialism, whether of the east or the west, whether of capitalism or socialism, must give account of the moral stewardship they have presumed to exercise. […] Why is the vast majority of the world’s peoples sinking ever deeper into hunger and wretchedness when wealth on a scale undreamed of by the Pharaohs, the Caesars, or even the imperialist powers of the nineteenth century is at the disposal of the present arbiters of human affairs? (UHJ 1985).

In the Baháʼí teachings, the spiritual cure lies neither in a spiritual escape from this world, nor in focusing exclusively on how to live a moral life within the system, nor in coercively engineering a different type of system through imposed morality or state control over work and economic life. Nor is self-righteous criticism or refusal to participate in the economy a solution. After all, other than, perhaps, people who move “off grid”, almost everyone, regardless of what they do or don’t do to oppose, mitigate or improve the social and environmental effects of capitalism, have no choice but to contribute to the reproduction of the system through consuming corporate products, entrusting their assets to or borrowing from banks and financial managers, and drawing salaries from corporations or from public or non-profit entities which rely on corporate taxes or donations. There is no possible position entirely outside of the capitalist system from which one could claim moral superiority over those who are deeply engaged within the system. Common responses to the systemic problem include confrontational activism against corporations, partisan politics aiming to produce legislative majorities to regulate corporations, or instigating violent revolution leading to the state nationalization of the economy. The Baháʼí teachings, however, do not condone any of these approaches. Since adversarial methods violate the Baháʼí principle of the oneness of humanity, Baháʼís prefer to seek unifying approaches to social change (Palmer 2018). The experience of the past century shows that activism and partisan politics have been increasingly ineffective in restraining the power of corporations, and frequently lead to a counter-offensive, resulting in even greater corporate power

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

329

(Karlberg 2004). And expanding the state as a substitute for business enterprises, without questioning materialist and domination-based assumptions about human nature, usually results in merely shifting the problem from private to state organizations. Most particularly, it is in the glorification of material pursuits, at once the progenitor and common feature of all such ideologies, that we find the roots which nourish the falsehood that human beings are incorrigibly selfish and aggressive. It is here that the ground must be cleared for the building of a new world fit for our descendants (UHJ 1985).

The new civilization envisioned by Baháʼu’lláh is based on rethinking our basic assumptions about human nature and social relations. As mentioned above, we start with the assumption that human nature combines both worldly and divine, material and spiritual, self-interested and altruistic tendencies; that our higher nature can be cultivated and strengthened; and that human beings seek relationships of companionship and cooperation, governed by virtues of honesty, dignity, truthfulness, love, and justice. Building a Baháʼí civilization consists, in the first instance, in building relationships characterized by those qualities, and in the mutual nurturing and expression of our higher nature. This culture begins within the family, in relationships between friends, colleagues and acquaintances, and spiritual education and practice at all ages aims to foster this culture. A local Baháʼí community is a community engaged in a process of learning, through educational and consultative activities, how to strengthen and apply this culture in ever expanding domains of life, involving ever wider circles of participants of different backgrounds. It administers its affairs by means of a Local Spiritual Assembly, elected through a process in which all members are automatically candidates while banning nominations, campaigning and competing for power (Abizadeh 2005). Being elected entails an unsought duty to serve rather than a position, a rank or power to fight over. The Assembly operates following the principles of consultation described above, and only the Assembly as a body, rather than any of its members, possesses decision making authority. As a local Baháʼí community grows in size, capacity and maturity, it becomes increasingly engaged in the affairs of its surrounding society. As an integral part of religious life, its members increasingly engage in acts of service to the broader community, some of which may evolve into longer-term initiatives or even development organizations managing complex projects. In the current stage of development of Baháʼí communities worldwide, most of these initiatives are forms of small-scale volunteer service and educational capacity building, and a growing number of NGOs whose projects are increasing in scope and complexity (OSED 2017). However, a small but growing number of economic enterprises have begun to arise out of these initiatives. A training course on social action currently being studied by Baháʼís around the world includes examples of an agricultural enterprise, small scale retail operations, and a mutual savings and loan circle (Ruhi 2019). It is anticipated that, in the coming decades, the number and complexity of such initiatives will expand significantly (UHJ 2021). It is important to note that while these enterprises arise to meet specific economic needs in a community, they emerge out of a culture in which mutual service, learning and accompaniment are the defining

330

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

characteristics of social relationships, while notions of self-interest, materialism and competition are downplayed. And yet, these are not utopian communes that enforce compulsory sharing and self-denial. Thus, it would be hard to categorize these enterprises as either “profit-making businesses” or “non-profit organizations.” Local communities are united at the regional, national and international levels through the election of institutions following the electoral processes and principles of consultation described above. The Universal House of Justice, the supreme governing body of the Baháʼí Faith, is a world body elected at an International Convention every five years by the National Assembly members of over 180 countries and territories around the world, representing over two thousand ethnic groups. The nine members of the Universal House of Justice are not internally differentiated by rank, hierarchy, or formal function. The community and institutional structure outlined above is unique in the world. There is no international religious community, multinational corporation, non-­ governmental organization, or inter-governmental organization that institutionally connects, through an electoral and consultative system, the grassroots in villages and neighborhoods around the world into a single global community with an elected world authority. This institutional structure is seen as providing the shape and pattern for a new world order. While this process is spearheaded by the Baháʼís of the world and their collaborators, the Baháʼí writings envision a parallel process taking place independently of the Baháʼís: the political unification of the world through the voluntary decision of its sovereign countries. This process is understood by Baháʼís as taking place in fits and starts, through the establishment of institutions of global governance such as the League of Nations, the United Nations, and processes of regional integration. The Baháʼí International Community, as one of the most active nongovernmental organizations within the UN system, actively supports these efforts (Berger 2021). While these efforts advance at times and regress at others, the Baháʼí teachings foresee them leading to the eventual formation of a world federation, as states become exhausted by war and come to the realization of the incapacity of competing and uncoordinated nations to solve the pressing planetary challenges facing humanity without a world authority imbued with sovereign power. This world federation of states is to be characterized by: A world parliament whose members shall be elected by the people in their respective countries and whose election shall be confirmed by their respective governments; and a supreme tribunal whose judgment will have a binding effect even in such cases where the parties concerned did not voluntarily agree to submit their case to its consideration. A world community in which all economic barriers will have been permanently demolished and the interdependence of Capital and Labor definitely recognized; in which the clamor of religious fanaticism and strife will have been forever stilled; in which the flame of racial animosity will have been finally extinguished; in which a single code of international law—the product of the considered judgment of the world’s federated representatives—shall have as its sanction the instant and coercive intervention of the combined forces of the federated units; and finally a world community in which the fury of a capricious and militant nationalism will have been transmuted into an abiding consciousness of world citizenship—such indeed, appears, in its broadest outline, the Order anticipated by Baháʼu’lláh, an Order that shall come to be regarded as the fairest fruit of a slowly maturing age (Shoghi 1931).

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

331

This permanent world peace will have profound implications on the structure of the global economy. The war machine and the military-industrial complex—a profoundly corrupting relationship between governments and weapons corporations that have an intrinsic interest in global insecurity, will cease to absorb a large proportion of the world’s resources. … The enormous energy dissipated and wasted on war, whether economic or political, will be consecrated to such ends as will extend the range of human inventions and technical development, to the increase of the productivity of mankind, to the extermination of disease, to the extension of scientific research, to the raising of the standard of physical health, to the sharpening and refinement of the human brain, to the exploitation of the unused and unsuspected resources of the planet, to the prolongation of human life, and to the furtherance of any other agency that can stimulate the intellectual, the moral, and spiritual life of the entire human race… (Shoghi 1931).

World federation will presumably eliminate the unproductive and opaque parking of wealth in offshore tax havens and reduce the ability of multinational corporations to play countries against each other in the pursuit of preferential policies. To the extent that electoral systems adopt aspects of the Baháʼí electoral process that treats all citizens as candidates and bans campaigning and partisan politics, corporate and other actors will be unable to distort elections through campaign financing and other means. The Baháʼí conception of world government, however, does not imply belief in centralization or in the unrestrained growth of the state. The Baháʼí World Centre, in its statement The Prosperity of Humankind, calls for the promotion of human rights to be freed from the grip of the false dichotomies that have for so long held it hostage. Concern that each human being should enjoy the freedom of thought and action conducive to his or her personal growth does not justify devotion to the cult of individualism that so deeply corrupts many areas of contemporary life. Nor does concern to ensure the welfare of society as a whole require a deification of the state as the supposed source of humanity’s well-being (BWC 1995).

Avoidance of ideological dichotomies is also visible in the Baháʼí teachings on eliminating extreme disparities in wealth. The Baháʼí writings acknowledge that humans, having different abilities, will inevitably have differences in social and economic standing, and will have unequal wages (Shoghi 1973: 20). The means for reducing inequality can be found in Baháʼí teachings concerning worker compensation, taxation, and benevolence. ʻAbdu’l-Bahá has stated that labour should be compensated through both wages and profit-sharing, suggesting a proportion of 20–25% of profits being dedicated to workers (Abdu’l-Bahá 1904–06 [2014], p. 315–320). In 1912, speaking to an audience in New  York, ʻAbdu’l-Bahá stated that income taxes should be levied only on income in excess of basic need, and those whose income is insufficient for basic needs should receive an income supplement to meet that level. “Therefore taxation will be proportionate to capacity and production, and there will be no poor in the community” (Abdu’l-Bahá 1912b). This teaching seems to suggest a form of guaranteed income, though it needs to be considered together with the Baháʼí obligation to work we mentioned earlier. Finally, the Baháʼí teachings enjoin benevolence and voluntary giving by the wealthy, as preferable to the coercive distribution of wealth.

332

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

The Baháʼí vision may seem utopian, impossible to realize at present, and far from the practical concerns that face us today. To be sure, the Baháʼí writings warn that it will be centuries before this vision comes into fruition, in a future so distant that it is beyond our capacity to imagine. Nonetheless, imagining this ideal society and putting it into practice is at the core of the Baháʼí life. This work of imagination has powerful and immediate practical effects. First, it provides a collective ideal to strive for, a process which motivates and empowers a growing community. Second, it provides a standard against which to critically assess the condition and features of the current global order and economic system and opens lines of inquiry for the investigation of solutions to current problems. And third, it includes principles and guidelines that can be applied by individuals, organizations and institutions in the here and now—not only as the application of timeless spiritual, moral or ethical principles, but also as small steps toward the realization of a progressively unfolding vision of our collective future.

17.6 Conclusion Taken in isolation, the efforts of individuals to practice conscious capitalism have their limitations, but taken as a whole each of these experiences enriches the collective learning of the Baháʼí community as it engages more deeply with the life of society, learns about the potentialities and limitations of action in different social spheres, strives to develop ever more coherent and systematic approaches to applying spiritual principles in these spheres, and integrates this learning into its efforts to build the foundations of a new world order. This learning is the subject of discussions in bodies such as the Association for Baháʼí Studies, the Ethical Business for a Better Future association (EBBF, previously known as the European Baháʼí Business Forum), and other more specialized groups and initiatives in which Baháʼís play leading roles such as the Spiritual Capital and Moral Leadership Institute (www.scmli.com) and developing a new Global Systems Accounting methodology that incorporates non-financial indicators to facilitate the process of internalizing social and environmental costs and benefits (Dahl 2021). These associations and networks include practitioners and scholars, and are still in the initial phases of systematically researching the relationship between the Baháʼí teachings and concepts in disciplines such as economics (Dahl 1996, Rassekh 2001, Dahl 2018) and in fields of application such as community currencies (Scoggin 2002), rural enterprises (Zahrai 1998), and building Baháʼí-­ inspired enterprises (Brown 2002), among others. As a contribution to those conversations, this essay has aimed to emphasize the organic connection between consciousness and action at three levels: the individual, the organizational, and the societal or systemic. Michael Strong, in his original manifesto Be the Solution laid out the case for the social and systemic benefits of Conscious Capitalism. It is this fundamental faith in the power of entrepreneurship and economic freedom that drives the movement.

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

333

This is clearly exemplified by people like Bruce, the hotel entrepreneur who had a dream of owning hotels as a young man, began with a job in the industry and through hard work, ambition, a willingness to grow personally and spiritually and the support of family, friends, and community fulfilled his American Dream. We also looked at the systemic issues involved when medium sized enterprises get “rolled up” by Wall Street financing, the same pools of capital that invest in multinationals. They lose their “heart and soul” and the guiding consciousness of their founders. Moral responsibility gets distributed so widely among so many large and small shareholders as to become impotent as a guiding force. Maybe part of the systemic solution lies in something like the B-Corp, that makes social contribution a voluntary expansion of the chartered purpose of a business rather than leaving this vital community development work up to underfunded non-profit and charitable organizations. Although the B-Corp form has its critics for not going far enough, it at least has an established verification process and ensures companies explicitly integrate stakeholder commitments into their governing documents. So what, therefore, may be the hope for a more conscious economic system? As this question was asked almost a century ago people like economist John Maynard Keynes (1936) responded by advocating for what he called “managed capitalism,” meeting social needs through a transfer of power to the state. The results have been mixed at best: some social and environmental needs have been minimally met, but at the expense, many would argue, of freedom and innovation that could have otherwise already made strides toward addressing “all the world’s problems.” The consequence has been a destructive, distracting power struggle between the Keynesian and free market camps, leaving both unsatisfied and entirely leaving out other schools of economic thought that may have important contributions to make. A Baháʼí approach, for example, would involve redefining the meaning of capital to cover its social and spiritual dimensions. As we have argued in these pages, it entails viewing the business organization as operating within both a micro-environment of individuals and a macro-environment defined by the socio-political system. Building a conscious capitalism requires transformation at all three levels. This transformation needs to be driven by the growing spiritual maturity of consumers, employees, investors, and leadership as well as the harmonizing of various economic points of view. The vehicle to integrate and operationalize this rising individual consciousness and harmonized economic understanding is a more enlightened institutional culture at both the organizational and systemic levels. At the individual level, the question here becomes, how does an individual business leader raise his or her consciousness? We asked this of all the men we spoke to. They each had experiences that transformed them, but we don’t relate their personal stories here because the inexpressible truth at the heart of stories of personal transformation, when told or written, often gets lost in translation into words. There are a thousand paths up the spiritual mountain but clearly people like Michael Strong and John Mackey were “on a spiritual path” as they began FLOW. They were looking within, cultivating self-awareness and beginning to take responsibility for amending and transforming their unconscious behavior,

334

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

particularly, in their case, their inherited male attitudes. Men of previous generations had to shut down parts of themselves, like feelings and intuition and sensitivity, just to function in the harsh realities of life. They were often enculturated into industrial life that elevated obedience and loyalty to old patriarchal values and were often relatively numb to the damage their behavior did to others outside their family or community, not to mention future generations or the environment. Strong and Mackey were committed, it seems, to changing these patriarchal behavior patterns, and so it seems were the other two men we spoke to, via a different path up the mountain, the Baháʼí Faith. All these men underwent a spiritual transformation. What is transformation? Perhaps it can be compared to death and rebirth. In the context of Conscious Capitalism we are primarily referring to the transformation from a state of being unconscious and insensitive to the consequences of one’s behavior, to being conscious and sensitive. This transformation can take many forms, but it tends to take the form of a journey of maturation. As a young man there is great ambition and maybe idealism. It could be to create something, or to offer a product or service that benefits the world, or maybe just to rise to the top of a professional field, or maybe just to “make a mark.” These are natural motivations but in pursuing them inevitably men are tested, meet with setbacks and defeats, disillusionment, and failures. They often break their hearts in the pursuit of their dream or ideal. At some point, often at midlife, they hit a waiting place, a place, in Dr. Seuss’ words, of “Waiting for a train to go or a bus to come, or a plane to go or the mail to come, or the rain to go or the phone to ring, or the snow to snow or waiting around for a Yes or No or waiting for their hair to grow.” Often from this place there is space for reflection, maybe even deep reflection. There’s enough evidence now of the consequences of unconscious behavior to awaken their consciousness. From this void there is often a call to de-armor the heart from all the armors needed to protect it during the professional “ascent” of the previous decades. Once this armor is stripped away one feels vulnerable. Inevitably a new source of spiritual protection is sensed, one that teaches that true power emerges from our vulnerability. This is a phase some call “the return” when a man is softened enough to feel his feelings fully and consequently be sensitive to the pain and suffering around him. This is the path of individual spiritual maturation. The Baháʼí teachings speak of this maturation also taking place at the collective level—humanity, as a whole, has advanced through states of collective infancy and childhood, and is currently at the threshold between the tumultuous phase of our collective adolescence and the balanced consciousness of maturity. How far have we advanced in the maturation of our collective body, our social system and collective consciousness? The journey could still take some more descents and ascents, but to the extent we keep going, our heart and actions become slowly purified. We see ourselves increasingly as instruments of a higher power, which many call God, and cease to instrumentalize others or allow ourselves to be instrumentalized. In time, if we keep on, we become servants of God, dedicating our lives to the betterment of His creation.

17  A Baháʼí Perspective on Conscious Capitalism: Working for Individual…

335

References ʻAbdu’l-Bahá. 1875. The Secret of Divine Civilization. Wilmette, IL: Baháʼí Publishing Trust. ———. 1904–06 [2014]. Some Answered Questions. Revised translation. Haifa: Baháʼí World Centre. ———. 1912a. Talk at 309 West Seventy-eighth Street, New  York, 15 June 1912. In The Promulgation of Universal Peace. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/331882631. ———. 1912b. Talk at 309 West Seventy-eighth Street, New  York, 1 July 1912. In The Promulgation of Universal Peace. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/828752876. Abizadeh, Arash. 2005. Democratic Elections without Campaigns? Normative Foundations of National Baháʼí Elections. World Order 37 (1): 7–49. Badee, Houshmand. 2000. The True Foundation of all Economics. A Compilation from the Writings of Baháʼu’lláh, the Báb, ʻAbdu’l-Bahá, Shoghi Effendi, and the Universal House of Justice. Published online: https://bahai-­library.com/pdf/b/badee_compilation_foundation_economics.pdf. BWC (Baháʼí World Centre). 1995. The Prosperity of Humankind. Online link: www.bahai. org/r/467881578. Baháʼu’lláh. 1853–1892a. Gleanings from the Writings of Baháʼu’lláh XXVII. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/250990672. ———. 1853–1892b. Gleanings from the Writings of Baháʼu’lláh CIX. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/994085186. ———. 1858a. The Hidden Words. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/748392247. ———. 1858b. The Hidden Words. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/561352140. ———. 1858c. The Hidden Words. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/119659976. ———. 1880–81. Tablet of Maqṣúd. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/403173768. ———. 1891. Tablet of Bishárát (Glad Tidings). Online link to cited passage: www.bahai. org/r/491674573. Beckert, Sven. 2014. Empire of Cotton: A New History of Global Capitalism. London: Penguin Random House. Berger, Julia. 2021. Rethinking Religion and Politics in a Plural World: The Bahá’í International Community and the United Nations. New York: Bloomsbury. Brown, Don. 2002. To Build Anew: Creating Baháʼí-inspired Enterprises. Sooke, BC: Paragon-­ Quest Publications. Dahl, Arthur Lyon. 1996. The Eco Principle: Ecology and Economics in Symbiosis. Oxford: George Ronald. ———. 2021. Global Systems Accounting: Beyond Economics. Published online on International Environment Forum: https://iefworld.org/index.php/ddahl_accounting. Accessed 1 Mar 2022. Dahl, Gregory C. 2018. New Directions for Economics. Journal of Baháʼí Studies 28 (1–2): 33–67. Karlberg, Michael. 2004. Beyond the culture of contest. From Adversarialism to Mutualism in an Age of Interdependence. Welwyn: George Ronald. Keynes, John Maynard. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan. Korten, David A. 2009. Agenda for a New Economy: From Phantom Wealth to Real Wealth. Oakland: Barrett Kohler Publishing. Mackey, John. 2014. Conscious Capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. OSED (Office of Social and Economic Development, Baháʼí International Community). 2017. For the Betterment of the World: The Worldwide Baháʼí Community’s Approach to Social and Economic Development. Available online: https://www.bahai.org/documents/osed/betterment-­ world.pdf?a28125bc Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

336

D. A. Palmer and J. F. McCormick

Palmer, David A. 2018. Religion, Spiritual Principles and Civil Society. In Religion and Public Discourse in an Age of Transition: Reflections on Baháʼí Practice and Thought, ed. Ben Schewel and Geoff Cameron, 37–70. Guelph, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Robins, Nick. 2007. This Imperious Company: The English East India Company and its Legacy for Corporate Accountability. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 25 (Spring): 31–42. Rassekh, Farhad. 2001. The Baháʼí Faith and the Market Economy. Journal of Baháʼí Studies 11: 3–4. Ross, I.S. 1995. The Life of Adam Smith. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Ruhi Institute. 2019. Engaging in Social Action, Unit 1: Stirrings at the Grassroots. Cali: The Ruhi Foundation. Scoggin, Justin. 2002. Forging the Divine Economy. Published online: https://bahai-­library.com/ scoggin_forging_divine_economy. Shoghi, Effendi Rabbani. 1931. The Goal of a New World Order. In The World Order of Baháʼu’lláh. Online link to cited passage: www.bahai.org/r/401292698. ———. 1973. Directives from the Guardian. New Delhi: Baháʼí Publishing Trust. Online edition: https://reference.bahai.org/en/t/se/DG/. Smith, Adam. 1776. Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. New York: The Modern Library. Smith, Peter. 1987. The Bábi and Bahá’í Religions: From Messianic Shi’ism to World Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stockman, Robert. 2012. ʻAbdu’l-Bahá in America. Wilmette, IL: Baháʼí Publishing Trust. Strong, Michael. 2009. Be the Solution: How Entrepreneurs and Conscious Capitalists Can Solve All the World’s Problems. New York: Wiley. UHJ (Universal House of Justice). 1985. The Promise of World Peace. Online link: www.bahai. org/r/387799953. ———. 2021. Letter to the Conference of the Continental Counselors, 31 Dec 2021. Zahrai, Michel. 1998. Management of Small Rural Businesses: Some Views of the European Bahá’í Business Forum. Published online: https://bahai-­library.com/ zahrai_management_rural_businesses. David A. Palmer is professor of anthropology jointly appointed by the Hong Kong Institute for the Humanities and Social Sciences and the Department of Sociology of the University of Hong Kong. He has published articles on Baháʼí perspectives and experiences on civil society, pluralism, cosmopolitanism, community building, human dignity, and spiritual education. His research interests also include religion in modern and contemporary China and Asia. He is the author of several award-­winning books including Qigong Fever: Body, Science and Utopia in China (Columbia University Press, 2007), The Religious Question in Modern China (University of Chicago Press, co-authored with Vincent Goossaert, 2011) and Dream Trippers: Global Daoism and the Predicament of Modern Spirituality (University of Chicago Press, co-authored with Elijah Siegler, 2017).  

Joseph F. McCormick is an independent researcher, former politician, entrepreneur, and movement initiator. He is co-author (with Steve Bhaerman) of Reuniting America: A Toolkit for Changing the Political Game (2011). For almost a decade prior to 2012 he was an organizer and facilitator of a series of national thought leader conferences in the U.S. aimed at catalyzing “transpartisan” issue coalitions. One of the results was cross-pollination between green and libertarian networks united in an interest in socially responsible business and green economics. These bridge-building efforts indirectly overlapped with the work of Michael Strong, co-­founder with John Mackey and Phyllis Blees in 2006 of a small non-profit, FLOW, with the mission of clarifying and promoting the philosophy of “Conscious Capitalism.”  

PART III

Non-theistic Spiritualities, Indigenous Spiritualities, and Conscious Capitalism

Chapter 18

Buddhist Economics: The Global View Robert Elliott Allinson

18.1 Introduction What precisely is Buddhist economics and how do we bring Buddhist economics into engagement with conscious capitalism? We need to consider two starting points. Firstly, what do we mean by Buddhist economics and secondly, what do we mean by conscious capitalism? Since there is no systematic exposition about economics that can be found in the Buddhist canonical writings concerning what Buddhist economics is, the definition of what Buddhist economics is must be inferred from the primary, core Buddhist teachings.1 How are we to consider the second starting point, what is meant by conscious capitalism? According to James Heskett, “A natural result of capitalism and the free market is income inequality. Advocates of capitalism argue that inequality, to the extent that it recognizes differences in efforts and results is good.”2 Is conscious capitalism a way of addressing income inequality? According to John Mackey and Raj Sisodia, “Conscious businesses are galvanized by higher purposes that serve, align and integrate the interests of all their major stakeholders. Their higher state of consciousness makes visible to

 What follows is an integrated version of Buddhist sources from Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana, Ch’ an and Nichiren traditions. The emphasis on caring for all beings in the world is thought to be more characteristic of the Mahayana tradition, but as we shall note in the following, compassion for the other also belongs to the Theravada, the Vajrayana, the Ch’ an and the Nichiren traditions. 2  Heskett, James. 2013. Is ‘Conscious Capitalism’ an Antidote to Income Inequality. Harvard Business Review. 1

R. E. Allinson (*) Soka University of America, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_18

339

340

R. E. Allinson

them the interdependencies that exist across all stakeholders.”3 What are the higher purposes? What are the interdependencies? This is where Buddhism can provide conscious capitalism with higher purposes and can provide a link to these higher purposes through the understanding of interdependence. Marie Legault writes that “Developing leaders with a world-centric perspective is essential in order to create and sustain conscious businesses—businesses that are guided by a higher purpose, that seek to deliver value for all stakeholders simultaneously, and that build conscious cultures.”4 In order for Buddhism to work together with conscious capitalism, the first contribution Buddhism can make to conscious capitalism is to widen the notion of stakeholders to include the global population. Such an extension is in line with Buddhist teachings. As the 14th Dalai Lama writes, “What I am calling for is that we move beyond our limited or biased source of closeness to this or that group or identity, and instead cultivate a sense of closeness to the entire human family.”5 There is no exclusion here; “the entire human family” includes everyone. This is an aspirational truth and not an actual one. However, this does not prevent the 14th Dalai Lama from calling for us to cultivate this closeness to the entire human family. If we already possessed this closeness, there would be no need for his clarion call. A primary doctrine of Buddhism is the concept of interdependence. From the time that we are born, it is evident that we are dependent upon others. It might appear that we are separate individuals, but this is only an appearance. As the 14th Dalai Lama writes, “… there is no phenomenon that is inherently established, that is not established in dependence upon causes and conditions, its parts, and so forth. Yet, while not existing this way, phenomena appear to exist this way ….”6 We must understand the reality that exists beyond appearances. Indeed, for Buddhism to make its contribution to conscious capitalism, the concept of interdependence must be expanded. As Professor Michel Dion quotes from the 17th Karmapa, “Interdependence between beings makes every specific being responsible for other’s wellbeing. Our responsibility for other’s wellbeing is a universal rule. There is no exception to that rule ….”7 This notion of being responsible for others is  Mackey, John and Sisodia, Raj. 14 January 2013. “Conscious Capitalism” is not an Oxymoron. Harvard Business Review. 4  Legault, Marie. March 2012. Conscious Capitalism Leaders and Organizations with a World View. Integral Leadership Review. 5  Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 2012. Beyond Religion, Ethics for a Whole World. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 52. 6  Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 1999. Opening the Eye of New Awareness. English edition: Lopez, Jr., Donald S., trans. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 73. (emphasis in the original) The 14th Dalai Lama is of the Vajrayana tradition, but considers himself to be a Mahayanist. For a detailed exposition of the historical transmission of Buddhism to Tibet, the differences between the different traditions, and the 14th Dalai Lama’s personal identification with Mahayana, cf., Bhikshu Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Universal Responsibility and The Good Heart, Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1984, pp. 46–47, 82–3, 142. 7  Dion, Michel. 2021. “Theistic and Non-Theistic Modes of Detachment from the Presence of the Infinite,” Dialogue and Universalism. 1:243. 3

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

341

unrestricted. Dion states later, “It needs a spirit of universal generosity.”8 One cannot possess universal generosity and be motivated by the desire to maximize profit, or to be greedy, at the same time. The implication of universal generosity would appear to be that each being is responsible, in part, for the wellbeing of all beings. The word “universal” carried that connotation. In Ch’an Buddhism, the Sixth Patriarch Huineng (also known as Wei Lam and as Eno) writes in his Platform Sutra, “In our daily life we shall always practice altruism.”9 This is the contribution that Buddhism provides for conscious capitalism. It provides a higher purpose for economic activity than the maximization of profit for the individual, or individual corporation. The maximization of profit cannot be the motive for economic activity according to Ch’an because the intention to maximize profit is guided by the motivation of greed. For the Sixth Patriarch, “Greed and hatred are the hells.”10 Greed, the driving force behind the goal of maximization of profit, cannot be a motivation for a Buddhist. In the Theravada tradition, the following dialogue takes place in the Kālāma Sutta: “What do you think, kālāmes? When greed arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?” “For harm, lord.” … “What do you think, kālāmes? When lack of greed arises in a person, does it arise for welfare of for harm?” “For welfare, lord.”11

In the Mahayana tradition, the sixth ordination vow in the The Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā of the Lion’s Roar states: “I will not accumulate property for own benefit. Whatever I receive will be used to assist living beings who are poor and suffering.”12 Though this is a vow of a monk, the ideal cannot be completely different for the lay aspirant of Buddhism. It is also written in the Sutra, “… the noble truth of the extinction [of suffering] is the supreme truth.”13 Whereas the removal of suffering due to attachment may be the meaning of this supreme truth, it cannot be denied that poverty, hunger, and illness are forms of suffering. Indeed, the eighth ordination vow makes this clear: “When I see living beings who are lonely, imprisoned, ill, and afflicted by various misfortunes and hardships, I will never forsake them even for a

 Ibid., p. 243. (emphasis added)  Huineng. On the High Seat of “The Treasure of the Law”, The Platform Sutra of the 6th Patriarch Hui Neng. English edition: Price, A.F. and Mou-Lam, Wong. 25. 10  Ibid., p. 24. 11  Kālāma Sutta; To the Kālāmas. https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN3_66.html. Accessed 25 April 2021. 12  Guņabhadra. (trans.) 2004. Chapter II, 217b. From The Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā of the Lion’s Roar. English edition: Paul, Diana Y., trans. Berkeley, California: Numata Center for Buddhist Translations and Research, DK English Tripiṭaka Series, Taishō Volume 12, Number 353. https:// www.bdk.or.jp/document/dgtl-dl/dBET_Srimala_Vimalakirti_2004.pdf. Accessed 27 April 2021. 13  Gunabhadra. (trans.) 2004. Chapter XI, 222a. From The Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā of the Lion’s Roar. 41. 8 9

342

R. E. Allinson

moment … Through my good deeds I will bring them benefits and liberate them from their pain. Only then will I leave them.”14 It is clearly stated here that the suffering from which the sufferer is to be liberated is not simply spiritual suffering but physical suffering. This is to be accomplished by good deeds, by right action. Right action is the genus; right livelihood is the species. There is but a short step here to the principles of Buddhist economics. The interpretation of Buddhist economics that is presented here is, I argue, a logical consequence of core Buddhist ideas. In the Lotus Sutra, also representative of the Mahayana Tradition and Nichiren, it states, in Chapter III, without referencing only monks, “Always practice compassion, And give unsparingly of their bodies and lives.” And, again in a Chapter XIV, “Always … be compassionate toward all.”15 Though the purpose of extending the concept of caring for all sentient beings to designing and promoting an economics that fulfills the aim of caring for all beings is not explicitly advocated by any branch of Buddhism, it is, as this chapter argues, the logical implication of core Buddhist ideas. As the 14th Dalai Lama writes: “Compassion for others (as opposed to self) is one of the central teachings of Mahayana Buddhism.” He then quotes the following Mahayana verse: If you are unable to exchange your happiness For the suffering of other beings. You have no hope of attaining Buddhahood, Nor even of happiness in this present life. In Mahayana Buddhism you sacrifice yourself in order to attain salvation for the sake of other beings.16

To define conscious capitalism as a set of economic practices from a Buddhist point of view, one would consider conscious capitalism to be an ethically conscious capitalism. An ethically conscious capitalism is a capitalism that takes the consequences of one’s actions on others into account. An ethically conscious capitalism would require economic practices that consider consequences for those who are underprivileged. In my view, the best way to understand how conscious compassion for others in suffering is the Buddhist contribution to conscious capitalism is to make a genuine attempt to understand the first Noble Truth that the Buddha discovered and taught: all life is suffering. It provides a more intelligible, meaningful, and long-lasting understanding if one’s path to understand and practice Buddhist economics arises from the same starting point that Buddha’s understanding arose in order to discern that conscious capitalism means an ethically conscious capitalism. The epistemological source of the first Noble Truth, that all life is suffering, commences with  Op. cit., Chapter II, 217b, p. 13.  Kumārajiva. 2007. Chapter III, 16a, in Lotus Sutra. Chinese edition: Kubo, Tsugunari, Kubo and Yuyama, Akira, trans. Berkeley, California: Numata Center for Buddhist Translations and Research, DK English Tripitaka Series, Taishō Volume 9, Number 262. https://www.bdk.or.jp/ document/dgtl-dl/dBET_T0262_LotusSutra_2007.pdf. Accessed 26 April 2021. 16  Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 1984. Universal Responsibility and The Good Heart. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. 46–7, 8203, 142. 14 15

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

343

empirical observation that through a leap of judgment (to adapt Kierkegaard), one obtains an essential metaphysical insight. Every creature suffers pain. Pain is a condition of life. One is born through pain. There is the constant pain of hunger, of disease, of witnessing the suffering of others, of witnessing the injustices of the world, the poverty, and the lack of opportunity that affect the hugest percentage of the world’s population, the daily observation of the deterioration of our planet and the worry how future generations will be able to manage. When such reflections reach one’s heart, and one feels the pain that witnesses pain, that is the starting point of a genuine understanding that all life is suffering. The result of witnessing all of this terrible plight of humankind—and I have added the devastation that has grown since the time of the Buddha—is, for the Buddha, the invocation of the feeling of compassion.17 In the Buddhist sutras, that is, records recorded later of Buddha’s speeches to his followers, it is said that Buddha adjured every person to possess compassion for all sentient beings.18 The question is, how best is one to understand the way to apply this feeling of compassion for all sentient beings to address the universal fact of the existence of pain and suffering. For compassion even to arise, one must first be capable of feeling and experiencing the pain of another. The 14th Dalai Lama narrates the story of how his own pain from a severe gastrointestinal infection dissipated when on the way to the hospital, he saw so many people in dire poverty and his compassion grew for them.19 When Siddhartha Gautama, for that was his name (the name “Buddha,” the “enlightened one” was given to him by his followers), left the Palace grounds to witness the world that existed outside of his palatial estate, his discovery of poverty, illness and death caused him to permanently leave his Royal Palace, young wife, and infant child to decipher how to address this terrible plight of Humanity. After years of practicing asceticism, similar to the later Newton, he had a sudden  In the Buddha’s original list, he begins with “birth is suffering, also old age is suffering, also sickness is suffering, also death is suffering …” Cf., The Theravada text. May 2014. Section I. The Great Chapter, Vinaya Mahakhandhaka. English edition: Ānandajoti Bhikku, (trans.), https:// www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/English-Texts/Great-Chapter/Great-Chapter.pdf. Accessed 26 April 2021. 53. In the Visudimagga it is written that “Compassion is characterized as promoting the aspect of allaying suffering. Its functioning resides in not bearing others’ suffering. … Its proximate cause is to see helplessness in those overwhelmed by suffering.” Bahadantācariya Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga, IX, 94, translated from the Pali by Bhikku Nānamoli, Buddhist Publication Society, 2010. (emphasis in original) The use of the term “Hinayana” (the lesser vessel) rather than “Theravada” ought not to be countenanced since this is a pejorative term and not the name preferred by those who belong to the Theravada tradition (the Doctrine of the Elders). https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2020. 18  Ibid., Section II., Progress of the Sāsana, The Story about Māra, When the Buddha spoke of compassion, he spoke of “compassion for the world,” p. 85. There are many places in the Buddhist canonical literature in which one can find passages referring to the injunction to show compassion for all living or all sentient beings. Cf., The Mahayahan text, the Lotus Sutra, Maha Karuna Dharani Sutra, Avatamsaka Sutra, 40, et al. 19  Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 2012. Beyond Religion, Ethics for a Whole World. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 45–6. 17

344

R. E. Allinson

illumination, or set of illuminations that consisted of the Four Noble Truths. His solution was spiritual: The Second Noble Truth was that suffering was caused by craving and specifically, from our attachment to craving.20 His Third Noble Truth was that the cessation of suffering was accomplished by non-attachment such that we were no longer prey to our cravings. His Fourth Noble Truth consisted of understanding the ways by which one could succeed in attaining non-attachment, specifically by following the Eight-Fold Path: Right understanding, Right meditation, Right motivation, Right concentration, Right effort, Right speech, Right action, Right livelihood. I have placed the Eight Paths in this order of succession to illustrate that each one flows from the other in a derivative order. One could order them in a different succession. However, in Buddha’s own path, his first action was to follow the path of asceticism. This was the incorrect action.21 The path of Right livelihood is the one that will be the path most explored in this chapter since it is the path that most closely relates to Economics. However, the choice of the Right livelihood is based on Right understanding, Right motivation, Right concentration, and Right action so that one never leaves the essential insights of the Eight-Fold Path in order to understand and practice Buddhist Economics. How is this truth to be applied to economic activity? When we first embark upon economic activity, we must decide what job to apply for, what profession to learn, what services to provide, and what products to manufacture. We need a criterion of decision making. We can, of course, utilize the criterion of profit making: What job, profession, service, and product will earn the most profits? However, profit making is a non-user-friendly Pole Star. It is an empty imperative. It is non-user-friendly because it does not offer any concrete, specific advice to the user through what means the user is to make a profit. It offers no advice as to how to make a profit. In this sense it is uninformative. In order for a direction to be given that enables one to make a profit, one needs to consider what particular needs do human beings have (or new needs that can be cultivated), that, if catered to, will bring in the greatest profits? We can, if motivated by a profit-based economics, stop there. In Buddhist economics or an ethically conscious capitalism, our search is complete when we consider instead what are the greatest needs of society, what are the highest priorities to be taken care of first, for the sake of those in greatest deprivation, for future  In the text, it is only listed that the four Noble Truths are: Suffering, Craving, Cessation of craving and the method for the cessation of craving, i.e., practicing and achieving the Eight-Fold path. I have elaborated on the list for the purpose of greater clarification for modern purposes; e.g., we cannot literally stop ourselves from having a desire, but we do not need to be attached to it, that is, to follow it. Op. cit., p. 54. 21  For another source of the Four Noble Truths, cf., the Theravada text, the Dhammacakkappavatanna Sutra. For still another source of the Eight-Fold path, please see, the Theravada text, the Mahassatipatthana Sutra. The names of the Eight-Fold paths are sometimes translated differently, but these English translations are, for me, the most intelligible. In the Theravada text, the Vinaya Mahakhandhaka, the order and the English translation of the Eight-Fold path is given as: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness, right concentration. Op. cit., p. 53. 20

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

345

generations, for the health and survival of the planet, and so on. In other words, compassion becomes the first guiding principle or criterion for deciding upon the nature and content of the course of our economic endeavor. All economic activity is based upon fulfilling needs. Making money is a means to fulfilling needs. One makes money, or attempts to, in order to achieve some other end goal, such as, financial security, the capability of purchasing goods and services, etc. When making money or profit becomes an end-in-itself, economic activity loses both its basic purpose and its ethical direction. It can restore an ethical direction when the profits earned are turned to philanthropic purposes. However, this approach is limited in its ethical efficacy by reason of its dependence upon sufficient philanthropic agents and the fact that such philanthropy usually provides symptomatic relief but does not alter the foundation of the economic system when the economic system is an unreflective capitalism which is based upon profit and loss without regard to the consequences of such activity, a system that lacks compassion and arguably is a source of the extreme inequity in the present world in the first place.22 The market system that is not conscious is a system that lacks ethical guidance.

18.2 The Market System It is therefore an oversimplification to argue as the distinguished Amartya Sen with whom I find so much to agree, that “The market system works by putting a price on a commodity and the allocation between consumers is done by the intensities of the respective willingness to buy it at the prevailing price. When ‘equilibrium prices’ emerge, they balance demand with supply for each commodity.”23 But it is not only a matter of willingness. It is a matter of capability. Demand is not ethically driven. Demand is driven by the capability on the part of the purchaser of paying the price for the commodity. Supply is not ethically driven. The price of the supply is not ethically driven. The price of the supply is set by the supplier in accordance with what the market—translate the financially advantaged—is capable and willing to pay. The price is thus a function of what the financially advantaged is capable and willing to pay and how high this price can be set by the supplier without losing sufficient volume of sales which would lower the profit margin. “Equilibrium prices” are at an equilibrium only for the financially advantaged. The market system, whether engaged in by a state socialism or privately owned capitalism is inherently unethical so long as the market system is motivated by the maximization of profit for the producer of the goods or services.  Allinson, Robert Elliott. 2004. Circles within a Circle: The Condition for the Possibility of an Ethical Business Enterprise within a Market System. Journal of Business Ethics 54:261–177. 23  Sen, Amartya, Donaldson, Thomas and Werhane, Patricia H., eds. 1996. Does Business Ethics Make Economic Sense. Ethical Issues in Business, A Philosophical Approach. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 17. (emphasis added). 22

346

R. E. Allinson

18.2.1 Profit and Loss Whenever profit is made by one, loss is incurred by another. For example, if I sell my house at a price above the price that I paid for it, the buyer has now paid a higher price than I did. My profit necessitates my neighbor’s loss in that she or he has had to utilize more of her or his capital to make the same purchase as I did. The only solution is for my neighbor to now profit on some transaction that creates loss for another person. In the stock market, if I buy my stocks when the market falls, my future profit is made at the expense of the previous owner or owners of the stock who may have sold their stocks at a price less than they paid when buying it.24 If I sell my stocks when they are high and then the stocks decline, the buyers of my stocks suffer a loss in that what they have bought has now lost some of its value. It may be countered that such a result only incurs in transactions of buying and selling. What if I sell a product from which everyone benefits and the profit I make is due to the fact that I sell the product or service at a greater price than the cost of manufacturing the product or providing the service. No one loses when purchasing my product or utilizing my service. In this case, the loss that is taken is hidden. In order to manufacture my product or provide my service, I must first buy raw materials or labor. In order to possess purchasing power, I must have capital. I can only have accumulated this capital by trading, exchanging, renting, inheritance, sharing costs, borrowing, or a combination of these six. In all of these forms of raising capital, I must have a built-in advantage of possessing property, collateral, previously accumulated capital, credit rating, and so on. I can only make profit by possessing capital at the start of my enterprise. The only way in which I can possess capital in the first place is by having made or inherited profit in the past. Now, it can be argued that I could have been accumulating savings by my labors. However, in order to accumulate savings, I must have either have had made investments (creating profit for myself and loss for others) or put my money in a bank that operates and makes profit through trading in the market. This holds true even when my labors involved competing for a job, in which case, in order for me to have been given the job, someone else must have been passed over as a candidate for the job. The first principle of an unreflective profit-based economics is that profit for one always occasions loss for another. The second principle of profit-based economics is that making profit in the present is dependent upon having made profit (possessing capital from the past) in the past. It could be argued that such an analysis is based upon the idea of a zero-growth economy and it does not take into account that the entire economy is growing. In a growth economy, the assumption usually made is that the income of each part of that economy is always rising. However, such an argument is too simplistic. The fact remains that some parts of the economy rise at higher rates than others. When this occurs, the result is greater inequity. The problem with inequity is that some parts of the world economy do not possess the same buying power as other parts of the world 24

 Ibid.

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

347

economy. This results in economic inequality. The greater the profit that is made by the wealthier part of the world economy, the larger the gap that results between the “haves” and the “have-nots.” Though it might be true that the “have nots” are better off than they were previously, when they are measured against the “haves,” the amount of the difference will always be greater than it was before. This is due to the third principle of an unreflective profit-based economics, that the greater the amount of the profit made by some must result in the greater the loss generated for some others. Let us take an example. Amazon provides a service that enables billions of people to purchase goods and services in efficient ways. The result is greater convenience and delivery of goods and services for those who can afford Amazon’s services. The consequence is that the owner of Amazon and those who own its stocks become very wealthy. These wealthy owners of Amazon stock now have greater buying power than they had before. Those providers of goods and services can raise their prices because there now exist buyers of those goods and services who can afford to pay higher prices. Those who do not own Amazon stocks (or other high rising stocks) now may not be able to afford the products and services that have risen in cost. Thus, they suffer a loss in purchasing power. The richer those become who own Amazon (or comparable stocks), the lower the purchasing power of those who do not. Profit begets loss and the higher the profit for some, the greater the loss and buying power for others. The unethical character of the nature of unreflective or non-ethically conscious capitalism is well-evidenced in the case of the access to medical supplies and services. The examples of the availability of medical supplies and services are some of the most graphic examples of how the wealthy part of the population enjoys benefits that the poorer class cannot possibly obtain. A kidney transplant or a heart transplant is far beyond the capacity for the poor or even the middle class to afford. Those who are very wealthy possess access to such inordinately expensive medical supplies, equipment, hospital stays, and services. The wider the gap between the rich and the poor, the less opportunity for the less well-off to possess access to medical services. This is a fact of non-ethically conscious capitalist economics. Though the economics of capitalism has famously been depicted by the phrase, “supply and demand,” this is an incomplete depiction. As pointed out above, the economics of capitalism also requires the phrase, “the more financially advantaged, the greater the access to goods, services and opportunities.” In sum, profit-based economics is inherently unethical because it creates and persists in perpetuating an unequal society. Though Karl Marx pointed out the dangers in human alienation that capitalist economics caused, he did not specifically write about the unethical nature of capitalism. The problem of the creation of an unequal society can well be avoided in a Buddhist economics framework. In Buddhist economics, based on conscious capitalism which involves conscious compassion, the needs of the most disadvantaged would be set as the highest priority. Within the limits of practicality, Amazon’s service would have to be distributed to the most needy as a first priority. This may appear to be a recipe for going out of business. However, from a long-term point of view, it can create new markets for businesses to increase their profits. One need

348

R. E. Allinson

only think of the opening up of countries in Africa as a market for consumer products (Amazon is already available in 11 countries in Africa) and making it possible for individuals to establish enterprises that will increase the new entrepreneurs’ profits. These new entrepreneurs in turn will become consumers for Amazon’s products. In order for this process to commence, in the framework of this chapter, ideally, the most needy would first have to have access to computers, internet services, knowledge acquired through education how to utilize such services, purchasing power, available infrastructure to transport goods and services, and so on and so forth. Other business enterprises would have to be involved in making it possible for Amazon to be available as a service in the first place. This involves including the African country in which Amazon does not have a presence as a potential market. Bank loans would have to be made through the World Bank, through governments or non-government organizations. China has been very involved in starting up enterprises in the African continent.25 Amazon would not come into existence in African countries in the first place until there were the development of the education and economic purchasing power of a certain percentage of these underdeveloped world population groups. The point made here is that for a system of conscious capitalism to be integrated with universal compassion, the percentage of the underdeveloped world population groups would have to be considerably widened. This is the logical consequence of the Buddhist contribution to conscious capitalism. Are there Buddhist economic economies? Buddhist economics cannot be defined by economic practices that are conducted by countries that are considered Buddhist since these countries may not be practicing economics that are consonant with Buddhist principles any more than America as a Christian country practices economics that are in harmony with the principles to be found in the New Testament. Is this all utopian thinking? This only sounds utopian because we consider that economics can only exist if it is profit-driven without any ethical imperative. If those with more capital than is needed for sustainable survival were directed by conscious or deliberate compassion to take care of those who are in need, there would not be inequality in the first place. It is only the attachment to a short-term profit-based economics that prevents these actions from occurring. It can be countered that if attachment were the problem, that one could not be too attached to attachment and that what is being proposed requires an attachment to taking care of the poor. One is attached to taking care of the poor until there are no more poor. The attachment is not permanent. One cannot be too attached to doing good. We would find other directions to doing good. There is no such thing as too much good. Axiological good does not permit of excess. Though the Buddhist principle of the Middle Way may be adduced to argue against this point, nonetheless,

 It could well be argued that China and the U.S. are competing in the African market out of profit motivations. In the U.S. case, there is an interest in sharing the values of the “American way of life.” Even if the intention is not altruistic, the point is that investing in the African market is making life better for those population groups in undeveloped nations. Cf., Webinar from the Kissinger Institute of the Wilson Center, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/chinas-soft-power-projectionafrica?utm_medium=email&utm_source=event&utm_campaign=kicus (accessed 5/12/2021). 25

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

349

when it comes to compassion, there is no Middle Way.26 Compassion is not bested by being halfway between compassionate and indifferent. For Elie Wiesel, the opposite to love is not hate; it is indifference.

18.2.2 Consumption and Production Buddhist economics has been interpreted to mean to simplify one’s needs. This is certainly correct, but it does not go far enough. In Mahayana Buddhism, no one can achieve enlightenment until everyone achieves enlightenment. To simplify one’s needs is one thing; compassion for everyone is another. Gandhi (who technically was not Buddhist) owned only his loin cloth, his sandals, his bowl, and his spectacles. However, he did not stop with his personal choice of living habits. His prime interest was in creating an independent and self-sufficient India. One of the first to integrate Buddha’s teaching with economics and indeed to actually coin the phrase “Buddhist economics” was E. F. Schumacher. Schumacher, in his groundbreaking book, Small is Beautiful, Economics as if People Mattered,27 as we shall see below, focuses on right livelihood which as stated above is the Path most directly relevant to a Buddhist economics. Right livelihood would also, in my thinking, as argued above, take the other paths into account. In addition, right livelihood would also take the Third Noble Truth into account, for non-attachment to profit maximization would be required for right livelihood. Right livelihood would also be derived from conscious compassion for all sentient beings because one would be guided by the principle of not harming another, in this case, causing others, directly or indirectly, to assume economic hardships. In Buddhist traditional teachings, right livelihood basically means not getting involved in any actions that harm other living beings. Hans-Guenter Wagner writes, “… the core of Buddhist economics are the mental states on which human economic as well as other kinds of behavior is based.”28 Wagner’s point here is that non-harm doing must be the basic motivation for action (recall the Path, “right motivation”). One must choose and practice the right livelihood, that is, one that does not cause harm to self or others. The Buddhist monk, Payutto, whose work is very influential for Buddhist economics, captures this truth in a pithy phrase: “… the basic ethical  In Madhyamaka, the meaning of the Middle Way is explained as not resting in either extreme rather than being a compromise between extremes. Cf., Dölpa et al. 2015. Stages of the Buddha’s Teachings, Three Key Texts. English edition: Roesler, Ulrike et  al. (trans.). Somerville, Massachusetts: The Library of Tibetan Classics, Wisdom Publications. 89. In Tiantai Buddhism, with reference to substance ontology and nihilism of objects, the middle path is the denial of the two extremes. Cf., Hung, Jenny, “Is dharma-nature identical to ignorance? A study of ji in early Tiantai Buddhism,” Asian Philosophy, 2020, 30, No. 4, 310. 27  Schumacher, E.F. 1973. Small is Beautiful, Economics as if People Mattered. London: Blood & Briggs, Ltd. 28  Wagner, Hans-Guenter. 2007. Buddhist Economics  – ancient teaching revisited. International Journal of Green Economics. 328. (emphasis added) 26

350

R. E. Allinson

question posed is always: ‘Do my thoughts, words and deeds help or harm myself and those around me?’”29 As an aside, Wagner points out that the motivation for Buddhist economics stands in contrast to Mandeville’s Fable of the Bees, which concludes that vanity, greed, and fraud finally promote welfare and social stability.30 How do we achieve the goals of Buddhist economics? For Wagner, who relies heavily on the important work of Payutto, “Buddhism maintains it is the duty of the government or King of a country to see to the needs [of] those who are in want and strive to banish poverty from the land.”31 This may be the traditional Buddhist solution. Such a solution might need amendment, but the important truth revealed is that according to Buddhist economics, the goal is to banish poverty. Wagner takes this truth beyond a particular country’s obligation to a global level: “Buddhist economics should be appreciated as the economics of global responsibility.”32 The idea of an economics assuming the role of global responsibility is revelatory and stands in stark contrast with the idea of economics as standing for the profit maximization for the individual, the individual corporation, or the individual country. However, global responsibility is in great accord with the most fundamental principle of Buddhism, compassion for all sentient beings. My long-term friend and colleague, Laszlo Zsolnai, who has been influential in his writings about Buddhist economics, has stated this principle in a concise and comprehensive manner: “The underlying principle of Buddhist economics is to minimize suffering of all sentient beings including human and non-human beings.”33 Wagner adds the qualification that “Buddhist economics does not reject wealth and acquisition as far as it is attained by proper means and used for the benefit of all.”34 With this qualification, one realizes that conscious capitalism includes the provision that wealth obtained is to be shared with the world. Conscious capitalism is, from the Buddhist point of view, the view that the purpose of wealth is for the achievement of equality among the citizens of the world. The idea of non-attachment, the Third Noble Truth, implies that one would not be goal obsessed or goal driven. In economics, this would translate into minimization. The first major change in economic activity would be the idea of limitation. Limitation would curb the incessant drive toward always increasing growth and thereby always increasing profit maximization. Limitation has normally been applied to individual consumer habits. It can and should be applied to production habits as well. Over production, particularly over production of products that are  Payutto, Venerable Paryudh. 1994. English edition: Dhammavijaya and Evans, Bruce. Bangkok, Thailand. 23. Payutto, a Thai monk, is of the Theravada Buddhist tradition. 30  Op. cit., p. 328. Bernard Mandeville, Collected Works of Bernard Mandeville, Volume IV: The Fable of the Bees, ed. Bernhard Fabian and Irwin Primer (Germany: Georg Olms Verlag, 1980). 31  Op. cit., p. 330, Payutto 1994, p. 79. 32  Op. cit., p. 337. 33  Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2009. Buddhist economics for business. Ethical Prospects, Economy, Society, and Environment. English edition: Zsolnai, Laszlo et al., trans. Springer. 90. 34  Op. cit., p. 338. 29

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

351

unnecessary or harmful to health or the environment, is a cause of many ills, including the production of waste by-products and end products such as plastics which pose a serious disposal and health problem. This idea of limitation, which Schumacher famously adapted in his phrase, “Small is Beautiful,” would be the result of severing the attachment to constant growth and increase of profits. At the same time, this idea of limitation would dovetail with the other major principle of Buddhism: Action taken should always show compassion to every sentient being. Nature, certainly animal nature, is sentient. Hence, it would be part of Buddhist economics to show great care and concern for animal welfare and the natural environment. If one polluted the natural environment, this would cause a decrease in the health quality of the inhabitants of the planet. Hence, it would not be showing compassion for sentient beings. For example, reducing or eliminating the use of fossil fuels would at once be limiting growth and at the same time showing compassion for all sentient beings. Schumacher, in turn, was greatly influenced by Gandhi. Thomas Weber quotes from Schumacher’s 1960 manifesto: A way of life that ever more rapidly depletes the power of earth to sustain it and piles up ever more insoluble problems for each succeeding generation can only be called “violent” … present day economics, while claiming to be ethically neutral, in fact propagates a philosophy of unlimited expansionism without any regard to the true and genuine needs of men which are limited.35

One of Schumacher’s most insightful comments is, “The profit motive throws humanity and the planet out of equilibrium.”36 This statement implies that the profit motive is not natural: It throws humanity out of harmony and plunges the planet into a state of disharmony. The idea that buttresses non-Buddhist economics is that it is rational to seek one’s self-interest by profit seeking and ultimately, profit maximization. Schumacher’s comment on this is that the basic presumption of the link between rationality and self-interest maximization is unnatural, that is, destructive to human nature and the nature of the planet. Apichai Puntasen sums up the issue with a pithy distinction. He writes that there are two core values accepted without question by economists: (1) Following self-­ interest is considered rational behavior for an individual (selfishness is rational; unselfishness is irrational); (2) Only competition can lead to economic progress.37 This distinction illustrates how our values influence our concepts of economics. In the end, it depends upon one’s ultimate values, whether one prioritizes self-interest and competition or selflessness and conscious or intentional compassion leading to cooperation.38 For the Venerable Payutto, there are two possible motivations.  Weber, Thomas. May, 1999. Gandhi, Deep Ecology, Peace Research, and Buddhist Economics. Journal of Peace Research. 36: 349–361. (emphasis added) 36  Ibid., p. 358. 37  Puntasen, Apicahi. Why Buddhist Economics is Needed as a New Paradign for a Better Understanding of Happiness (Wellness). Presented at International Conference on Happiness and Public Policy, United Nations Conference Center, Bangkok, Thailand, 18–19 July 2007. 5. 38  Ibid., p. 14. 35

352

R. E. Allinson

Either one is motivated by negative mental constituents such as greed, fear, delusion, and pride or by positive mental constituents, such as non-greed, non-fear, non-delusion, faith, generosity, and good will.39 Schumacher quotes from Gandhi that someone who claims “more than the minimum that is really necessary for him is guilty of theft.”40 Here, Gandhi goes even farther than the famous maxim of Proudhon, “property is theft.” Weber narrates a little-known anecdote about Gandhi: Towards the end of his life he [Gandhi] wrote: I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt or when the self becomes too much for you, apply the following text. Recall the face of the poorest and weakest man whom you have seen and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him.41

Zsolnai is aware of how much Gandhi, who was, of course, not Buddhist, influenced the development of what is now referred to as Buddhist economics. Zsolnai goes so far as to write that, “non-violence (called ‘ahimsa’) is the main guiding principle of Buddhism for solving social problems. It is required that an act should not cause harm to the doer and the receiver.”42

18.3 Conscious Capitalism from the Buddhist Perspective Is Ethically Conscious Capitalism Conscious capitalism from the Buddhist perspective is to take the view that the product created, and the service or the opportunity provided must be beneficial to the sentient world. Hence, the value base of Buddhist economics must be a socially and cosmically beneficial product or service and not simply or solely an approach to minimization. The socially beneficial product or service can never create harm to any creature; it must be cosmically beneficial. For example, burning fossil fuel cannot be a beneficial product because it creates harm to many living creatures and to nature itself.

 Payutto, Venerable Paryudh. 1994. English edition: Dhammavijaya and Evans, Bruce. Bangkok, Thailand. 40  Ibid., p.  355. Gandhi, Mohandas K., 1955. Ashram Observances in Action. Ahmedabad: Navajivan. p. 58. 41  Ibid., p.  358. Cf., Tendulkar, D.  G. 1963. Mahatma: Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. 288–9. 42  Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2009. Buddhist economics for business. Ethical Prospects, Economy, Society, and Environment. English edition: Zsolnai, Laszlo et al., trans. Springer. 93. 39

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

353

18.3.1 Buddhism, Profit Limitation, and Poverty The Buddhist approach to profit limitation is the limitation of our desires. If we eliminate, radically reduce, or redirect the profit motive, we can limit growth. As Professor Zsolnai so well puts it: Buddhist economics represents a minimizing framework where suffering, desires, violence, instrumental use, and self-interest have to be minimized. … Western economics represents a maximizing framework. It wants to maximize profit, desires, market, instrumental use, and self-interest and tends to build a world where “bigger is better” and “more and more.”43

Professor Zsolnai’s point is that the motivation for economic activity must be reversed by 180° from maximizing growth and profit to minimizing growth and profit. It could be argued that this is against human nature. This depends upon how we define happiness. If happiness is identified with accumulating more and more material possessions, then human nature is being defined by greed. However, if human nature is defined at least in part as wishing to contribute to a greater equality of wealth in the world, then minimizing growth and profit for some may realize a greater amount of purchasing power for others. This also depends upon how we define human nature. From the point of view of the 14th Dalai Lama, selfishness does not define human nature. The 14th Dalai Lama writes, “Human Beings are not inherently selfish, because selfishness is a form of isolation. We are essentially social animals depending on others to meet our needs.”44 Our nature is to be social. Being social involves interdependence with other human beings. Our nature is more akin to gentleness than to aggression. The 14th Dalai Lama presents a homely example to illustrate our human nature: If we look at basic human nature, we can see that it is more gentle than aggressive … When we compare our own body structure to theirs, we see that we resemble deer and rabbits more than tigers. Even our teeth are more like a rabbit’s, are they not? They are not like a tiger’s. Our fingernails are another good example—I cannot harm a rat with a swipe of my fingernails alone.45

The point of the 14th Dalai Lama is that we are not built for aggression. We need to do more than minimize our own consumption; we need to alter the goals of our production such that it meets global needs and especially reaches those who are in the most destitute conditions. Of course, this implies that we are not seeking growth and profit for ourselves as our primary goal. However, we need to do more than this. To properly apply the most fundamental Buddhist principle of reducing suffering in the world, we must pay our highest priority in motivation to

 Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2009. Buddhist economics for business. Ethical Prospects, Economy, Society, and Environment. English edition: Zsolnai, Laszlo et al., trans. Springer. 96. 44  Willis, Clint, ed. 2002. A Lifetime of Wisdom, Essential Writings By and About the Dalai Lama. New York: Avalon Publishing Group. 85. 45  Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 2001. The Compassionate Life. Somervilla, Massachusetts: Wisdom Publications. 3. 43

354

R. E. Allinson

eliminating poverty in the world. As R.  C. H.  Ng emphasizes, “… The Buddha singled out hunger as ‘the worst disease.’”46 According to Professor Zsolnai, “In 2009, 1.02 billion people were classified as undernourished … In 2006–2008 a food crisis, which especially affected populations in developing countries, was created by a strong increase in international food commodity prices resulting from international financial speculation.”47 The “free” market cannot solve this problem; it creates it. As Zsolnai points out, “… there are stakeholders who are not represented and the interests of the poor and disadvantaged are necessarily underrepresented. Future generations do not have the opportunity to vote on the marketplace.”48 Stakeholders include the global poor. These stakeholders are in the vast majority. The solution to a problem requires that one understands the cause of a problem. The cause of the problem is not poverty; poverty is an effect, not a cause. A major cause of poverty is non ethically conscious capitalism. Non ethically conscious capitalism leads to the overproduction of the wrong goods and services and overconsumption of the wrong goods and services. When the very rich contribute to world poverty through overproduction and overconsumption, it is the means by which they produce their wealth that is the cause of the problem. It is not their wealth that is the problem; the wealth is the effect, not the cause. Song Choo Beng quotes from the influential Buddhist monk, Payutto that from the Buddhist perspective, “… it is not the end which justifies the means, but rather the means which conditions the end. … The Buddhist teaching of causality not only emphasizes the means over the ends but also necessitates ethical judgment in achieving the end.”49 Such a thought may be taken as the very definition of conscious capitalism. My long-time friend and colleague David Loy quotes from Susan George and Fabrizio Sabelli’s Faith and Credit: The World Bank’s Secular Empire: “According to the United Nations Development Report for 1998 … the three richest people in the planet have assets that exceed the combined GNP of the 48 poorest countries. The result is that three-fifths of the 4.4 billion people in developing countries lack basic sanitation, one-third have no safe drinking water, one-quarter are inadequately housed, one-fifth lack access to modern health services … The number of people classified as poor rose from 184 million in 1985 to 216 million in 1990, an increase of seventeen percent.”50 In the United Nations Development Report for 2020, the

 Ng, E.C.H. 2020. Buddhist Economic Theory. Introduction to Buddhist Economics. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, Springer. 47  Zsolnai, Laszlo et al., eds. 2002. The Future of Capitalism. Ethics in the Economy, Handbook of Business Ethics. 3. (emphasis in original) 48  Ibid., p. 4. (emphasis in original) 49  Beng, Song Choo. July-December 2016. Buddhist economics  – An Ethical Remedy for the Prevailing Neoclassical Economics. Journal of Buddhist Education and Research. 2:2. 43–4. (emphasis added); Payutto. (1994). English edition: Dhammavijaya and Evans, Bruce. Bangkok, Thailand. 50  Loy, David R. 9 June 2008. Buddhism and Poverty. Contemporary Buddhism. 2:1. 62. 46

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

355

number of people classified as multidimensionally poor had risen to 1.3 billion.51 In America, from 1993 to 2015, the top 1% of incomes grew by 94.5% from 1993 to 2015. The bottom 99% of incomes grew at 20.3% from 1993 to 2000, and 6.8% from 2002 to 2007.52 The difference in the growth of the incomes in different groups illustrates the widening gaps between those with wealth and those who are without wealth. From 2009 to 2015, the top 1% in the United States grew by 37.4% while the bottom 99% incomes grew by 7.6%.53 What these statistics omit is the point argued above that the growth in the income of the upper percentage groups is the cause of the decline of purchasing power of the income in the lower percentage groups. As Professor Zsolnai stresses, “The main purpose of Buddhist economics is to reduce pain or suffering for all human beings. Buddhist economics insists that priority goes to those that are still in pain because of inadequate materials to support their lives.”54 The problem of poverty, Professor Loy points out, is not primarily an economic one: “The problem is a lack of collective will, enough will to overcome the simple fact that the people who have the most [to] say about what happens to the earth’s resources do not care to do it.”55 Professor Loy quotes from the U. N. Development Report from 1998 that less than 4% of the combined wealth of the 225 richest people in the world could provide the cost of achieving and maintaining universal access to basic education for all, reproductive health care for all, adequate food care for all, and safe water and sanitation for all at a cost of $40 billion per year.56 As Professor Zsolnai prophetically writes, “Businesses have a responsibility for the long-term effects [that] they produce.”57 As Puntasen writes, “More rapid production and consumption results in more rapid production of waste.”58 The shifting of our motivation from profit accumulation to creating an excellent environment can  United Nations Development Report. 2020. http://hdr.undp.org/en/2020-MPI. Accessed 26 April 2021. According to the 16 July 2020 Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative of the University of Oxford and the Human Development Report Office of the United Nations Development Programme. Using 2018 population data from the UNDESA.  UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs). 2019. World Population Prospects: The 2019 Revision. Rev 1. New  York. https://population.un.org/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2019_ Highlights.pdf. Accessed 9 December2020.  52  Grusky, David B. and Hill, Jasmine, eds. 2018. Inequality in the 21st Century, A Reader. Westview Press. 40. 53  Ibid., p. 41. (emphasis added) 54   Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2011. Why Buddhist Economics? Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation – A Buddhist Approach. New York: Springer. 11. 55  Loy, David R. 9 June 2008. Buddhism and Poverty. Contemporary Buddhism. 2:1. 70. 56  Ibid., p. 70. 57  Ibid., p. 16. 58  Puntasen, Apicahi. Why Buddhist Economics is Needed as a New Paradign for a Better Understanding of Happiness (Wellness). Presented at International Conference on Happiness and Public Policy, United Nations Conference Center, Bangkok, Thailand, 18–19 July 2007. 6. 51

356

R. E. Allinson

limit growth and its accompanying dangers to our healthy survival. The key to this shift in motivation is the understanding that our desire for profit is a result both of a fear of survival and an attachment to more and more accumulation.

18.3.2 Conscious Production and Consumption The ethical motivation for economics can only work if the structure of society is first established such that the basic survival needs of life, food, clothing, shelter, education, and health are provided for. When one is not worried about providing for basic needs, one can focus on producing goods and services that are socially and cosmically beneficial and not producing goods and services that are harmful to the social and planetary environment. What is required in order to produce socially and environmentally beneficial goods and services is to first understand that the essence of a human being is not to be a consumer, but to be a producer. If we conceive of ourselves as consumers, the fundamental nature of a consumer is to consume. We will identify ourselves with having goods and services that we consume. We will identify ourselves with our material possessions and with the accumulation and collection of more and more possessions. The concept of a consumer is an infinite one. If the end-goal of life is consumption, then one must continually consume, that is, acquire more and more possessions, and most importantly, more and more buying power, that is the medium of exchange, namely monetary wealth. The concept of consumption is not a concept that possesses a built-in limitation of “how much.” The concept of amassing individual wealth as the end goal does not make explicit its automatic accompaniment and consequence: the creation of global inequality. If, in contrast, we identify ourselves with being ethical producers or creators, we will identify ourselves with the quality of our actions, our labor, our production or creation of goods and services for others, both for the planet and future generations not yet living. Our focus will be on what good we can accomplish in conserving and preserving the beauty of the planet and making the future a better place to be and not on the quantity of the goods and services we can accumulate or purchase. If we identify ourselves as consumers, we are not thinking of others. We are thinking of what we can gain for ourselves. It is this attitude that is the source of the philosophical problems that are at the root of inequality and inequity in the world. This attitude is a philosophical problem. From the standpoint of Buddhism, the identification of the self with consumption is the source of our unhappiness. If we think of ourselves as consumers, our desire is and will be to consume. Appetite, by its very nature, is always discontent. When driven by appetite, we forever live in the winter of our discontent. Appetite creates or is constituted by craving, by desire. In its characteristic as the source of craving, it possesses no self-limits. Craving, or more precisely as we have seen above, the attachment to craving, is according to Buddhism, the source of unhappiness. The Buddhist means of addressing the problem of craving is to counsel against the attachment to craving. Though we cannot

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

357

stop craving, we can limit our attachment to craving. One way of limiting our attachment to craving is to alter our self-identity as consumers to ethical producers. We cannot eliminate desire by repressing it. As Spinoza taught in his great treatise, Ethics (published posthumously in 1677), we can only eliminate one emotion by replacing it with another emotion. As we conceive of ourselves as ethical producers, so we shall act. Our ethical actions, in turn, solidify our self-identities as ethical producers and reduce our self-identities as consumers. Theory and Practice must become one. We must cultivate our characters to become ethical producers. If our primary self-identification is with ethical production, the direction of our action will be to improve the lot of the world. Our most primary self-identification will be directed to those parts of the world and its inhabitants that are suffering the most severe deprivation. As conscious compassion becomes our primary motivation for action, our compassion will naturally be directed to those who are most in need. We shall not be able to abide the severest deprivation that affects huge portions of the world’s populations. Our actions, the goods we intend to produce, the services we intend to provide, will be directed to the relieving the suffering that is affecting huge sectors of the world’s population and the natural green environment. With this self-conscious alteration of the goals of our production and services, a concrete difference will ensue in the kinds of goods and services that are produced and provided. It will ensue in the non-production of goods and services that create harm to the denizens of the planet and the planet itself. Such a non-production will in and of itself possess beneficial effects. For example, the stoppage of the use of fossil fuels will be an enormous benefit to the people and the planet at large. We may decide to produce medications that treat diseases that cause suffering for disadvantaged sections of the world’s population.

18.4 Conclusion The idea that no one can achieve Enlightenment until everyone does is a core principle of Mahayana Buddhism. This universalist attitude is indicative of an ultimate concern for society. This Mahayana Buddhist principle is normally construed to refer to spiritual enlightenment. A spiritual enlightenment, or an ethically conscious capitalism, is what is required in order to change one’s economic behavior. The achievement of spiritual enlightenment by the whole of the human community would necessarily alter the economic behavior of the whole of the human community. To return to our earlier account of Buddhist economics, once the goal of profit making is no longer the goal of economic behavior, economic behavior must be based on a different goal. If one takes into account the Mahayana principle that everyone in the world must achieve enlightenment, then in economic terms this translates into the goal that everyone in the world must achieve economic equality. A Buddhist economics cannot be a capitalistic economics in the sense of following the goal of maximization of profit for the individual. Therefore, Buddhist economics must follow a conscious, compassionate, ethically driven capitalism. Conscious,

358

R. E. Allinson

compassionate capitalism is a capitalism that is conscious of ethical considerations and implications and places ethical values at the center of the capitalist enterprise.59 The central Buddhist value is compassion for all sentient beings. Given the wastage of our planet that was not present in the time of Buddha, we need to expand this to include non-sentient beings as well; i.e., our entire planet and its resources. The value of conscious compassion will offer guidance in terms of what services to offer, what goods to provide, what services not to offer, what goods not to provide, and, importantly, to which population groups to ensure distribution of our goods and services. We should not manufacture goods or make services available simply by and for affluent population groups. Such a practice is not guided by compassion, but rather by convenience and profit making. We should not produce goods and provide services with advertisements that promise results that are not likely to be forthcoming. Such a practice of false advertisement shows no compassion toward the population groups that will be receiving the goods and services under false pretenses. We should not produce goods that are made of cheap or harmful parts or of cheap or harmful design or that are designed for planned obsolescence. All such practices demonstrate a lack of concern and therefore a lack of compassion for the end user. Compassion for the end user as the guiding principle in manufacturing, service provision, and end population distribution (the most disadvantaged, the most needy, etc.) would be the key motivating principle for Buddhist economic activity. As Professor Dion writes, citing the 8th Karmaka Mikyō Dorje, “Buddhahood cannot be reached without … the unconditional/universal compassion towards all sentient beings.”60 Such universal compassion cannot reach all human beings in the absence of an ethically conscious capitalism.

References Allinson, Robert Elliott. 1992. A Hermeneutic Reconstruction of the Child in the Well Example. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 19: 297–308. ———. 1995. A Call for Ethically-Centered Management. The Academy of Management Executive 9: 72–75. ———. 2004. Circles within a Circle: The Condition for the Possibility of an Ethical Business Enterprise within a Market System. Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1/2): 17–28. ———. 2019. Space, Time and the Ethical Foundations. London/New York: Routledge Revivals/ Taylor & Francis. Allinson, Robert Elliott, and László Zsolnai, eds. 2015. The Ethical Producer. Spirituality, Ethics & Management 19: 61–74. Beng, Song Choo. 2016, July–December. Buddhist Economics  – An Ethical Remedy for the Prevailing Neoclassical Economics. Journal of Buddhist Education and Research 2: 2.  Allinson, Robert Elliott. 1995. A call for ethically centered management. The Academy of Management Executive 9:72–75. 60  Dion, Michel. 2021. “Theistic and Non-Theistic Modes of Detachment from the Presence of the Infinite,” Dialogue and Universalism. 1:243–244. 59

18  Buddhist Economics: The Global View

359

Bernard, Mandeville. 1980. Collected Works of Bernard Mandeville, Volume IV: The Fable of the Bees. Edited by Bernhard Fabian and Irwin Primer. Germany: Georg Olms Verlag. Buddhaghosa, Bahadantācariya. 2010. Visuddhimagga, IX, 94. English edition: Nānamoli, Bhikku, trans. Buddhist Publication Society. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/ PathofPurification2011.pdf. Accessed 10 Oct 2020. Buddhist, Sutra. 2014. May. The Great Chapter, Vinaya Mahākhandhaka. English edition: Ānandajoti Bhikku, trans. https://www.ancient-­buddhist-­texts.net/English-­Texts/Great-­ Chapter/Great-­Chapter.pdf. Accessed 7 Oct 2020. Dion, Michel. 2021. Theistic and Non-Theistic Modes of Detachment from the Presence of the Infinite. Dialogue and Universalism 1: 243. Gampopa, and Sakya Pandita. Stages of the Buddha’s Teachings, Three Key Texts, 89. English edition: Roesler, Ulrike et al. trans. Somerville: The Library of Tibetan Classics and Wisdom Publications. Gandhi, Mohandas K. 1955. Ashram Observances in Action. Ahmedabad: Navajivan. Grusky, David B, and Jasmine Hill, eds. 2018. Inequality in the 21st Century, A Reader. New York: Westview Press. Guņabhadra. 2004. (trans.) Chapter II, 217b. From The Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā of the Lion’s Roar. English edition: Paul, Diana Y., trans. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translations and Research, DK English Tripiṭaka Series, Taishō Volume 12, Number 353. https://www.bdk. or.jp/document/dgtl-­dl/dBET_Srimala_Vimalakirti_2004.pdf. Accessed 27 Apr 2021. Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 1984. Universal Responsibility and the Good Heart. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives 46–7 (8203): 142. ———, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 1999. Opening the Eye of New Awareness, 73. English edition: Lopez Jr., Donald S., trans. Boston: Wisdom Publications. ———, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 2001. The Compassionate Life, 3. Somervilla: Wisdom Publications. ———, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. 2012. Beyond Religion, Ethics for a Whole World, 45–46, 52. Boston/New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Heskett, James. 2013. Is ‘Conscious Capitalism’ an Antidote to Income Inequality. Harvard Business Review. http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/is-­conscious-­capitalism-­an-­antidote-­to-­income-­inequality Kālāma Sutta; To the Kālāmas. https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN3_66.html. Accessed 25 Apr 2021. Hung, Jenny. 2020. Is Dharma-Nature Identical to Ignorance? A Study of Ji in Early Tiantai Buddhism. Asian Philosophy 30 (4): 307–323. Kumārajiva. 2007. Chapter III, 16a, in Lotus Sutra. Chinese edition: Tsugunari, Kubo, and Yuyama Akira, trans. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translations and Research, DK English Tripitaka Series, Taishō Volume 9, Number 262. https://www.bdk.or.jp/document/dgtl-­dl/ dBET_T0262_LotusSutra_2007.pdf. Accessed 26 Apr 2021. Legault, Marie. 2012, March. Conscious Capitalism Leaders and Organizations with a World View. Integral Leadership Review. http://integralleadershipreview. com/6686-­conscious-­capitalism-­leaders-­and-­organizations-­with-­a-­worldview/ Loy, David R. 2008, June 9. Buddhism and Poverty. Contemporary Buddhism 2: 1. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013, January 14. “Conscious Capitalism” Is Not an Oxymoron. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2013/01/cultivating-­a-­higher-­conscious Neng, Hui. On the High Seat of “The Treasure of the Law”, The Platform Sutra of the 6th Patriarch Hui Neng, 25. English edition: Price, A.F., and Mou-Lam Wong. Ng, E.C.H. 2020. Buddhist Economic Theory. Introduction to Buddhist Economics. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan/Springer. Payutto, Venerable Paryudh. 1994. English Edition: Dhammavijaya and Evans. Bangkok: Bruce. Puntasen, Apicahi. Why Buddhist Economics Is Needed as a New Paradign for a Better Understanding of Happiness (Wellness). In Presented at International Conference on Happiness and Public Policy, United Nations Conference Center, Bangkok, 18–19 July 2007.

360

R. E. Allinson

Schumacher, E.D. 1973. Small Is Beautiful, Economics as If People Mattered. London: Blood & Briggs, Ltd. Sen, Amartya. Thomas Donaldson, and Patricia H.  Werhane, eds. 1996. Does Business Ethics Make Economic Sense. In Ethical Issues in Business, A Philosophical Approach, 17. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. Tendulkar, D.G. 1963. Mahatma: Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs). 2019. World Population Prospects: The 2019 Revision. Rev 1. New York. https://population.un.org/wpp/Publications/ Files/WPP2019_Highlights.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2020. United Nations Development Report. 2020. http://hdr.undp.org/en/2020-­MPI Wagner, Hans-Guenter. 2007. Buddhist Economics – Ancient Teaching Revisited. International Journal of Green Economics 1: 326–340. Weber, Thomas. 1999, May. Gandhi, Deep Ecology, Peace Research, and Buddhist Economics. Journal of Peace Research 36: 349–361. Willis, Clint, ed. 2002. A Lifetime of Wisdom, Essential Writings By and About the Dalai Lama, 85. New York: Avalon Publishing Group. Wilson Center: Kissinger Institute. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/chinas-­soft-­power-­ projection-­africa?utm_medium=email&utm_source=event&utm_campaign=kicus. Accessed 12 May 2021. Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2009. Buddhist Economics for Business. Ethical Prospects, Economy, Society, and Environment. English edition: Zsolnai, Laszlo et al., trans. Springer. ———. 2011. Why Buddhist Economics? In Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation – A Buddhist Approach. New York: Springer. Zsolnai, Laszlo, and Laszlo Zsolnai, et al., eds. 2002. The Future of Capitalism. In Ethics in the Economy, Handbook of Business Ethics. Witney: Peter Lang. Robert Elliott Allinson is Full Professor of philosophy, at Soka University of America (USA). He is the President of the International Society for Universal Dialogue. He was formerly Full Professor at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. He is Affiliate Faculty Member at the University of Haifa (Israel). His monographs include: A Metaphysics for the Future (Routledge Revivals, 2018); Space, Time, and the Ethical Foundations (Routledge Revivals, 2019); The Philosophical Influences of Mao Zedong, Notations, Reflections, and Insights (Bloomsbury Academic, 2020); Awakening Philosophy, The Loss of Truth (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022).  

Chapter 19

Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring Market Economy Clair Brown

19.1 Introduction The on-going interrelated devastating global crises caused by global warming and inequality, compounded by the current pandemic and economic meltdown, has the public and lawmakers questioning if the capitalist system is the underlying cause and needs to be replaced. This discussion is confusing unless we differentiate among possible capitalistic systems, which cover a broad range of how ownership of private property (capital) and government regulations and social programs together structure the economy (Hall and Soskice 2001; Vogel 2018). A capitalist economy includes markets that are structured to varying degrees by governments and by business and also includes a variety of public goods and services that are provided directly by the government rather than a market. The role of the government ranges from a minimal role in the traditional free market economy to a major role in broadly viewed conscious capitalism systems, including Buddhist Economics. Mackey and Sisodia’s Conscious Capitalism (2013) and its related activities frame its management ethics in a free enterprise system where companies create value with and for the various stakeholders (customers, employees, vendors, investors, communities, the environment) (Conscious Capitalism Guidelines 2015). Other books by economists that call for restructuring capitalism to support the well-being of people and the environment fall under a variety of names: Steady State Economics (Daly 1991; Jackson 2016), Doughnut Economics (Raworth 2017), and Progressive Capitalism (Stiglitz 2019).

C. Brown (*) University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_19

361

362

C. Brown

The underlying assumptions of how the economy operates either as a free-­market economy or as a Buddhist economy present different world views. The fundamentals for a Buddhist economy that allows people and nature to thrive are based upon three assumptions, which echo Buddhist teachings as well as ecological principles: • People are interdependent with each other and with the planet. • People are compassionate and care for others, as well as self-caring. • People care for their body, mind, and spirit, and harm to any of these causes suffering. Together these provide the foundation for Buddhist economics. The outcome of these assumptions is that human well-being and happiness are not dependent on income, once basic consumption is assured. Materialism does not play a central role in people’s lives, because our consciousness is awakened by awareness of the present moment and caring for others and nature. Well-being of people and nations is determined by ethical living that supports a meaningful life and caring for the human spirit. Free market economics is based on three assumptions: • Humans dominate nature, with natural resources used to increase consumption, and we don’t need to worry about destroying our ecosystems. • Consumers are self-serving and make rational choices with perfect information and equal opportunity. No company has market power in this competitive economy. Under these assumptions, the free-market economy is efficient and maximizes national income. • Average national income (or output) per person measures national well-being, and growth of national income determines economic performance. These provide the foundation for Free market economics where the market operates “free” from government interference, because value added comes from business. Optimal policies include low taxation that pays for national security and protection of private property along with no regulations on companies and open global markets, where supposedly no company or country has market power. Mackey’s Conscious Capitalism is based upon the free enterprise system centered around the private sector, where companies voluntarily focus on more than profits and care about other stakeholders (as stated above). However free market can only function and flourish provided government provides the infrastructure, the legal system that protects private property and maintains the rule of law, and the financial system that oversees the central bank and the investment banking sector (Vogel 2018). Buddhist economics is based upon the premise that government programs and public goods provide for people’s well-being, along with the value-added consumption provided by business (Brown 2017). As you can see, economic performance is viewed differently in these two approaches. Free market economics supports self-centered materialism, where people buy luxuries that display their self-importance and status, and environmental resources are for humans to consume to increase their standard of living. Economic performance is judged by the growth in gross domestic product (GDP), which ignores income distribution and environmental degradation. In the free market

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

363

economy, government regulations or taxation are assumed to interfere with how well markets function, so less government is advocated. In contrast, the social democracy economy focuses on the quality of life, with resources shared by all people who care for each other and for the planet. Economic performance is judged by the well-being of the people and the environment. The government plays an important role in structuring markets and providing social programs to support people’s well-being including the human spirit and consciousness, and also to protect the planet’s ecosystems. One way to think about economic growth is to go beyond looking at the size of the “pie” (GDP) and how the pie is distributed, and ask more broadly “What’s in the pie?” The economy is no longer judged only by the size of average GDP, or the company by its revenue, but by the well-being fostered by the economy and corporations. People’s jobs, their use of time to care for family and community, their health and education, the  promotion of justice, a company’s impact on customers and the community, and the overall health of the environment—all are important in evaluating economic performance. In a Buddhist or similar economy, government and business together play a key role in creating an economy that supports a meaningful life for all people while caring for the planet.

19.2 Country Policies Drive Inequality and Carbon Emissions Today countries worldwide are suffering from multiple crises, including the acute crises of the viral pandemic causing economic shutdowns, along with the ongoing crises of climate change, inequality, and systemic racism. In light of these crises, we can evaluate the economic performance of the major industrialized economies according to the observed well-being of their residents and the environment. We find: • Over the past four decades, economic growth has increased inequality (Atkinson et  al. 2011), which reduces well-being and happiness for most people. In the United States, deregulation and decreasing taxes have resulted in a redistribution of income towards the rich with little improvement in average wage or market (GDP) growth. No longer does the free-market maxim hold that economic growth is a rising tide that lifts all ships. • Economic growth has dramatically increased carbon emissions, especially over the past four decades. Climate scientists warn us that two critical ecosystems, climate change and loss of biodiversity, are being impacted in a way that threatens human life on the planet. Climate change has occurred faster than earlier predicted, and the United Nations Paris Agreement needs to limiting global warming to under 1.5 °C (IPCC 2018). To understand the role that economic policies play, economists and political scientists have studied a variety of policies and how they influence specific outcomes (Vogel 2018; Hall and Soskice 2001; Sachs 2017). Joseph Stiglitz (2012) and Tony

364

C. Brown

Table 19.1  Selected country income and well-being data (various years) Country Singapore Norway Hong Kong SAR United States Germany Australia Austria Taiwan Belgium Finland United Kingdom France Japan Israel Hungary Malaysia Thailand China Sri Lanka Indonesia Bhutan India Vietnam Cambodia World

GDP per cap 90,531 70,590 61,016 59,495 50,206 49,882 49,247 49,827 46,301 44,050 43,620 43,550 42,659 36,250 28,910 28,871 17,786 16,624 13,001 12,378 8720 7714 6876 4010 16,779

HDI 0.932 0.953 0.933 0.924 0.936 0.939 0.908 0.907 0.916 0.920 0.922 0.901 0.909 0.903 0.838 0.789 0.740 0.752 0.770 0.689 0.612 0.640 0.683 0.563 0.728

CO2 per cap 1960 2014 0.8 10.3 3.7 9.3 1.0 6.4 16.0 16.5 na 8.9 8.6 15.4 4.4 6.9 na na 9.9 8.3 3.4 8.7 11.2 6.5 5.8 4.6 2.5 9.5 3.1 7.9 4.5 4.3 na 8.0 0.1 4.6 1.2 7.5 0.2 0.9 0.2 1.8 na 1.3 0.3 1.7 0.2 1.8 0.0 0.4 3.1 5.0

Inequality (9.7) 4.1 (9.7) 9.4 5.1 5.8 4.9 na 4.2 3.9 5.4 5.2 5.4 9.8 4.9 11.2 6.5 9.2 6.8 6.6 6.9 5.3 5.9 (7.3) na

Sources: 2017 GDP at purchasing power parity per capita, in current international dollars (IMF, October 2018). United Nations Human Development Index, 2018 (http://hdr.undp.org/en/data#) CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita, based on production and excluding land use emissions) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?view=map Inequality is ratio of the average income of the richest 20% to the poorest 20% (most recent year available, range from 2010 to 2017). United Nations Development Programme data http://hdr. undp.org/en/indicators/135106. Figures in parentheses are from older data with source: https:// www.nationmaster.com/country-­info/stats/Economy/Poverty-­and-­inequality/Richest-­quintile-­to-­ poorest-­quintile-­ratio

Atkinson (2015) explain how capitalist systems choose their level of inequality through their economic policies, and how policies can create an equitable economy. Climate scientists provide roadmaps that show how countries choose their carbon emissions, and how to transform their economies to be carbon free (Jacobson 2020). These observed patterns of GDP growth, inequality, and carbon emissions are outcomes that reflect government policies. Table 19.1 shows how countries end up with different outcomes for income distribution and carbon emissions, regardless of their GDP per person. Countries vary enormously in GDP per person (shown in

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

365

descending order), Human Development Index (HDI), CO2 per person (1960 and 2014), and inequality (ratio of income of richest 20% income to income of poorest 20%). GDP per person and HDI move together, because income is a component of HDI. However GDP and CO2 per person do not move together; and GDP per person and inequality do not move together. For example, Norway has GDP per person of $70,590 with average carbon emissions of 9.3 metric tons per person, and the top 20% have income 4.1 times the bottom 20%. In contrast, the United States has $59,495 GDP, 16.5 carbon emissions, and an income ratio of 9.4; the United States has almost twice the carbon emissions and over twice the inequality ratio of Norway, even though the US GDP is 15% lower. Comparing two lower-income countries, we see China has much higher carbon emissions and inequality than Thailand, even though their GDP per person is only 7% different. Economists and scientists have demonstrated the policies that structure economies to reduce inequality and carbon emissions. Yet most countries and companies have yet to change their mindset of “more is better” that keeps people focused on consumption. The national economic growth imperative pushed policy focused on market output and ever-increasing average income per person rather than basing economic growth on building a sustainable, equitable world that supports well-­being and meaningful lives (Sachs 2015). Today the world is out of balance with its unending series of crises—pandemic, recession, inequality, climate change, injustice. Human interdependence with each other and with the environment is an integral part of Buddhist economics. Our interdependence encourages us to be kind and altruistic because the well-being of others and the planet affects our own well-being. Interdependence means that companies care about how their operations and products affect the well-being of their customers, workers, and community as well as the environment. Assuming interdependence and altruism turns the mainstream free market model on its head. The distribution of income and a sustainable environment become central economic goals instead of being ignored. Profits are no longer the primary business goal, as the health and welfare of all stakeholders—customers, workers, suppliers, the community, the environment—become integrated into the company’s “bottom line”. As Ven. Payutto writes (Buddhist Economics, ch 1): Our ethics—and the behavior that naturally flows from our ethics—contribute to the causes and conditions that determine who we are, the kind of society we live in and the condition of our environment.

19.3 Higher Inequality Reduces Both Individual and National Well-being Now we examine the evidence that demonstrates how a more equitable market economy, a conscious form of capitalism, improves people’s lives. Increased inequality makes people and countries worse off in at least two ways: (1) families

366

C. Brown

become less satisfied as their lifestyle falls behind those at the top, and (2) the country’s overall well-being worsens. The relative income approach in economics goes back at least to Veblen (1953), who explained how families compare their standard of living to those with higher incomes. Veblen described how these invidious comparisons push families to emulate conspicuous consumption. When a family’s sense of well-being depends on its relative income, then as national inequality increases, most families feel worse off as the income of those at the top rise and their income remains the same (Frank 2007). This seems especially relevant in today’s world where social media glorifies luxurious or conspicuous consumption. The consumption of status, which marks position, does not add to the overall quality of life because status consumption is based on making one person happier at another person’s expense (a zero-sum game). When inequality increases the income gap between the rich and everyone else, the rich start paying even more for status goods. They buy bigger, more lavish houses to maintain their position relative to other rich people. The rest of the population feels worse off as their relative consumption falls further behind. Buying status is wasteful and does not add to total social welfare (Frank 1999). Once people’s basic needs are satisfied, consumption’s contribution depends on how it enables people to live meaningful lives and fulfill their human potential (Sen 1999). The idea of using consumption to distinguish yourself becomes viewed as silly and a path to personal suffering along with climate destruction. Progressive taxes reduce luxurious consumption by the rich and help families in need lead healthier and more fulfilling lives. A more equal distribution of post-tax income improves social welfare, as invidious comparisons are replaced by communal feelings of belonging, and status consumption of the rich is replaced by basic consumption of families in need (Brown 2017). When we compare countries, we find that inequality hurts a country’s overall well-being according to a public health study of well-being across twenty-two rich countries. A well-being index that combines ten precise measures of health, education, and social problems is compared both to average income per person and to inequality across industrialized countries. The study finds that the wellbeing index is NOT related to average income across rich countries, but  it is related to inequality. Growth in national income does not translate into improving a country’s quality of life. Instead the well-being index is related to the distribution of income (inequality) across rich countries. A country’s health, education, and social problems worsen as income inequality increases (Wilkinson and Pickett 2009). • Measures of health, education, and social problems are not related to average national income per person. • Growth in national income does not translate into improving quality of life. • Quality of life indicators worsen as income inequality rises across countries. The United States presents the worst position of their twenty-two high-income countries, with the highest income inequality and the worst well-being index. Today, U.S. indicators of mortality, life expectancy, childhood poverty, incarceration, and

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

367

general health put the United States at or near the bottom among these high-income countries. As recently as 1980 the United States’ well-being measures ranked at or near the top, but as inequality rose in the US, overall well-being declined (Wilkinson and Pickett 2009, slides). A conscious capitalist system would not allow the worsening of mortality, life expectancy, childhood poverty, incarceration, and general health that goes with high levels of inequality. The well-being of the people and the planet must be the top priority of an economic system, and not the profit rate of large corporations or stock market performance.

19.4 Inequality Also Drives Carbon Emissions Within and Across Nations When we look closer at the very rich, we see that extreme inequality goes hand-in-­ hand with the unacceptable carbon footprint of the super rich. America’s top ten percenters emit six times the tCO2e of the bottom 50% of households (50 vs. 8.5 tCO2e per person yearly). Even the bottom 50% have an average carbon footprint that is four times the Paris Climate Accord goal of 2.1 tCO2e per person per year by 2050. The United States stands out with its very high CO2 emissions—the US averages 16.4 tCO2 per person, which is much higher than the European Union average of 6.7 tCO2 (Oxfam Report 2015). India and Indonesia, with low carbon footprints below the 2.1 tCO2e benchmark, will increase their carbon emissions as their living standards improve (Girod et al. 2013). The global rich need to lead the way in reducing their carbon footprint. Everyone must live in harmony with Nature if we want to keep global warming under 1.5 °C. Our carbon emissions are quickly approaching the maximum allowed, and people in rich countries must stop living beyond the earth’s resources. Rich countries need to reduce consumption so poorer countries can increase their consumption, and globally we stay under the 2 °C goal set by the Paris Climate Accords that allows 2.1 tCO2e (tons of carbon) per person per year by 2050 (Girod et al. 2014). Unfortunately, the developing world faces enormous environmental degradation as their standard of living rises and the professional class imitates the lifestyle of the Western world based on subsidized fossil fuel energy. Countries such as China and India are already suffering the consequences of a burgeoning middle and upper class that consume increasingly more. These populations are not only trying to keep up with the rich within their own countries but the global rich as well. We see this happening in China, where almost all Chinese provinces and cities increased their per capita carbon footprints from 2007 to 2010 (Shao et  al. 2018). In India, we observe that the poor urban slums have lower carbon footprints than that of richer non-slum areas (Adnan et al. 2018). When I visited Sri Lanka in 2016 and Bhutan in 2017 to discuss sustainable development, I was dismayed to see streets

368

C. Brown

gridlocked by highly polluting diesel cars and meat offered at every meal. The air pollution from the traffic made walking unhealthy, although the local public transit was crowded and not reliable. The majority of the population who could not afford cars or meat were left without a healthy way to get around and fewer local produce options. The rich countries must help the developing world improve the standard of living with clean energy, and all countries need to develop regenerative agriculture. In order for the world to meet the Paris Climate Accord target of 2.1 tCO2e per person by 2050, it should be clear that radical lifestyle shifts by the rich countries must happen, and this will provide the path for the developing world to emulate. Living in harmony with Nature involves changing our culture and our way of thinking—by individuals, companies, and governments. Their decisions are interrelated and must reinforce each other, so that the economy and society are working together with similar values and goals. Let’s look in more detail at how individuals, companies and governments can reduce their carbon footprint.

19.5 Living Mindfully and Ethically Dramatically reducing the luxurious consumption of the rich will dramatically reduce their carbon footprint as they stop flying private jets as part of daily life, as they downscale to only one vacation home, as they scale back on their massive purchasing of clothes, devices, and anything that hits their momentary fancy and ends up in the landfill. When our social norms no longer view luxurious consumption as conferring status, lifestyles will change and the non-rich can stop worrying about pursuing a luxurious lifestyle. Living in harmony with nature, instead of overconsuming and destroying nature, will become the new ideal lifestyle. Moving from a closetful to a mindful way of life is not hard to do, once you realize the benefits to yourself and the world. Most of us can reduce our carbon footprint in two important ways that account for a large part of individuals’ carbon footprint. In transportation, we can take very few trips on airplanes and reduce our vehicle miles traveled locally by taking public transit or biking and walking, even when we have an electric car. Second, we can reduce meat consumption and mostly eat a plant-based diet, and consciously not toss out food that we buy or order at a restaurant. Almost one-third of the food grown is wasted globally. About half of this is lost between harvest and distribution, and the rest is wasted at retail and post-purchase (FAO 2019). Up to 40% of food is wasted in the USA (USFDA 2020). Food loss occurs especially in the field or in the process of distribution in poorer countries, which lack adequate storage, transport, and processing facilities. Once food is available for consumption, little is wasted in poorer countries compared to richer countries, where imperfect food and excess food are routinely tossed out by wholesalers, retail stores, restaurants, and consumers at home. The billions of pounds of food wasted each week could feed the millions of hungry people who lack adequate

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

369

nutrition. In addition, the wasted food causes methane emissions, both in the field and in the landfill (FAO 2019). Both the way the livestock industry produces their meat and the type of meat bought by consumers make a big difference in the GHG emissions and the degradation of land and water. A recent detailed report documents the GHG emissions and land and water use by method of production and documents the results by livestock compared to plant-based foods, and by type of meat. Besides plants having much lower emissions and environmental degradation compared to meat, beef and sheep have much higher emissions and land degradation compared to pork and chicken (Poore and Nemecek 2018). Yet meat consumption is increasing around the world as incomes rise in poorer countries and as people in richer countries continue their large daily consumption of meat (Ritchie and Roser 2019).

19.6 How Corporations Can Contribute to the Holistic Economy Corporations contribute to economic well-being and sustainability in ways that affect workers’ daily lives at work and their work-life balance, and also affect global carbon emissions and directly impact communities around the world where they have operations. • Companies contribute to a Buddhist economy by integrating the well-being of workers, customers, the community, and the environment along with shareholders into their practices and into performance metrics. This volume, as its subtitle states, focuses on contributions of religions and spiritualities to modern “conscious capitalist” economies. Enterprises can be categorized as “Buddhist enterprises” if they meaningfully employ Buddhist values and principles of care and compassion, non-violence, generosity, suffering minimization, and want-reduction (Brown and Zsolnai 2018). A comparative analysis of eleven Buddhist and eleven Christian entrepreneurs demonstrates the differences in the company’s value orientation and in how the companies are structured and operated, although the entrepreneurs view spirituality as interconnectedness and including beyond-material aspects of life (Kovács 2020). In general, companies vary enormously in how they treat workers and in how their operations and products impact the world. In response to investor demands, many corporations have signed on to following ESG (environment, social, governance) criteria to improve their impact and performance, as well as their profits. The Climate Action 100+ is an investor-led initiative that engages with 160 big corporations that voluntarily agreed to adopt management practices to oversee climate-­related risks and opportunities to have their business strategy, governance, metrics and targets in line with the Paris benchmarks (Climate Action 100+ 2020). However, these voluntary company practices cover a wide range of strategies and emissions goals, and the effectiveness of the Climate Action 100+ engagement approach is yet to be seen.

370

C. Brown

Overall, some of the ESG initiatives have had a positive impact, while others have been implemented cynically, for marketing purposes. The derogatory term “greenwash” tags a company for bragging about its socially and environmentally friendly products while it simultaneously degrades the environment. In addition, even when companies sign on to Conscious Capitalism or agree to focus on their benefits to all stakeholders, as the Business Roundtable did in 2019, they tend to oppose government regulations that impact their industry, or government programs such as universal health care, or progressive taxes that affect company profits or personal wealth.1 Companies in general tend to be anti-union and anti-government spending. Buddhist economics therefore pushes to have more companies play a role in creating an equitable as well as sustainable world. Companies can help create a Buddhist economy by providing decent jobs to their workers—jobs that do not destroy their humanity, that pay a living wage for a comfortable sustainable lifestyle, and that allow time for family and community activities. Jobs that pay slave wages, or leave workers depleted, or require hours of overwork are not compatible with happiness. Rapidly increasing executive pay since the 1980s with stagnant worker pay has been a driving force of inequality. The ratio of CEO pay to typical worker pay went from 20- or 30-to-1 in the 1960s and 1970s to 200- or 300-to-1 in recent years (Baker et al. 2019). Yet this increase in CEO pay does not reflect company performance or return to shareholders. One study found that CEO total compensation at 429 large corporations was negatively related to the company’s long-term (10 year) returns to shareholders over the 2006–2015 period. The total return to shareholders of companies with CEO pay in the bottom quintile was more than 60% higher than the shareholder return of companies with CEO pay in the top quintile (Marshall and Lee 2016). To restore morale and equity, companies must restructure the earnings schedule to shift earnings from the very top 0.1% to workers in the bottom 40% and bring the earnings gap back to a reasonable level (Sabadish and Mishel 2012). An MIT study turned heads in 2014 when it showed that companies using human-centered strategies that provide good jobs with a living wage and empowerment at work have superior performance (Ton 2014). This points out how companies embracing conscious capitalism can be profitable as well as good employers. Some companies are well-known for treating all stakeholders well—such as Working Assets (now Credo) in the United States, which was founded in 1985 to provide credit card and phone services with the aim of donating a portion of their revenue to social causes. Another example is Interface, from the petroleum-­intensive manufacturing carpet industry. The company made a major change in direction in 1994, “from a plunderer of the earth to an agent of its restoration.” Outside the US,  See interview of Mackey by MotherJones in 2013 https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/whole-foods-market-john-mackey-interview-conscious-capitalism/, and the statement of the Business Roundtable https://www.businessroundtable.org/business-roundtableredefines-the-purpose-of-a-corporation-to-promote-an-economy-that-serves-all-americans along with their statement against raising taxes https://www.businessroundtable.org/policy-perspectives/ tax-fiscal-policy 1

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

371

the Belgian social enterprise Apopo operating in Tanzania and other African countries, and Loden Foundation entrepreneurs in Bhutan are examples of Buddhist enterprises (Brown and Zsolnai 2018; Zsolnai 2015; Tideman 2016). Companies around the world can, and must, change the way they operate to reduce their environmental impact and carbon footprint. After the Paris Climate conference achieved the global consensus that countries had to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to limit overheating the earth, the private sector also took part in devising strategies, with different accounting systems and approaches being used. The guiding principle is that a company’s investments in retooling for carbon-free operations can greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions while preserving corporate profits. A Harvard Business School study found that ninety high-sustainability companies outperformed comparable low-sustainability companies in the stock market over the period from 1993 to 2009 (Eccles et al. 2014). Yet overall, business has been slow to adopt sustainable operations. Companies need to be pushed by customers and society to stop polluting the environment and to use carbon-free energy. One way to put pressure on fossil-fuel-­ dependent industries is through divesting from their stocks and bonds. Today’s divestment movement began on college campuses and has spread across the United States and Europe to churches and civic organizations. Organizations with large pension and endowment funds can play a big role in pushing fossil-fuel-related industries to leave carbon in the ground and move to renewable energy through divestment (McKibben 2020). To what extent does government need to play a role? Mackey’s Conscious Capitalism relies upon companies voluntarily providing good jobs (safe, with living wage, paid time off and health benefits) without government interference with labor standards and laws protecting workers. The government and unions are usually absent from the discussion, but in general the free enterprise system views government as interfering with the company’s ability to create value and with encroaching on the rights of employers and workers to act in their own best interests.2 However even if companies provided good jobs, the government still needs to ensure adequate demand to create full employment and a social safety net for families needing help. Even when a company such as Whole Foods (prior to its acquisition by Amazon) provides good jobs with some worker input and provides higher-income customers with healthy organic products, the grocery industry cannot be expected to provide adequate nutritious food to everyone. For example, the prosperous US has hungry children with 8–11% of children having food insecurity over the past decade.3 The grocery industry can help reduce food waste in the US, but we also need broader policies that reduce waste by consumers and the entire supply chain.

 See the Conscious Capitalism website https://www.consciouscapitalism.org/ for an overview of philosophy and anecdotes from companies. 3  https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/interactivecharts-and-highlights/#childtrends 2

372

C. Brown

Other policies that support living wages include increasing workers’ bargaining power, raising the minimum wage, and prohibiting imports produced with substandard labor practices, such as child and slave labor or long work days or unsafe conditions. More paid time off and flexible family leave policies are compatible with profitability, as we observe in Northern European, French, and German companies. However, these countries can go further in shortening the workweek in addition to providing paid time off through vacation time. Overworked employees become burned out and develop health problems. Overworking with meager vacation time, as seen in the United States and Japan, should not be the professional way of life. In summary, we see that business needs to play a major role in creating a Buddhist economy with jobs that have living wages and hours, with  a sustainable supply chain and operations that respect ecological planetary boundaries, and with providing green products and services that people need to live sustainably and comfortably. However, we cannot expect companies to be in charge of transitioning the national economy to a modern, sustainable clean energy economy with livable cities, and companies cannot create a just and equitable society with much less income inequality and discrimination. This is the role of the government.

19.7 National Policies to Create an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring Economy As discussed above, country policies impact the country’s inequality and its greenhouse gas emissions. Within the national economic system, individuals can make choices and businesses can adopt strategies that are congruent with caring for the planet in a prosperous, equitable economy. This brings us to the question, “What are the national policies in practice today to create a sustainable, shared prosperity economy, which we call a Buddhist economy?” • Governments oversee regulations and incentives that protect the environment, structure markets and provide basic goods and services, so all people have meaningful, dignified lives in a healthy environment. The role of the government varies across countries, and often business, or sometimes religious leaders, are in charge of these polices that determine economic and social outcomes. Government provision of goods and services to enhance people’s well-being, such as education and health care, can be comprehensive or scaled back to provide minimal (or no) services. Taxation policies to pay for government programs can vary in who is taxed, e.g., people or companies, and the degree of progressivity. Government also regulates how the economy impacts the environment, e.g., the use of fossil fuel energy, water, and pesticides. Thus, the policies of capitalist systems end up affecting market production, the distribution of resources, and greenhouse gas emissions, so the well-being of the country depends on the policy choices that are made.

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

373

Market rules can be set by the government for the common good (social democracy), or they can be handed off to Big Business under the guise of free markets (neoliberalism). When markets are concentrated with a few large companies dominating an industry, deregulation does not increase competition. Instead, deregulation replaces government rules with company policies, and power shifts from the government to the large companies. The free-market model assumes a limited role for the government, where Big Business structures the market and government provides meager goods and services. This leaves Big Business in charge of structuring markets so they set the rules in their industry with less competition, higher profits, and unconscionable executive pay, along with lower wages, fewer resources, and less security provided to the rest of society. These powerful, profitable companies help elect business friendly lawmakers who lower taxes and expand business control over the economy. In contrast, government policies can govern market regulations, tax systems, and social programs to provide the desired outcomes of basic consumption and a strong safety net, along with health care, education, clean air and water in a healthy environment, with a dignified life and opportunities for everyone (Vogel 2018; Hall and Soskice 2001). My research team at UC Berkeley developed a Sustainable Shared-Prosperity Policy Index (SSPI) (Brown et al. 2019). The goal of the SSPI is to document policies have been adopted by countries to create a market economy that focuses on the well-being of people and the environment, and to explore the relationship between the SSPI and various economic and social outcomes. The SSPI provides a metric of the national policies (regulations and programs) for fifty countries. It divides policies into three pillars (Sustainability, Market Structure, and Governance) that represent the government functions of protecting the environment, structuring markets, and delivering programs and services. The three pillars are further divided into thirteen policy categories, which together contain over fifty policy indicators. The underlying data used to create the SSPI indicators, which aggregate into the categories, and then the pillars, is an ongoing project at UC Berkeley (Brown 2022). The SSPI ranks countries by their SSPI scores and by their Pillar scores and demonstrates how nations vary widely in their policies to structure economic and social life. One can think of the policy variables as indicating the extent to which national markets are structured and programs are created to support specific outcomes that improve the well-being of the people or protect the environment. Low scores indicate lack of such policies, or weak versions of these policies. The scores allow comparison of country policies and point out policies that countries can improve. Most economic indices measure economic performance or outcomes. A policy index, such as the SSPI, differs from a performance or well-being index. Performance indices use a variety of methods and variables and range from the well-known monthly measure of market output (Gross National Product) to the widely used Human Development Index (HDI) to broader indices such as the Better Life Index with its dashboard of many indicators. Because of data limitations, often a performance index will include a policy variable as a proxy for an outcome. Likewise, the

374

C. Brown

SSPI sometimes uses outcome variables to proxy for a specific policy when data for the policy variable is not available. The advanced European countries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Austria, France, Germany) rank at the top of the SSPI, although their positions vary across the Pillars. Japan and the United Kingdom rank in the top 20. The US ranks in the mid-30s out of 50 countries. We also examined the statistical relationship between the SSPI and its pillars with five widely used measures of economic performance: UN Human Development Index (HDI), the Sustainable Development Index (SDG), the Legatum Prosperity Index (LPI), the Social Progress Index (SPI), the Cantril Life Satisfaction Ladder (CL), and the Environmental Performance Index (EPI). We find that the SSPI and all three Pillars positively track these broad measures of economic performance. Overall, the SSPI shows how to measure and compare policies across countries, and the findings indicate that policies are related to broad measures of economic performance that are not focused only on increasing GDP per capita. Consumption and well-being in Buddhist Economics take a global approach rather than a domestic approach. The SSPI also includes the role that countries play globally, especially how the high-income OECD countries provide resources to low-income countries. Rich countries no longer can ignore the suffering from extreme hunger or poverty in poor countries; social welfare increases with transfers from rich countries to poor countries that improve the consumption of basic food, water, shelter, health care, education, and human rights. Development must use clean energy instead of fossil fuel energy to raise the standard of living. Rich countries benefit from providing clean energy technology that supports green development.

19.8 Conclusion In the midst of multiple global crises caused by the pandemic along with economic shutdowns, unethical inequality, a climate emergency, and threats to democracy and justice, we live in a world out of balance. As this chapter argues, these crises are interrelated, and we must restructure our economic and political systems to create a sustainable, equitable, caring society. The good news is that we already know the policies to reduce inequality; transition to a low-carbon, regenerative economy; end racism and promote justice; and provide health care for everyone within robust public health systems. With a decrease in inequality and with progressive taxes to fund government programs and investments to create a modern clean energy, a nation’s well-being increases. The economy can grow in a sustainable way by replacing personal consumption with spending on social programs, including health care for all, free college education, paid family leave, along with investments in infrastructure for livable cities, low-carbon public transportation, renewable energy, clean air and water. As workers join unions and company boards, workers can improve earnings

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

375

as increased productivity is offset by the decline in work hours. Executive pay relative to worker pay will return to the reasonable ratios observed before the 1970s. Knowing that the country provides a robust safety net if the family suffers unemployment or illness, families can feel less financial anxiety, and work-life balance provides time for caring for each other and contributing to the community. In a Buddhist Economy, people can live meaningful lives that are not driven by consumerism but by developing their full potential and contributing to their communities and finding joy in daily life. As the SSPI demonstrates, we know the government policies that create a modern Conscious Capitalism (or Buddhist economy). Companies can support these policies, although large corporations often work against creating a more sustainable and equitable economy when they use their wealth and power to elect and lobby lawmakers in order for business to be in charge of structuring how the economy operates. Creating a Buddhist economy takes the courage of environmental justice organizations and their volunteer activists to come together to demand the public and private sectors work together to end the multiple crises, to stop the planet from overheating, and to support people living meaningful, fulfilling lives. Our collective compassion, mindfulness, and concentration nourishes us, but it also can help to reestablish the Earth’s equilibrium and restore balance. Together, we can bring about real transformation for ourselves and for the world. (Thich Nhat Hanh 2013, 69)

References Adnan, Mian Nazish, Rabia Safeer, and Audil Rashid. 2018. Consumption Based Approach of Carbon Footprint Analysis in Urban Slum and Non-slum Areas of Rawalpindi. Habitat International 73: 16–24. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0197397517308925. Accessed 13 Nov 2020. Atkinson, Anthony. 2015. Inequality: What Can Be Done? Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Atkinson, Anthony, Thomas Piketty, and Emmanuel Saez. 2011. Top Incomes in the Long Run of History. Journal of Economic Literature 49 (1): 3–71. Update with data from https://www. nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-­inequality-­united-­states.html?_r=0. Accessed 10 Nov 2020. Baker, Dean, Josh Bivens, and Jessica Schieder. 2019. Reining in CEO Pay and Curbing the Rise of Inequality. Economic Policy Institute. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. https://www.epi.org/publication/ reining-­in-­ceo-­compensation-­and-­curbing-­the-­rise-­of-­inequality/. Brown, Clair. 2017. Buddhist Economics. New York: Bloomsbury Press. ———. 2022. SSPI Version 2 (forthcoming). https://irle.berkeley.edu/center-­for-­work-­technology-­ and-­society/creating-­a-­sustainable-­shared-­prosperity-­policy-­index-­sspi/. Brown, Clair, and Laszlo Zsolnai. 2018. Buddhist Economics: An Overview. Society and Economy 40: 497–513. Brown, Clair, Ekaterina Fedorova, Tai Lohrer, Simon Saellstroem, and Michelle Tan. 2019. A Policy Index to Create a Sustainable, Shared-Prosperity Economy. Working Paper. Institute for Research in Labor and Employment, University of California, Berkeley.

376

C. Brown

Climate Action 100+. 2020. 2020 Progress Report. https://www.climateaction100.org/wp-­content/ uploads/2020/12/CA100-­Progress-­Report.pdf. Conscious Capitalism Guidelines. 2015. https://www.consciouscapitalism.org/wp-­content/ uploads/2016/12/CC-­Chapter-­Communications-­Guidelines-­2015.pdf. Daly, Herman E. 1991. Steady State Economics. Washington, DC: Island Press. Eccles, Robert G., Ioannis Ioannou, and George Serafeim. 2014. Management Science 60: 2835–2857. https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/SSRN-­id1964011_6791edac-­ 7daa-­4603-­a220-­4a0c6c7a3f7a.pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. FAO. 2019. The State of Food and Agriculture 2019. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. http://www.fao.org/in-­action/seeking-­end-­to-­loss-­and-­waste-­of-­food-­along-­production-­ chain/en/. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Frank, Robert H. 1999. Luxury Fever. New York: Free Press. ———. 2007. Falling Behind: How Rising Inequality Harms the Middle Class. Berkeley: University of California Press. Girod, Bastien, Detlef Peter van Vuuren, and Edgar G Hertwich. 2013. Global Climate Targets and Future Consumption Level. Environmental Research Letters. https://iopscience.iop.org/ article/10.1088/1748-­9326/8/1/014016. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Girod, Bastien, Detlef Peter van Vuuren, and Edgar G. Hertwich. 2014. Climate Policy Through Changing Consumption Choices. Global Environmental Change 25: 5–15. Hall, Peter A., and David Soskice. 2001. Varieties of Capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. IPCC. 2018. Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5° C Summary for Policymakers. https://www. ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/. Accessed 10 Nov 2020. Jackson, Tim. 2016. Prosperity Without Growth. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. Jacobson, Mark Z. 2020. 100% Clean, Renewable energy and Storage for Everything. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kovács, Gábor. 2020. The Value Orientations of Buddhist and Christian Entrepreneurs: A Comparative Perspective on Spirituality and Business Ethics. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Press. Marshall, Ric, and Linda-Eling Lee. 2016. Are CEOs Paid for Performance? Evaluating the Effectiveness of Equity Incentives. MSCI report, July 2016. McKibben, Bill. 2020. Thanks to Climate Divestment, Big Oil Finally Runs Out of Gas. The New  York Review. https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2020/05/12/thanks-­to-­climate-­divestment-­ big-­oil-­finally-­runs-­out-­of-­gas/. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Oxfam Report. 2015. Extreme Carbon Inequality. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/ files/file_attachments/mb-­extreme-­carbon-­inequality-­021215-­en.pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Poore, Joseph, and Thomas Nemecek. 2018. Reducing Food’s Environmental Impacts Through Producers and Consumers. Science 360: 987–992. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/ sci/360/6392/987.full.pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Raworth, Kate. 2017. Doughnut Economics. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. Ritchie, Hannah, and Max Roser. 2019. Meat and Dairy Production. Published Online at OurWorldInData.org. https://ourworldindata.org/meat-­production. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Sabadish, Natalie, and Lawrence Mishel. 2012. CEO Pay and the Top 1%. Economic Policy Institute. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Sachs, Jeffrey D. 2015. The Age of Sustainable Development. New York: Columbia University Press. ———. 2017. Building the New American Economy. New York: Columbia University Press. Sen, Amartya. 1999. Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor Books (Random House). Shao, Ling, Yuan Li, Kuishuang Feng, Jing Meng, Yuli Shan, and Dabo Guan. 2018. Carbon Emission Imbalances and the Structural Paths of Chinese Regions. Applied Energy 215: 396–404. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261918301028. Accessed 13 Nov 2020. Stiglitz, Joseph. 2012. The Price of Inequality. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

19  Buddhist Economics: A Guide to Creating an Equitable, Sustainable, Caring…

377

———. 2019. People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent. New York: W. W. Norton and Company. Thich Nhat Hanh. 2013. Love Letter to the Earth. Berkeley: Parallax Press. Tideman, Sander. 2016. Business as an Instrument for Societal Change: In Conversation with the Dalai Lama. Oxfordshire: Routledge. Ton, Zeynep. 2014. The Good Job Strategy. Amazon Publishing. http://zeynepton.com/book/. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. USFDA. 2020. https://www.fda.gov/food/consumers/food-­loss-­and-­waste. Accessed 12 Nov 2020. Veblen, Thorsten. 1953[1899]. The Theory of the Leisure Class. Introduction by C. Wright Mills. New York: The Macmillan Company. Vogel, Steven K. 2018. Marketcraft: How Governments Make Markets Work. New York: Oxford University Press. Wilkinson, Richard, and Kate Pickett. 2009. The Spirit Level. New York: Bloomsbury Press. See slides https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/SpiritLevel-­jpg_0.pdf. Accessed 11 Nov 2020. Zsolnai, Laszlo. 2015. Post-Materialistic Business: Spiritual Value-Orientation in Renewing Management. London: Palgrave-Macmillan. Clair Brown is Professor of Economics at UC Berkeley (USA). She has published research on many aspects of how economies function, including high-tech industries, the standard of living, wage determination, inequality, and sustainability. Her recent book Buddhist Economics: An enlightened approach to the dismal science (Bloomsbury Press, 2017) provides an economic framework that integrates global sustainability, shared prosperity, and care for the human spirit. Professor Brown was a co-founder of the Development Engineering graduate program, which brings together faculty and students across disciplines to apply new technologies and practices to improve the well-being of people in low-resource communities in a sustainable way. Her economic approach and life as an economist are published in Eminent Economists II – Their Life and Work Philosophies (Cambridge University Press, 2013).  

Chapter 20

Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism Kiri Dell, Carla Houkamau, Jason Mika, and Jamie Newth

20.1 Introduction Writers observe that capitalism has reshaped the natural world, increased standards of living, and resulted in innovations that have dramatically improved the material conditions of life (Zitelmann 2018). Yet in recent years capitalism’s shortcomings have come under fire (Henderson 2020a, b). If judged by measures such as inequality and environmental damage, Western capitalism is in crisis. For decades, living standards have stagnated or declined, and inequality has risen dramatically. Climate change poses increasing risks to future prosperity (Jacobs and Mazzucato 2016). Criticism of capitalism comes from various political and philosophical approaches. We take a Māori perspective here, analysing capitalism’s shortcomings as well as the limitations of conscious capitalism as an emerging philosophy of business. Adherence to Milton Friedman’s doctrine that the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits and that the world runs on individuals pursuing their self-interests (Friedman 1970) has helped turn capitalism into a dirty word (Pinker 2012). Others have reimagined it and offered ways that capitalism can be reformed to become not only an engine of prosperity, but also a system that is in harmony with environmental realities, the striving for social justice, and the demands of truly democratic institutions (Henderson 2020a, b). Mackey and Sisodia (2014) define conscious capitalism as “a way of thinking about business that is more conscious of its higher purpose, its impacts on the world, and the relationships it has with its various constituencies and stakeholders. K. Dell (*) · C. Houkamau · J. Newth Business School, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand e-mail: [email protected] J. Mika Te Raupapa School of Management, Waikato of University, Hamilton, New Zealand © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_20

379

380

K. Dell et al.

It reflects a deeper consciousness about why businesses exist and how they can create more value” (pp. 32–33). Conscious capitalism reinforces the importance of generating profits and acknowledges that free-market capitalism remains the most powerful system for social cooperation and human progress (Mackey and Sisodia 2014). However, businesses should consider serving all stakeholders involved, including their employees, humanity, and the environment—not just their management teams and shareholders. There are four guiding principles behind the concept: • Higher purpose: A business that adheres to the principles of conscious capitalism focuses on a purpose beyond profit. • Stakeholder orientation: Businesses have multiple stakeholders, including customers, employees, suppliers, and investors. A conscious business attends to the whole business ecosystem to create and optimise value for all its stakeholders. • Conscious leadership: Conscious leaders emphasise a ‘we’ rather than a ‘me’ mentality to drive the business. • Conscious culture: A conscious culture is one where the policies of conscious capitalism permeate the enterprise, fostering a spirit of trust and cooperation among all stakeholders. Whether talking about free-market capitalism or conscious capitalism, the basic approach still holds true—businesses must make financial profit to survive. Our view reinforces the notion that businesses should sincerely consider the interests of all principal stakeholders; however, we take a Māori perspective and underline that stakeholders include the environment and future and past generations, who cannot speak for themselves but are still necessary imperatives when making business decisions. Māori people whakapapa (genealogically link) to the natural world and take a view that is aligned to sustainability imperatives because of an underlying spiritual belief that the environment is our ancestor. Spirituality, as a driving force of human behaviour, is not a principle focus of conscious capitalism as imagined by Mackey and Sisodia (2014). However, we see that as a crucial omission from a Māori perspective, whose underlying values, derive from a spiritual connection with the land. This connection has the effect of strengthening the commitment of entrepreneurs to advance their businesses, not only to gain profits—for themselves and for others—but also to enable them to better serve their people, including future generations. In this chapter, we focus on the concept of manahau, a new emerging te ao Māori theory of value, to illustrate how Māori perspectives extend the notion of conscious capitalism to incorporate Indigenous epistemologies and ontologies. We first discuss Māori values in general terms before considering them in a contemporary Aotearoa New Zealand contexts from a business perspective. We then present a case study of a Māori business, led by one of the authors, which is grappling with tensions between cultural and commercial imperatives. We then present an overview of manahau as a Māori theory of value before offering an initial discussion of the

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

381

‘institutional work’ required to create space for the pursuit of manahau in the Aotearoa New Zealand economy. Finally, we offer some concluding remarks. We suggest that colonisation brought about forced assimilation into dominant cultural practices that were originally foreign to Māori people. This has created a situation in which Māori are living separately from their traditional way of life, including traditional wealth creation. At the same time, we recognise tensions in the Māori world, and the label Māori, like the term ‘Māori values’, cannot be viewed as monolithic, or even upheld by all Māori. We acknowledge the culturally diverse nature of Māori society, which is to be expected given generations of integration, intermarriage, and shared nationhood with Pākehā (Pakeha is the Maori term for New Zealander’s of European descent). Treating Māori as one homogenous entity overlooks the importance of personal experiences and individual demographics in shaping economic attitudes, values and choices. As Durie (1994, p. 214) observes: “Māori live in diverse cultural worlds. There is no one reality nor is there any longer a single definition which will encompass the range of Māori lifestyles.” This heterogeneity challenges generalisations about the ‘Māori perspective’.

20.2 Māori Values Culture guides the way choices are made, priorities are set, and how people interact with one another and the world. Culture, like personality or character, has an amorphous quality that shapes motivation and belief, exerting a powerful influence over how individuals live their lives and direct their energy, time, and resources. Culture influences perspectives on innovation and creativity, attitudes to risk, and the priority given to education (including its level and form), as well as perspectives on health and well-being, such as general psychological well-being, the gravity and weight given to spiritual aspects of well-being, and the importance of relationships between youth and elders. Culture also influences notions of environmental protection, including the nature of a resource, its use, and priorities for production and consumption (Craig et al. 2012). Māori people have a resilient and unique culture and body of knowledge that, while based on ancient values and traditions, have adapted and manifested in a range of attitudes, behaviours, and beliefs, including attitudes towards the environment and the economy (Hikuroa 2017; Maxwell et al. 2020). To understand Māori attitudes, an appreciation of traditional Māori society is required. Although pre-colonial Māori social structure was dynamic and evolving (Dell et al. 2018), it has been observed that pre-European Māori settlements were organised into small, self-sufficient communities of common descent in kāinga (villages) (Best 1934). Groupings were based on shared genealogy, including, loosely, iwi (tribes), hapū (sub-tribes), and whānau (extended-family units) (Waa and Love 1997).

382

K. Dell et al.

Traditional Māori society had no concept of absolute ownership of land, despite depending on their immediate natural environment to survive. Whānau and hapū could enjoy different rights to the same territory. Exclusive boundaries were rare, and rights were continually renegotiated. Land and the environment were regarded as being more under stewardship than dominated for extractive purposes (Harmsworth and Awatere 2013). Meeting material needs by creating clothing and procuring food and shelter were kinship-based economic practices for community benefit, which served to bind the community. The Māori origin story portrays people as both born of the land and inhabiting it (Walker 1978). Therefore, protocols for respectful and sustainable engagement with nature were comprehensive (Harmsworth and Awatere 2013). The Māori origin story bestows this connection, portraying Māori as born of Papatūānuku (Earth mother) and, therefore, tangata whenua—‘people of the land’. Concepts such as ‘mauri’ help frame natural entities as having intrinsic value. Mauri means the life force that unites all things in nature, including the natural environment and people (Pohatu 2011). The weakening of the mauri of the natural world weakens the mauri of people, but mauri can be restored by looking after the environment, which in turn has consequences for human well-being (Durie 2001). In this respect, the view that nature is an ancestor was a given, and natural entities, including lands, lakes, rivers, and seas, were seen as having an intrinsic life force and value, independent of human ownership and control, yet at the same time central to sustaining life via a complex network of community economic activity (Rout et al. 2021). In order to survive, caring for the land and the environment was seen as a reciprocal obligation, activity and process. Nevertheless, Māori economic activity was immersed in social relations and inseparable from the environment, contrary to the economic system that was later introduced. The sharing of food, food-gathering areas, and other resources, including people, cemented and reinforced relationships. Collective work for collective gain promoted a Māori sense of belonging, cohesiveness, and sharing. Kinship ties were central to livelihood (Harmsworth and Awatere 2013). Production was neither for profit maximisation nor, often, for exchange. Traditional Māori economies were based on wealth distribution rather than individual wealth accumulation (Hēnare 2014). Private property was minimal (for example, comprising pets, art, weapons, and jewellery), and the accumulation of personal wealth for individual gain, besides being impractical, lacked cultural value. Consequently, power and prestige were not denoted by material wealth or its accumulation; influence and power were held as mana, discussed further below. From these origins, key Māori cultural values found expression and shaped how Māori engaged in economic activity in alignment with the rights of the natural world. This collation draws from comparisons with qualitative case studies of Māori enterprise and writings on Māori economic development (Harmsworth and Awatere 2013; Hēnare 2000; Māori Economic Panel 2012; McIntosh et al. 2004; Oliver and Love 2007; Smith et al. 2015). The values below derive from tikanga Māori, the

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

383

accumulated customary values and practices generally taken as ‘the Māori way of doing things’. • Mana: a supernatural force for status in a person, place, or object • Whanaungatanga: relationship, kinship, redistribution, sense of family connection • Manaakitanga: the care and support of others • Utu: reciprocity and exchange for mutual benefit and relationship maintenance • Kaitiakitanga: guardianship, acknowledging a close affinity to the environment • Wairuatanga: spirituality, acknowledging spiritual and physical dimensions of entities. Māori values were adaptive and largely uncontested for centuries in a pre-contact Māori ecology (Rout et al. 2021). Whanaungatanga is the essential element because it concerns the binding together of all parts of an ecosystem marking them as an interrelated whole (Gillies et al. 2007). Manaakitanga, and utu in turn, reflect a deference to whanaungatanga and facilitate redistribution of resources and their protection. Manaakitanga and utu confined the extent to which individuals or nuclear families could accumulate material wealth, as they explicitly deprioritise individualism and promote cooperation over competition. Māori were both of the land and dependent on it (Mika 2014). Therefore, respectful and sustainable engagement with the land was an imperative because damaging the environment had severe implications for future generations (Kawharu 2000). All human societies, including Māori, affect the environment they live in, and tensions were undoubtedly present for Māori. For example, before Europeans arrived, Māori hunted the moa (a giant flightless bird) to extinction and burnt large areas of forest. In areas where natural resources were depleted, food shortages led to the development of resource-protective conservation practices in order to secure the survival of future generations. Therefore, the Māori relationship with the environment had many practical elements, with Māori taking the view that the health, well-being, and survival of humans depended on the health, well-being, and survival of local ecosystems (Mika et  al. 2021). Practices such as rāhui (temporary site-specific prohibitions) emerged (Taylor et al. 2018). These restricted the harvest of fish species at certain times and sometimes included size limits. Royal (2007) found that, before colonisation, Māori followed traditional practices designed to protect the environment when hunting, fishing, growing, or finding food. These included using maramataka (the Māori lunar calendar) to decide when to plant and harvest, taking only what was needed, hunting and fishing only for food (not as a sport or for personal profit), and using bird snares at the appropriate time (for example, not when the birds were breeding) (Royal 2007). Research is exploring the utilisation of maramataka in marine resource management, rediscovering this traditional knowledge and in the process finding localised variations in maramataka construction, terms, and usage across Aotearoa New Zealand (Rameka and Taiapa 2020).

384

K. Dell et al.

Thus, Māori practices recognised that human activity that strains the Earth’s ecosystems is directly at odds with core Māori orientation toward maintaining kin relations and ensuring the survival of future generations. Activity that works with our natural environment is, therefore, compatible with these values. Moreover, although it was recognised that resources were needed for survival, it was also understood that the long-term survival of the community depended on the consistently deliberate and protective use of resources. The consequences of resource depletion were understood to be dire for the community. Potentially, then, mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) offers a way forward that puts the environment and people (including future generations) at the centre (Hikuroa 2017). In particular, we point to the positioning of Māori values, including whanaungatanga and kaitiakitanga (caring for the community while ensuring long-­term stability by caring for resources), as a system that serves collective interests while also honouring Māori rights to ensuring resource protection (Rout et al. 2021). We find that these values were reflected and protected in a Māori ecology devoid of external influences. In this space, Māori exercised rangatiratanga (Rout et al. 2019). Tino rangatiratanga may be defined as Māori self-determination, where Māori exercise control over their own experiences, resources, and territories (Durie 1995). This point speaks to the tension of protecting and providing for Māori interests when that economy does not uphold Māori values, indicative of a dichotomous relationship between environmental protection and environmental development that is resolved through articulations of tino rangatiratanga and tikanga (Mika et al. 2021).

20.3 Māori Values in Contemporary Aotearoa New Zealand Despite being immersed in a larger New Zealand society, Māori have resisted full assimilation for over 200 years (Walker 2004), and our research uncovers values and ordering principles that permeate Māori society. To illustrate the ongoing potency of Māori values, our research has looked to identity economics and Māori culture for understanding how Māori approach wealth creation in New Zealand. Akerlof and Kranton (2010) highlighted the impact of identity-related values when they integrated core components of social identity theory into formal economic analysis, thereby creating the field of identity economics. Elements of identity, which manifest in the way people define who they are and how they define others, impact how decisions are made. People make choices based not just on financial incentives but also on their identity and the relationships that are important to them. Moreover, when people express preferences for the way they utilise natural resources, and the way they spend their time and money, they are engaging in actions that have a psychological, social, and cultural meaning to them. Understanding identity economics can be tremendously beneficial for understanding decision making at the individual level as well as at the collective level. We

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

385

suggest they have implications for understanding the impact of cultural identity on general environmental attitudes, particularly the way in which the value of nature is weighted and accounted for when making decisions about how to engage appropriately in the creation of wealth. The primary insight from identity economics is that monetary decisions directly correlate with a person’s sense of identity. Akerlof and Kranton’s work shows how identity can account for many phenomena that the principle of ‘rational choice’ cannot explain. For example, identity economics helps to explain why some women choose family commitments over personal financial gain. Akerlof and Kranton (2010, p. 217) argue that “because identity is fundamental to behaviour, choice of identity may be the most important ‘economic’ decision people make”. This implies that peoples’ views of what is normative for their group, and therefore themselves as members, influence personal choices in relation to savings, entrepreneurial behaviour, and educational and career aspirations. Examples of Māori resisting the dominant paradigm of individualism and resource use are prevalent. Houkamau and Sibley (2019), drawing on Te Rangahau o Te Tuakiri Māori me Ngā Waiaro ā-Pūtea | The Māori Identity and Financial Attitudes Study (MIFAS), explored Māori attitudes to three aspects of economic activity: risking iwi (tribal) assets for profit; individualism at work; and preferences for workplaces that promote Māori culture and identity. A total of 7019 participants in the sample frame responded to the MIFAS, thus providing an extensive data set to explore. Overall, the researchers found that Māori who are strongly oriented toward a traditional Māori belief system are more likely to prefer work that advances Māori development (even if it pays less money), more likely to take a position in which success is collective (rather than individualistic), and less likely to support commercialising iwi assets for profit. In other words, according to this research, Māori were not focused on money, salary, or even work status as a single indicator of value or measure of success; value was linked to an expectation that collective work is recognised and valued, and profit is beyond a single monetary measure. These personal attitudes are reflected in Māori businesses and organisations that endeavour to incorporate Māori values and principles into their strategic goals, management, and operations, thereby demonstrating a deep commitment to cultural identity above more conventional business metrics like income. For example, Spiller et al. (2010) have used a ‘five well-beings’ approach to elucidate how Māori create spiritual, cultural, social, environmental, and economic well-being through their businesses. This means choosing to make a difference to their communities— attending to social, cultural, environmental, and workplace factors, and the community that is created with customers and suppliers. Binder Dijker Otte (BDO) recently surveyed Māori businesses in order to gauge Māori indicators of success (BDO 2020). The results reveal a recurrent theme among respondents that their enterprises were firmly committed to social and cultural outcomes: satisfied employees and community reciprocity. These values were apparent in the recruiting practices and investment enterprises that were put into their employee training and mentoring programmes. Happy and well whānau is the key to success for Māori enterprises, above both cultural well-being (second) and

386

K. Dell et al.

financial performance (third). Economic performance was seen as necessary to meet broader goals. Smaller Māori enterprises commonly support the community by employing whānau, whose employment leads to improving living standards for whānau. For larger enterprises, multiple stakeholders are acknowledged and valued; these can include distributions to local marae (traditional Māori meeting places), educational scholarships, or the offering of health services and other social services to the local community. In other words, Māori enterprises operate in a holistic way. Many of these enterprises provide help to their communities—they consider broader employee and community needs. Moreover, the notion of whānau is broader than immediate whānau—it extends to human and non-human communities (Rout et al. 2021). Māori attitudes to money, wealth, and savings may differ amongst Māori. In 2018, Houkamau et al. (2020) embarked on an exploratory study to identify how tikanga Māori and Māori cultural values concerning wealth could be embedded in financial literacy training. A secondary aim was to trial culturally tailored spending diaries for promoting self-reflection and behaviour change. Participants shared wide-ranging insights regarding their attitudes toward money, wealth, and savings. Whānau relationships were identified as a key driver of behaviour and attitudes regarding money. Qualitative data from workshop discussions indicate that whānau heavily influenced participants’ attitudes and behaviours through parental teachings, modelling by close and older whānau members, and other family members’ current behaviours. Twelve of the 20 participants tended to prioritise whānau needs over their own at the start of the study. Another theme was the importance of viewing contemporary Māori engagement with money, wealth, and savings decisions in a socio-historical context. Some participants were conscious of the intergenerational legacy of Māori deprivation. A related tension was expressed between Māori values on the one hand and, on the other hand, values relating to success that were perceived as Pākehā. The authors concluded that financial literacy training for Māori should expressly honour Māori history as well as what Maori valued prior to colonisation. This approach would include a focus on the cascading impact of colonisation and would invite participants’ views on, and responses to, money, wealth, and savings. Fundamentally, to be effective, financial education for Māori must harness the strengths of local communities. Educational offerings must explicitly recognise and honour (without imposing) multidimensional Māori concepts of wealth and success. The research concluded that the contrast between Māori concepts of wealth and prosperity and Western concepts of individualism, and the Western orientation toward economic ‘growth’, challenges those seeking to boost the prosperity of Māori communities. Moreover, leadership from within the community should be encouraged and nurtured to encourage buy-in for education and interventions that benefit Māori. These personal attitudes are reflected in Māori businesses and organisations that endeavour to incorporate Māori values and principles into their strategic goals, management, and operations, showing a deep commitment to cultural identity above more conventional business metrics like income. For example, qualitative research

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

387

has found Māori tribal organisations operate a multiple bottom line and balance financial success with the cultural, social, and environmental aspirations of their members (Awatere et al. 2017; Smith et al. 2015). More recently, the MIFAS project specifically explored attitudes towards the environment and climate change among Māori. Participants were asked how much importance they give to two environmental values—‘protecting the environment’ (preserving nature) and ‘unity with nature’ (fitting into nature)—and whether they believed (1) climate change is real, (2) climate change is caused by humans, and (3) whether they were deeply concerned about climate change (Houkamau et al. 2021a). Participants were also asked if they felt iwi assets should be used for profit or whether iwi should be protecting the land for generations to come. The items were: ‘Protecting iwi assets (including land) means preserving things exactly as they are even if it means missing out on potential profits’; ‘I think that many iwi should take bigger risks with their resources in order to make more money’; and ‘Iwi should protect their resources at all costs, even if that means not using them to make money’. Overall, the data show that the vast majority of Māori (97%) believe that climate change is real and caused by humans. Many are deeply concerned about it. Younger people were more likely to want to protect iwi assets for future generations, while older adults were more likely to support using iwi assets for financial gain (increased profits). More recently, during the COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020, we surveyed MIFAS participants again, with 3116 of our original sample responding. Respondents’ answers to the open-ended questions were particularly telling. We asked: ‘How do you think the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic should change us as a society?’ A total of 2648 participants responded to this question. Of that group, just over one quarter called for a kinder, more united, and more tolerant society that cares for the poor/vulnerable, and others called for a reset of societal priorities and values, with some calling for a greater focus on environmental protection and a move away from individualism, consumerism, and greed (Houkamau et al. 2021b). Globalization was also seriously challenged, and respondents called for local solutions to the genuine social and economic challenges that were highlighted during this time. However, while many Māori may be concerned about the environment and desire a societal shift towards more resource-protective and humanistic values, Māori, as noted earlier, are largely integrated within a dominant economic system that does not uphold traditional ways of living or interacting with the environment or, indeed, with each other. A focus on the history of Māori economic practices is not meant to imply that values and practices have been entirely lost. Rather, they have continually undergone change and continue to manifest in a range of contemporary attitudes and behaviours, which our research seeks to explore. In addition, if some Māori are less than enthused by the promise of an economy that keeps growing at the expense of natural resources and quality relationships, this should not come as a surprise to policy makers. This is because research shows Māori have a preference for engaging in wealth creation that takes into account a broad range of factors, including social, cultural, and environmental attitudes (Awatere et al. 2017; Newth and Warner

388

K. Dell et al.

2019; Rout et al. 2021). This perspective also makes the case for paying due regard to the way in which values shape attitudes to the environment and the decisions we make about it. For example, Māori communities are reconstructing and expressing traditional knowledge in their tribal areas and are restoring areas in their local environment but also the tribal knowledge of those places (Maxwell et al. 2020; Rameka and Taiapa 2020). This situation brings tension for Māori between reconciling business imperatives with environmental protection (Mika et al. 2021). In this next section, we discuss an exemplar of a Māori community-based business, Nuka. This case study includes personal communications shared with the authors from the Ngārimu whānau of Whareponga.

20.4 Nuka—A Case Study of the Tensions of Reconciling Environmental Protection with Business Imperatives 20.4.1 Valuing Nature: What’s the Use? Everything we need to navigate is in nature, the question is, can you see it? Nainoa Thompson, Pacific navigator and voyager

Environmental and sustainability literature is often written from a perspective of value tensions (Mika et al. 2021). Economic development is viewed as trading off environmental preservation and economic imperatives. However, utilising a case study from Nuka—a nature-related enterprise—we ask readers to step away from this normative view of value tensions and trade-offs into an alternative perspective that perceives the economy and the environment as congruent entities. Nuka seeks to create commercially innovative items from native plants, such as food products, fragrances, and health products. Its main objective is to utilise existing land resources for the benefit of Māori landowners, especially in remote and marginalised areas of New Zealand. Māori landowners work with the University of Auckland’s technology and research capability to develop and realise this potential. Our case study makes known two relationship dimensions with nature—‘gifts’ and ‘utility’. Nuka views nature as a place of gifts. Symbolically, gifts represent offerings of abundance. From a gift perspective, nature is not exploited because gifts are a surplus whereby purposeful generosity is offered to others, and thus appropriate utilisation will follow. Understanding nature and its utility to humans when viewed through a lens of the gift restricts and confines the potential for exploitation. Within this case study’s title, ‘Valuing nature: What’s the use?’, the notion of ‘use’ is important because, more than ever, understanding appropriate usage of nature is important for the Earth’s sustainability. The case study describes Nuka’s journey to realise the gifts of the kānuka tree and its utility in terms of sustaining people. Kānuka, often confused with its more famous relation mānuka, is an endemic tree found throughout New Zealand, and is particularly prolific on the East Coast of Aotearoa New Zealand. Before discussing

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

389

value as gifts, we describe this journey over three time periods: ngā wā o mua (pre-­ colonisation), ināianei (colonisation), and āpōpō (decolonisation).

20.4.2 Ngā wā o mua—Knowing Our Place Nature has always been utilised by humans to supply necessities such as food, clothing shelter, and medicine. Traditionally, the kānuka tree has been known for providing sustenance, helping sustain the hunter-gatherer lifestyle of pre-colonial communities. Being a highly adaptive plant, capable of reproducing prolifically, Māori avidly used numerous parts of the tree, with no part deemed without use. The wood was used for wahie (firewood), for splints to help mend broken bones, and as implements such as tool handles and posts. The wood was also used for smoking fish and other foods, infusing food with flavour. The inner bark was utilised as durable waterproof roofing material and for the lining of walls and floors. The leaves were used for tea and as a mordant for dyeing natural fibres. Ash would be used to remove slime from eels. Perceiving nature’s gifts requires an intimate relationship with nature. This intimacy developed for Māori via a long-term relationship with the territories that provided them with sustenance. Over many generations, their long-term observation of the bio-life within the terrain of their homelands empowered their ability to discover and utilise these gifts of nature. This extended to knowledge of forest plants, foods, medicines, building materials, and so forth (Williams et al. 2011). The extent of Māori bush knowledge was noted by Baron von Heugal, a botanist who travelled around New Zealand and Australia in the early-to mid-1800s. He noted the remarkable ability of Māori to account for and identify hundreds of native trees. It will scarcely be credited … that the New Zealanders have a distinct name for every tree and plant in their land … when the celebrated botanist Baron von Heugal paid us a visit and made a large collection of plants we asked a native their names, he gave a name to all without exception, from the smallest to the grand, and with little hesitation … and lest it should be thought that this man was coining the names, another native was called the following evening … and with one single exception, out of three hundred specimens, he gave the same name to each as had been given the night before. Yates (1834) cited in Foster (2008)

Naming and identifying 300 tree and plant species, as this quote suggests, shows how much Māori relied on the environment for their survival. The growth of a body of knowledge correlates to its utility and relevance to a community. Where mātauranga Māori is extensive, there is a relationship with human survival, living, and environmental utility. For example, a vast body of knowledge exists on harakeke, the native flax. Harakeke was one of the few sources of fibre, so considerable dependence on the plant accumulated due to community reliance on harakeke as a vital source of fibre for clothing and warmth, and for baskets and fishing nets for the procurement and containment of food. Assessing the appearance of the harakeke bush and leaf, and its behaviour and feel, Māori were able to identify and categorise

390

K. Dell et al.

hundreds of different cultivars, knowing which specific strain produced heavy duty fibre, soft or pliable fibre, leaves for baskets, and which might generate rope for fishing nets. Thus, plants that had a high utility value for Māori communities added to the system of relationships that entwined spiritual, physical, and intellectual nourishment.

20.4.3 Ināianei—Losing Our Place Loss of Māori utility within whenua (land) occurred with colonisation and deforestation. Around AD 1000, before humans arrived in New Zealand, forest covered approximately 80% of the land. With European arrival, 6.7 million hectares of forest were destroyed and replaced by grassland, shrubland, and fern land. This continued between 1840 and 2000, where another eight million hectares were cleared. Initially, timber was mainly used for repairs to sailing ships, a practice that lasted until the nineteenth century. Then, with a rapidly expanding New South Wales colony, the demand for New Zealand timber began to increase. Timber exports, mainly kauri, became a major industry for New Zealand, and the harvesting of kauri took place on a devastating scale. Deforestation and colonisation disrupted Māori relationships with the land, thereby affecting the continuum of mātauranga (Winiata et al. 2008). Evidence of the loss of knowledge is reflected in recent interviews of Māori who work and live in dense, isolated areas of native forest. We never learnt the native bush trees, we never learnt any of that, I couldn’t really identify them. (Ngāti Porou elder 2021) I don’t have this extensive knowledge, I didn’t have a little old lady show me about rongoā or anything like that. (Ngāti Kahungunu elder 2021)

Botanist Baron von Heugal noted how Māori were easily able to identify several hundred native plants. Anecdotal evidence suggests that individual Māori can now only identify three to six native plants. Prior to colonisation, ‘knowing’ the bush was essential for shelter, food, and clothing. Yeah, things like kererū, you know, once kererū harvesting stopped being a regular thing, that need to be in the bush just lessened and lessened. (Te Whānau a Apanui elder 2021)

Disrupted relationships for Māori have also resulted in a decreased ability to identify nature’s gifts and then utilise nature in sustainable ways (Barr et al. 2018).

20.4.4  Āpōpō—Finding Our Way Back The ‘gift’ perspective alters the way natural resources are utilised, extracted, and transacted. Unless we know, feel, and see nature, we will not be able to receive these gifts. Using whānau traditional knowledge and experience with kānuka, Nuka

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

391

identified two qualities to respect when designing and thinking about a business and products that create value from kānuka: 1. The gift of abundance: Due to its rejuvenation properties (fast growing and rapid spread), kānuka offers natural abundance. Nuka knew it could create products that would generate global supply opportunities, as opposed to, for example, the pōhutukawa, which does not have the spread and rejuvenation properties of kānuka. 2. The gift of being wild: Kānuka grows naturally wild and Nuka, therefore, decided to avoid breeding kānuka, creating monocrops that may have unique properties. As an enterprise, Nuka works with identifying the unique gifts of each particular species. This helps to resolve exploitation tensions (like unsustainable harvesting), because Nuka works with the plant’s strengths when designing product development and market considerations. Deciding who should benefit from the value of a commercial entity creates value tensions. Identifying and calculating value is often a constant journey of clarification for this enterprise because the operational environment requires functioning within capitalist systems and property rights that frame value as transactional and tradable for the benefit of individuals. Nuka is a whānau enterprise that seeks to restore Māori relationships with the whenua through re-establishing the practice of gifts, purposeful generosity, and utility—finding use in the bush. Māori values in respect of the environment focus on intrinsic concepts of kaitiakitanga, mauri, and whakapapa. Nuka believes that relationships with Papatūānuku are created by being in, being with, and utilising nature’s gifts. Therefore, Nuka’s sustainability practices are based on understanding and having an intimate relationship with the tree. Tensions are resolved when decisions are made about nature from the perspective of nature. Having a perspective of nature requires knowing nature. And to know nature requires experiencing it.

20.5 Manahau: Toward a Māori Theory of Value Thus far, we have emphasised that traditional Māori society, through collective economic practices, was balanced to protect resources via reciprocity in social relations based on whanaungatanga. This balance was key to survival, and practices evolved to maintain this balance between people and their environments when resources were depleted. The process of colonisation that was enacted in Aotearoa New Zealand between 1840 and 1940 had the effect of supplanting an emerging Indigenous theory and practice of capitalism that was arguably mana-enhancing in that hapū and iwi enterprise, in seeking to support the well-being of others, in turn enhanced the mana of their peoples and preserved an established way of life. This is, in essence, the theory of an economy of mana proposed by Hēnare (2014) and extended by others (Dell

392

K. Dell et al.

et al. 2018), which is now being rekindled as an alternative theory of enterprise and economy that derives from mātauranga Māori and tikanga Māori as accumulated wisdom (Mead 2003). Manahau is a Māori theory of value grounded in te ao Māori that may help explain how to reconcile tensions of economic prosperity. Manahau combines mana—power, authority, and dignity (Dell et  al. 2018; Hēnare 2014), and hau— vitality of people, places, and objects (Hēnare 2018; Nicholson 2019). The extent to which manahau as a Māori conceptualisation of value can be realised within an economy in which Māori are integrated and is dominated by Western institutions requires enquiry on multiple fronts, including pre- and post-colonial Māori economic values and practice. Manahau expands our profit- and capital-focused interpretation of economy where only what can be measured financially is considered of value. It sees human activity, including survival and wealth creation, as inextricably linked with community-­based values and benefit rather than individualised productivity or benefit alone. Mana refers to prestige, power, influence, and status, and is a supernatural force in a person, place, or object. Mana was built through service to others; therefore, personal success (which has a bearing on Māori notions of economic success) was earned through contribution to the success of the collective. In this milieu, status, power, and prestige were derived from social standing within the context of iwi, hapū, and whānau. The term ‘mana’ denotes the inherent status of a person, in this respect. Mana is a spiritual energy closely connected with the Māori concept of tapu (sacredness). While there is little written on the subject of mana in an economic sense, Hēnare (2014) refers to an ‘economy of mana’, which Dell et  al. (2018) define as “an economic system in which decisions regarding investment, production, consumption, and wealth distribution are influenced by the interplay of mana-­ enhancing interactions between people and the environment” (p. 54). Hau captures the notion of reciprocity in te ao Māori (Nicholson 2019). Hau refers to the spirit of the gift and utu (the practice of reciprocal relations). In this respect, the notion of the hau, in relation to environmental activity and economic relations, implies that nothing can be taken or used without the restoration of balance. As noted earlier, practices were in place in Māori society to ensure balance and reciprocal relationships between people and the environment on which Māori depended for their survival. The use of natural resources, and the creation of wealth in the process is, therefore, indicative of a relational balance between the well-being of people, the preservation of environmental resources, and material wealth.

20.6 Conclusion Conscious capitalism as envisioned Mackey and Sisodia (2014) is a philosophy of doing business that is driven by a higher purpose, combining the generation of profits with socially responsible choices. The tenets of conscious capitalism recognize

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

393

that a business has many stakeholders that affect the business’s activities. These stakeholders include the company’s employees, shareholders, community and the environment. This chapter has delved into Māori approaches to business, that align with Mackey and Sisodia’s higher-order tenets but are driven by culturally rooted beliefs and values. Māori businesses, such as Nuka consider the contribution of their activity on the interests of future and past generations based on a spiritual (genealogically linked) connection to the natural world. Nuka illustrates the importance of financial viability, in so far as it can be balanced with the social, spiritual, cultural, and environmental imperatives of key stakeholders. The nation-state of New Zealand as we experience it now was birthed by the view that the most ethically legitimate approach to the natural world was to exploit it for private profit, yet the values that underpin that notion are rarely articulated. This chapter establishes that tikanga Māori as values and practices appropriate for sustaining communities have not been entirely lost. Rather, they have continually undergone change and continue to manifest in a range of contemporary attitudes and behaviours, which our research explores. Māori now live in an economic system that is at worst hostile to traditional Māori ways of engaging in wealth creation, and at best, apathetic. Conscious capitalism, in our view, offers useful higher order principles that are in some ways relatable to Māori beliefs, but are limited for understanding how spirituality, whakapapa, and service to past and future generations are balanced as part of the process of wealth creation. As tangata whenua, Māori have taken the view that people are of pre-eminent importance when making decisions that benefit communities based on whakapapa connections. But what is normally omitted from discussions of communities and human relationships is the idea that the Māori world view emphasises that whakapapa extends beyond human relationships—whakapapa extends to the environment (Rout et al. 2021). Inherent in the Māori world view is an implicit understanding that as humans interact with local environments, natural resources can be depleted, and given that Māori depended on these for survival, mitigating environmental stress was seen as crucial. What we need are environmental and economic policies and practices that enable Māori to do business in ways that align with Māori values that have resonance for both Māori and non-Māori enterprises. This tension between values and what we value is not just a theoretical one; it is also epistemological—concerning knowledge and knowledge systems. A whakapapa-­based epistemology includes the natural world in the collective sense, thereby removing its separation from society or its consideration solely as a set of resources to be owned, exploited, sustained, or regenerated. To this end, this chapter is an initial exploration of how an emerging Indigenous Māori theory of value might help to develop a sustainable, inclusive, and equitable approach to understanding business. In this way, other scholars, practitioners, and entrepreneurs may be better positioned to integrate and contextualise emerging global practices and knowledge bases as they are operationalised in Aotearoa New Zealand.

394

K. Dell et al.

Glossary of Māori Words Aotearoa land of the long white cloud (Māori name for New Zealand) āpōpō tomorrow hapū subtribe harakeke New Zealand flax, Phormium tenax hau vitality, vital essence ināianei now, today iwi tribe kāinga villages kaitiakitanga stewardship, guardianship kānuka white tea-tree, Kunzea ericoides, leaves similar to mānuka but softer kaupapa Māori purpose, philosophy, collective vision mana power, authority, prestige, integrity, dignity, control, status, influence, spiritual power manaakitanga the care and support of others manahau A Maori theory of value mānuka tea-tree, Leptospermum scoparium—a common native scrub bush marae courtyard in front of a meeting house maramataka Māori lunar calendar mātauranga Māori Māori knowledge mauri life force, ethos ngā wā o mua the past, former, the time before Pākehā New Zealander of European descent Papatūānuku Earth mother tangata whenua people of the land taonga gift or treasure tapu restrictions, sacredness te ao Māori the Māori world, Māori world view te reo Māori the Māori language tikanga custom, the culturally correct way of doing things, values, customary practice tikanga Māori the accumulated customary values and practices generally taken as ‘the Māori way of doing things’ tino rangatiratanga self-determination, autonomy, chiefly authority utu reciprocity and exchange for mutual benefit and relationship maintenance wahie firewood whakapapa genealogy, blood ties whānau family, extended family, often spanning several generations whanaungatanga family relationships, a sense of belonging, kinship whenua land

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

395

References Akerlof, G.A., and R.E. Kranton. 2010. Identity Economics: How our Identities Shape Our Work, Wages, and Well-being. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Awatere, S., J.P. Mika, M. Hudson, C. Pauling, S. Lambert, and J. Reid. 2017. Whakatipu rawa mā ngā uri whakatipu: Optimising the ‘Māori’ in Māori Economic Development. AlterNative 13 (2): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180117700816. Barr, T.L., J.  Reid, P.  Catska, G.  Varona, and M.  Rout. 2018. Development of Indigenous Enterprise in a Contemporary Business Environment – The Ngāi Tahu Ahikā approach. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy 12 (4): 454–471. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-­05-­2016-­0014. BDO. 2020. Māori Business: Survey Report 2020. https://www.bdo.nz/getmedia/d756d8ed-­ 759d-­4943-­8768-­915c1cfe1fb7/Maori-­Business-­Report-­2020-­FINAL_1.pdf.aspx; https://doi. org/10.1080/00223344.2014.898232. Best, E. 1934. The Maori as He Was: A Brief Account of Maori life as It Was in Pre-European Days. Dominion Museum. http://nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-­BesMaor.html. Craig, R., R. Taonui, and S. Wild. 2012. The Concept of Taonga in Māori Culture: Insights for Accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 25 (6): 1025–1047. https://doi. org/10.1108/09513571211250233. Dell, K.M., N.  Staniland, and A.  Nicholson. 2018. Economy of Mana: Where to Next? MAI Journal 7 (1): 51–65. https://doi.org/10.20507/MAIJournal.2018.7.1.5. Durie, M. 1994. Whaiora: Maori health development. Oxford University Press, USA. p. 24. ———. 1995. Tino Rangatiratanga: Maori Self-Determination. He Pukenga Kōrero 1 (1): 44–53. https://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE22164330. ———. 2001. Mauri Ora: The Dynamics of Māori Health. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foster, T. 2008. Plant Heritage New Zealand: Te whakapapa o nga rakua  – Interpreting the Species Features of Native Plants. Raupo. Friedman, M. 1970, 13 September. A Friedman Doctrine: The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. The New York Times Magazine, p. 17. Gillies, A., R.S. Tinirau, and N. Mako. 2007. Whakawhanaungatanga – Extending the Networking Concept. He Pukenga Kōrero: A Journal of Māori Studies, Raumati (Summer) 8 (2): 29–37. Harmsworth, G.R., and S.  Awatere. 2013. Indigenous Māori Knowledge and Perspectives of Ecosystems. In Ecosystem Services in New Zealand: Conditions and Trends, ed. J.R. Dymond, 274–286. Manaaki Whenua Press. Hēnare, M. 2000. Māori, the Navajo, the Scots, The Welsh: Nation Building and Economic Development. In Nation Building and Māori Development in the 21st Century: Conference Proceedings, 30 August to 1 September 2000, ed. M. Dodd, 115–123. University of Waikato School of Māori and Pacific Development. ———. 2014. The Economy of Mana. In Beyond the Free Market: Rebuilding a Just Society in New Zealand, ed. D. Cooke, C. Hill, P. Baskett, and R. Irwin, 65–69. Dunmore. ———. 2018. “Ko te hau tēnā o tō taonga…”: The Words of Ranapiri on the Spirit of Gift Exchange and Economy. Journal of the Polynesian Society 127 (4): 451–463. https://doi.org/10.15286/ jps.127.4.451-­463. Henderson, R. 2020a. Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire. Hachette UK. ———. 2020b. Reimagining Capitalism: How Business Can Save the World. Portfolio. Hikuroa, D. 2017. Mātauranga Māori – the ūkaipō of Knowledge in New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 47 (1): 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/03036758.2016.1252407. Houkamau, C.A., and C.G. Sibley. 2019. The Role of Culture and Identity for Economic Values: A Quantitative Study of Maori Attitudes. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 49 (supp. 1): 118–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/03036758.2019.1650782. Houkamau, C.A., A.  Stevens, D.  Oakes, and M.  Blank. 2020. Embedding Tikanga Māori into Financial Literacy Training for Māori. Te Arotahi Paper Series May 2020 No. 05. https:// ebooks.auckland.ac.nz/te_arotahi_5_-­_c_houkamau_march_2020/2/.

396

K. Dell et al.

Houkamau, C.A., K.M. Dell, J. Newth, J.P. Mika, and C. Sibley. 2021a. Climate Change Beliefs Among Māori. https://sites.massey.ac.nz/teaurangahau/wp-­content/uploads/sites/53/2021/05/ Climate-­Change-­Beliefs-­and-­Maori-­Final-­for-­Web-­_reduced.pdf. Houkamau, C.A., K.M.  Dell, J.  Newth, J.P.  Mika, C.  Sibley, T.  Keelan, T.  Dunn. 2021b. The Wellbeing of Māori Pre and Post Covid-19 Lockdown in Aotearoa/New Zealand. https://cdn. auckland.ac.nz/assets/psych/about/our-­research/MIFAS/Tech-­Docs/MIFAS-­Covid-­19-­2021-­ Report.pdf. Jacobs, M., and M. Mazzucato. 2016. Rethinking Capitalism: Economics and Policy for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. Wiley-Blackwell. Kawharu, M. 2000. Kaitiakitanga: A Maori Anthropological Perspective of the Maori Socio-­ Environmental Ethic of Resource Management. The Journal of the Polynesian Society 109 (4): 349–370. Mackey, J., and R. Sisodia. 2014. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Māori Economic Development Panel. 2012. Māori Economic Development Panel: Discussion document. Te Puni Kōkiri and Ministry of Economic Development. Maxwell, K.H., K. Ratana, K.K. Davies, C. Taiapa, and S. Awatere. 2020. Navigating Towards Marine Co-Management with Indigenous Communities On-Board the Waka-Taurua. Marine Policy 111: 103722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103722. McIntosh, A.J., F.K.  Zygadlo, and H.  Matunga. 2004. Rethinking Maori Tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 9 (4): 331–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/1094166042000311237. Mead, H.M. 2003. Tikanga Māori: Living by Māori Values. Huia. Mika, J.P. 2014. Manaakitanga: Is Generosity Killing Māori Enterprises? In Proceedings of the Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange Conference 4–7 February 2014, UNSW, Sydney, Australia, ed. P. Davidsson, 815–829. Queensland University of Technology. Mika, J.P., K.M.  Dell, C.  Elers, M.J.  Dutta, and Q.  Tong. 2021. Indigenous Environmental Defenders in Aotearoa New Zealand: Ihumātao and Ōroua River. AlterNative. Newth, J., and A.  Warner. 2019. Impact Investor Insights 2019 Aotearoa New Zealand. https:// responsibleinvestment.org/wp-­content/uploads/2019/09/Impact-­Investor-­Insights-­Aotearoa-­ NZ-­2019-­FULL-­REPORT.pdf. Nicholson, A. 2019. Hau: Giving Voices to the Ancestors. Journal of the Polynesian Society 128 (2): 137–162. https://doi.org/10.15286/jps.128.2.137-­162. Oliver, P., and C.  Love. 2007. Mahi aroha: Māori Perspectives on Volunteering and Cultural Obligations. https://communityresearch.org.nz/wp-­content/uploads/2012/11/mahi-­aroha1.pdf Pinker, S. 2012. The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. New York: Penguin. Pohatu, T.W. 2011. Mauri: Rethinking Human Wellbeing. MAI Review 3: 1–12. Rameka, W., and C. Taiapa. 2020. Ngā tohu o te ao: Maramataka and Marine Management – A Research Project of the Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge. https://www.sustainableseaschallenge.co.nz/our-­research/nga-­tohu-­o-­te-­ao-­maramataka-­and-­marine-­management/ Rout, M., J.  Reid, H.  Bodwitch, A.  Gillies, B.  Lythberg, D.  Hikuro, L.  Mackey, S.  Awatere, J.P.  Mika, F.  Wiremu, M.  Rakena, and K.  Davies. 2019. Māori Marine Economy: A Literature Review. https://www.sustainableseaschallenge.co.nz/tools-­and-­resources/ maori-­marine-­economy-­a-­literature-­review/. Rout, M., S.  Awatere, J.P.  Mika, J.  Reid, and M.  Roskruge. 2021. A Māori Approach to Environmental Economics: Te ao tūroa, te ao hurihuri, te ao mārama  – The Old World, a Changing World, a World of Light. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.715. Royal, C. 2007. Kaitiakitanga  – Guardianship and Conservation  – Traditional kaitiakitanga. Te Ara  – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/kaitiakitanga-­ guardianship-­and-­conservation/page-­3. Accessed 14 Jan 2022. Smith, G.H., R.S.  Tinirau, A.  Gillies, and V.C.A.  Warriner. 2015. He mangōpare amohia: Strategies for Māori Economic Development. Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi. http://www. maramatanga.ac.nz/sites/default/files/He%20Mangopare%20Amohia_0.pdf.

20 Māori Perspectives on Conscious Capitalism

397

Spiller, C., L. Erakovic, M. Henare, and E. Pio. 2010. Relational Well-Being and Wealth: Maori Businesses and an Ethic of Care. Journal of Business Ethics 98 (1): 153–169. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10551-­010-­0540-­z. Taylor, L., T.  Te Whenua, and B.  Hatami. 2018. Discussion Paper: How Current Legislative Frameworks Enable Customary Management & Ecosystem-Based Management in Aotearoa New Zealand  – The Contemporary Practice of rāhui. Manaaki Whenua– Landcare Research. https://www.sustainableseaschallenge.co.nz/assets/dms/Reports/ How-­current-­legislative-­frameworks-­enable-­customary-­management-­and-­ecosystem-­based-­ management-­in-­Aotearoa-­New-­Zealand-­the-­contemporary-­practice-­of-­rahui/Disc-­paper-­ How-­current-­legislation-­enables-­EBM-­contemporary-­practice-­of-­rahui.pdf. Waa, P., and M. Love. 1997. The pre-European Maori Economy. In Business and New Zealand Society, ed. J. Deeks and P. Enderwick, 15–32. Longman Paul. Walker, R.J. 1978. The RELEVANCE of Maori Myth and Tradition. In Te ao hurihuri: Aspects of Maoritanga, ed. M. King. Reed. ———. 2004. Ka whawhai tonu matou: Struggle Without End. 2nd ed. New York: Penguin. Williams, J.V., R. Kearney, R. Maaka, P. Ringwood, and K. Walker. 2011. Ko Aotearoa tēnei: A Report into Claims Concerning New Zealand Law and Policy Affecting Māori Culture and Identity  – Te taumata tuatahi (Vol. 1). https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/WT/ wt_DOC_68356054/KoAotearoaTeneiTT1W.pdf. Winiata, W., D. Luke, and E. Cook. 2008. The Survival of Māori as a People and Māori Enterprise [Paper presentation]. Second Applied Geoinformatics for Society and Environment (AGSE), 28–30 October 2008, Kerala, India. Zitelmann, R. 2018. The Power of Capitalism: A Journey Through Recent History Across Five Continents. LID Editorial. Kiri Dell is a lecturer in the Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Auckland (New Zealand), academic director of the postgraduate diploma in Maori business development, and cochair of the native and Indigenous caucus of the Academy of Management. Kiri Dell’s tribal affiliation is Ngāti Porou. Dr. Dell’s research focuses on Māori land development and Indigenous entrepreneurship.  

Carla Houkamau is deputy dean of the Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Auckland (New Zealand). Carla Houkamau is of Ngāti Porou, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāi Tahu, and Pākehā descent. Dr. Houkamau leads Te Rangahau o Te Tuakiri Māori me Ngā Waiaro ā-Pūtea – The Māori Identity and Financial Attitudes Study, which is a longitudinal study of Māori identity, values, and attitudes to wealth and wealth creation.  

Jason Mika is an associate professor at Waikato Management School and Te Kotahi Research Institute at the University of Waikato (New Zealand). Jason Paul Mika’s tribal affiliations are Tūhoe, Ngāti Awa, Whakatōhea, and Ngāti Kahungunu. Dr. Mika’s research centers on intersections of indigeneity and entrepreneurship in multiple sites, sectors, and scales.  

Jamie Newth is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Auckland (New Zealand), where his research and supervisions explore social innovation and entrepreneurship, impact investing, sustainable business models, and the institutional arrangements that enable and constrain broader conceptions of value creation. Jamie Newth’s tribal affiliation is Ngāpuhi. His industry work includes founding and leading “Soul Capital,” an impact investment fund management firm, and various company and non-governmental organizations (NGO) board roles.  

Chapter 21

The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration, Neutralism, and Resistance Miguel Astor-Aguilera

21.1 Introduction: Thought Questions Individual Maya accept, reject, or are ambivalent to capitalism be it socially conscious driven or not. This chapter focuses on five, of ten, questions addressed by this edited volume as adapted to the Indigenous Maya: one, are conscious capitalism higher purposes consistent with Maya spiritual perspectives?; two, can Maya spiritualities contribute to the existential quest for meaning in modern capitalistic driven life?; three, conscious capitalism implies that its leaders can move beyond self-­ interest. Can conscious capitalistic empathy approximate the reciprocity exhibited within Maya spirituality?; four, is conscious capitalism consistent with traditional Maya leadership?; and, five, is conscious capitalism complimentary to Maya spiritual worldviews and practical to implement? Indigenous Mesoamericans were severely impacted by sixteenth century Spanish early capitalism (Teixeira and Iyall Smith 2008, 28) and, although the Maya were later incorporated into Mexican social economics, after Mexico’s 1821 Independence, many conservative villagers retain some ancestral economic traditions. In order to assess Maya production, as related to the above questions, we need to briefly survey the history, ancient to colonial to present, of Indigenous America. The following, then, incorporates three era sections. The first provides an overview of ancient Indigenous trading economies from North to Central to South America. This ancient period section is not comprehensive but only demonstrative in terms of the scope and nature of ancient Indigenous American trading societies. The second provides European contact integration into colonial market economies of what became Indigenous Latin America. Also not comprehensive, but, rather, an overview of the

M. Astor-Aguilera (*) Religious Studies, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_21

399

400

M. Astor-Aguilera

socio-economic transformations in colonial America at the hands of sixteenth century European early capitalism within Spanish macro-regional mercantilism. The third, examines the Indigenous Maya, nineteenth century to the present, in analyzing how contemporary capitalism shapes, and is shaped, by Maya individuals.

21.2 Pre-European Contact of Indigenous Mesoamerica and Pre-Capitalism Prior to European colonial expansion, the concept of Indigenous, as now understood, did not exist (Teixeira and Iyall Smith 2008, 29–30; Wilmer 1997 [1993). The term Indigenous, as deployed by academics, the World Bank, Nation-State Governments, Intergovernmental Organizations, the International Labor Organization, the International Work Group on Indigenous Affairs, the World Council of Indigenous Peoples, and contemporary “Indigenous” populations themselves, is a social concept that has been variously constructed around historically bound political economic stakes (Corntassel 2003). What most definitions of Indigenous have in common is that these populations are colonized peoples having ancient relation ties to the land upon which they live and claim as their ancestral homeland (Anaya 1996; Clifford 1997 [1994], 287; Guibernau 1999; Iyall Smith 2006; Poole 2000; Trask 1999). Pre-Columbian cosmologies are not understood very well. Our understanding of knowledge is historically situated (Foucault 1970 [1966]; Foucault 1972 [1969]) and this includes our modern Western concept of “religion” (Asad 1993). Even where native written records are available, aboriginal Americans did not systematically outline dogma, doctrine, or belief (Astor-Aguilera 2010). Pre-Columbian Americans left imagery, sculpture, burials, monumental buildings, and codices of which meaning academics continue to assess (Astor-Aguilera 2020). Commonly known as Indios, “Indians,” contemporary Indigenous populations of Latin North to South America, descend from the first inhabitants of the “New World.” Also called Amerindians, Indigenous Americans are now termed First American Nations. The Maya interacted and engaged in Mesoamerican world-system trade with their neighbors, near and far, for centuries prior to European contact. World-System is associated with Wallerstein’s (1974a, b, 1976) model concerning the rise of modern capitalism. The incipient capitalist monopoly of the world economy was composed of pre-modern accumulation and mercantilism, followed by corporate classical capitalism, that later reached a global phenomenon through colonial conquest and political rule expansion (Giddens 1994 [1985]; Robinson 2004). Pre-­ capitalist systems, per Marx (1964 [1952]), are composed of “primitive” households and communities not having private properties who command their labor and surplus while Schneider (1977) sees them as economies emphasizing preciosities exchange.

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

401

Whether pre-Columbian labor was commoditized is not clear (Hirth 1993). Applying Wallerstein’s (1974a, b, 1976) world-system theories to pre-capitalist societies is difficult (Alexander 2008; Blanton and Feinman 1984, 675; Price 1986); however, Abu-Lughod’s (1989) more generalized historical model, looking at thirteenth and fourteenth century long distance trade throughout and between China and northwest Europe, does appear applicable to the pre-European contact Indigenous Americas (Smith and Berdan 2000, 284). Having great time-depth, ancient Mesoamerican entrepreneurs were composed of opportunistic merchants seeking expansion within macro-regional economic systems (Alexander 2008; Blanton and Feinman 1984, 678; Masson and Freidel 2012, 455, 479). Per Smith and Berdan (2000, 284), “Postclassic Mesoamerica [was] a World-System, defined as a widespread system of interaction that cut across political boundaries [where] actions and processes in one area affected societies in distant areas… [These long distance impacts included] stylistic and cultural factors in addition to the economic.” Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, per Blanton et al. (1992, 419), was similar to the ancient Chinese socio-political macro system that economically incorporated various interactive trading regions (Skinner 1977). Mesoamerica’s nodal regions, like China’s, were culturally, politically, and economically interdependent (Blanton et  al. 1992, 420). Mesoamerican world-system factors began developing within each nodal region throughout 300–500 BCE to 200–300 CE. These world-system elements were later elaborated between 300–700 CE and reached their apogee during 1300–1500 CE and remained heightened until Spanish colonization in the 1500s (ibid). Mesoamerica’s nodal regions had high levels of intellectual, political, and economic interplay with merchants and marketplaces using various items as mediums for monetary-like exchange. At these centers, goods from not only Mesoamerica at large could be acquired but also from farther distant areas such as the now United States. Coastal port trade, along the Atlantic and Pacific, additionally allowed exchange to flow from Mesoamerica through Central America onto South America and vice-versa. Metallurgy, for example, was exchanged from Ecuador to Western Mexico (Hosler 1988). Turquoise from the American Southwest made its way to Southern Mesoamerica while cacao travelled in the opposite direction (Bergman 1969; Pailes and Whitecotton 1979; Weigand et al. 1977). The above widely traded goods, along with salt, cloth, and obsidian that, which like pre-Hispanic metal extraction techniques (Weigand and Gwynne 1982), required shaft mine excavation, had variable yet highly commercialized important economic roles (Drennan et al. 1990; Blanton et al. 1992, 422–424; Santley 1983; Smith and Berdan 2000, 285). Indigenous Americans traded long distance with one another until European colonizers disrupted their freedom to do so and, therefore, since world-system theory emphasizes long distance exchange, why the term “pre-­ Columbian world-system” applies (Blanton and Feinman 1984; Blanton et al. 1992, 425; Schortman and Urban 1987). Indigenous American large regional markets, each marked with regional specialties, were similar to ancient China’s in their being linked to cults emphasizing cosmological imagery legitimating the social position of the mercantile center’s rulers

402

M. Astor-Aguilera

(Blanton et  al. 1992, 422–424). Imagery at these centers exhibit that within Indigenous American cosmovisions, interbeing persons, animate and inanimate, as well as organic and inorganic, interact in seen and unseen manner within relational communities composed of myriad entities engaging each other through acts of reciprocation (Astor-Aguilera 2010; Bunten 2011, 67). Similar to human-to-human interaction where gifted offerings are done not only avoid conflict but also to create onerous obligations (see Graziano 1975, 27), the same applies in human-to-­ nonhuman reciprocal relations.

21.3 Colonial Indigenous Latin America and Early Capitalism The modern capitalist world-system is in great part derived from European world conquest. Part of this subjugation involved the colonization of the Americas (Braudel 1984; Frank 1978; Ringrose 1983). Though usually considered citizens, all the world’s Indigenous populations now live as internal colonies within modern nations. The colonial era continues to this day since invading foreign nations grew around now controlled native homelands (Teixeira and Iyall Smith 2008, 30). Spain, under heavy economic duress to its European neighbors; however, failed in its conquest of the Indigenous Americas to adequately provide for its “New Spain” colonies which in turn caused a renewed commerce in native goods and a growth in hybrid production (McAlister 1984). Seventeenth century Mexico, finding itself with economic vigor, began substantial trading with Peru (Brading and Cross 1985; Clayton 1985). Hacienda large estate plantations in Mexico were highly integrated within the colonial economy and the 1700s saw a spiking market economy in the Yucatán peninsula based on an increase of exportable cash crops integrated into the Spanish world-system (Farriss 1984; Farriss 1986; Patch 1993). The majority of Maya workers on colonial plantations were not landless but, instead, were sharecroppers on land that included that owned by the Church (Granado Baeza 1845). Considering that Indigenous households are based on a production complex composed of adaptive flexible strategies (Netting 1993; Wilk and Netting 1984; Wilk 1991), the colonial Maya community remained “the principal social and productive unit” (Alexander 1996). The nineteenth century; however, saw uneven markets that, along with Maya resentment toward Catholic clergy, spurred the onset of rebellions known as the “Caste War of Yucatán” (Astor-Aguilera 2021; Cline 1950; Dumond 1997; Patch 1985; Reed 2002 [1964]; Rugeley 1996). Part of the European colonial process comprised religious missionizing that included forced conversion. Proselytizing Christianity within the Indigenous Americas was difficult since the aboriginal populations had no concept of religion and, therefore, no churches. Many of Latin America’s Indigenous, including those of Mesoamerica, however, wound up adapting their cosmovisions within

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

403

Roman-­Catholicism. Aboriginal Latin American cosmovisions share core commonalities, however, they exhibit distinctions due to the size of North and South America that, in turn, affects their cultural and linguistic diversity (Astor-Aguilera 2016). Latin-Spanish North America (Mexico and Central America [excluding Belize]), for example, covers approximately 2,473,343 square kilometers (954,964 square miles). Latin-Spanish South America (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Columbia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela) covers 8,824,675 square kilometers (3,407,226 square miles) (C.I.A. 2015). Latin-Spanish North America has approximately 24.3 million people and Latin-Spanish South America 26.9 million people with each having its own distinct Indigenous populations. The largest Indigenous Latin North American populations are Mexico (15.7 million) and Guatemala (5.8 million) while Indigenous Latin South America has Peru (13.8 million) and Bolivia (6 million). Within Mexico, the largest indigenous population are the Maya (2.5 million) and, in Peru, the Quechua (3.25 million). Both Mayan and Quechuan language-family speakers are spread over various countries in North and South America respectively. During colonization, Indigenous American land was stolen and, with those turn of events, self-governance was practically obliterated. The forced assimilation of autochthonous cultures ensued and the use of native languages became heavily restricted (Teixeira and Iyall Smith 2008, 28). While hundreds of aboriginal North to South American languages became extinct since European contact, close to a thousand are still utilized (C.I.A. 2015). Those Indigenous languages still spoken are for the most part taught at home in the household private sphere where the early training in ones subsistence based livelihood begins. In the emerging world-system of Mexico’s colonial Yucatán, capitalism slowly began to remove Maya household labor from its subsistence production by transferring it toward commodity production. Capital accumulation, through commodities, is alluring to many people, including the Maya, since it functions as liquidity where each commodity can be converted into different types of products through exchange (Alexander 1996). Per Binford (1978, 1983), changes in Indigenous household strategies occur by additions and eliminations, in relation to one another, within domestic production as related to the allocation of labor (also Cook and Binford 1990; Little 1987). An added colonial trend within Maya household production, that continues to this day, due to the risk of agricultural subsistence shortage, is the breeding of pigs for use as food or, if sold, as an emergency source of funds (Hayden and Gargett 1990). Households, according to Wallerstein (1984) and Wallerstein and Smith (1992), are the foundational units in any emerging world-system. Integrating variable production at the household and community level with world-systems does not always equate a one-way transformation toward capitalistic oppression. Household production structure is malleable rather than traditionally static and, therefore, can conform somewhat to capitalistic demand for sporadic mobile laborers (Smith et  al. 1984). Under this system, the evolving colonial capitalistic world-system within Maya territories did not totally disenfranchise Indigenous households from native production strategies (Alexander 1996).

404

M. Astor-Aguilera

21.4 Indigenous Perspectives, Modern Maya Wage-Work, and Capitalism In assessing whether conscious capitalism is an oxymoron for Indigenous populations one needs to analyze native concepts and practices as understood by conservative cultural insiders. For hundreds of years, Indigenous Americans have lived in human manipulated environments (Krech 1999; Tallbear 2000). Past to present California natives, for example, have used ecological knowledge to better their lived environment by actively managing their local land resources (Anderson 2005). Indigenous Mesoamerican cosmologies establish patterns and conventions that include culturally embedded social values, and this includes millennial old practices that we Modern Western people involved in environmental conservationist movements see as not only wasteful, such as Maya slash and burn agriculture, but also as highly destructive. Overhunting, from an environmentalist perspective, is an ecological offense. A Maya person’s perspective, however, is different since hunting is reciprocated through rituals and ceremonies that thank invisible ecological entities in their midst, spirits if you will, for game taken in order to ensure that animals remain available for future hunting. Despite actual Maya practices, Silko (1997), in glamorizing their “old ways,” homogenizes Indigenous Americans, including the Maya to which she is unrelated, despite admitting that Indigenous individuals from rival First Nations are known to steal from each other in order to benefit economically. In contrast, other Indigenous Americans, like Tallbear (2002), take a balanced view of their ancestry and are opposed to, for example, LaDuke (1999) type essentializing caricatures. LaDuke’s romanticized view of Indigenous Americans is published by South End Press which self-proclaims to publish founded on a worker managed model of participatory economics, coined “Parecon,” that, like conscious capitalism, considers itself an alternative to modern capitalism (Albert and Hahnel 1990; Hahnel and Albert 1991; Schweickart 2006; Spannos 2008). A non-immersed perspective of First Nation Americans as nature worshippers implies that they, unless degenerated to an American capitalistic value system, are completely against petroleum companies. Indigenous spirituality, then, is assumed to be inherently an ideal representation of anti-capitalist sentiment (Taylor 2017). United States history, however, exposes an often-ignored complex narrative concerning Native American earth relations. Case studies are crucial to understanding human individuals and the actions they take and why. Not all United States Native Americans chose/have chosen to resist capitalistic endeavors within their territories—some have been ambivalent while others have embraced them (Harmon 2010). Opposed to popular conceptions that Indigenous peoples do not want televisions, refrigerators, cars, or modern homes with plumbing and climate control, Native Americans do acquire them through their economic trading in real estate, oil, lumber, mining, and, most recently, casino resorts (Taylor 2017). Indigenous peoples, after all, are human beings. Rather than Native Americans having a seemingly innate altruism that rejects affluence, actual case studies of Indigenous individuals

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

405

and their family histories, for example the late nineteenth century Oklahoma Osage, demonstrate that some First Nations’ individuals willingly participate in United States capitalistic endeavors, with a social and/or environmental conscience or not, when those opportunities arise (Grann 2017). Following Taylor (2017), who is a Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe member of Massachusetts and Eastern Rhode Island, “the line between comradeship and cooptation is dim. It is not fair to the complexities of Indian political economy…to launch a new “Iron Eyes Cody,” the crying Indian of 1970s television ads paddling and weeping his way down a garbage-strewn river… We fail to see American Indians for the complex people they are and who have politics as unpredictable as an average swing state. The best way to fight the excesses of corporate capitalism is not to prop up Indians [as] spiritual buoys, but as human beings.” Immersed ethnographers, including this chapter’s author, try to move beyond armchair generalizations. We strive, per our training, though not always successful, to listen carefully to individuals within our targeted populations. We try to apply our methods and theories without agendas since, otherwise, our data will not only be oversimplified, in terms of variability and complexity, but its articulations will then become distorted. By living with those we study, we can share in their life stories. Being privy to their hopes, dreams, and aspirations includes their reaction to capitalistic ventures (Simon 2011, 9). We need try, then, to appreciate, without prejudice and judgment, our consultant research partners’ worldviews, and ways of life. Immersed fieldwork in a culture’s native language reveals perspectives that can vary from individual to individual. These differentials apply to wage work and include distinctive and sometimes self-contradictory opinions about capitalism and its effect on their selves, families, and community (Lin 2011, 29). There is a potential for Indigenous populations to be empowered through various forms of Indigenous capitalisms. Per Bunten (2011), though brought into Western capitalist markets through colonialism and imperialism, Indigenous populations have been able to maintain agency more than is usually acknowledged. The Maya, for example, often seek empowerment through newfound economic opportunities. According to this author’s Maya consultants, they began to recognize in the late 1980s that wage labor gave added security to their traditional subsistence. “Kool,” cornfield, farmers, began to migrate out of their village to look for wage work in the increasingly affluent Quintana Roo, Mexico, tourist areas of Cancun, Cozumel, Playa Del Carmen, and Tulum. The Yucatán peninsula becoming a famous Western tourist destination beginning in the mid-1970s supposedly due to The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau maritime documentaries. Young Maya men began migrating to these Caribbean tourist zones looking for work in construction and as manual labor in hotels and restaurants. The men typically, but not always, left their wives and children in the village to take care of the home, watch their house lots, look after their older parents and/or grandparents, and to tend to ceremonial obligations. From the mid-1990s onward, motor vehicle transport began to increase in and out of remote forest Maya villages. This reliable transportation emerged from migrant workers being able to purchase vehicles at their work sites. Their first

406

M. Astor-Aguilera

vehicles were quite old, but, therefore, affordable to those Maya able/willing to save their wages. First to be purchased were five seat compact sedans such as the Datsun 210-Sentra (Nissan Tsuru). By the late 1990s, Maya villagers began to acquire old Volkswagen Type 2 microbus type minivans that could seat nine. Using the VW Bus as more efficient migrant transport came from Maya men observing that American, European, and Mexican hippie tourists would arrive in this multi-purpose vehicle super loaded with not only people, often cramming more than nine passengers and, on top of which, the minibus also carried baggage and freight within it and on its roof. Adding to this vehicle’s advantages, the chauffeur and his second driver “navigator” could sleep within the vehicle instead of paying for a worksite room rental. These larger vehicles thus allowed increasing numbers of Maya to leave the village as migrant laborers and, further, they allowed these workers to bring back goods that were either not available or too expensive at their villages. Maya laborers, then, started in the late 1980s to seek adding intermittent wage work to their subsistence lifestyle. This Maya mixed economy has not only continued but has increased up to the present. In the late 1990s, several Maya villagers began their own small businesses. These village proper enterprises were usually micro-markets selling basic necessities and cheap foodstuffs. Maya village mini-­ stores are now quite common whereas they used to be previously quite rare. Quintana Roo villagers often speak of deceased elders such as, for example, Don Julian T’zib Chay, from Xcabil, and Don Teodosio Noh Canul, from Huaymax, whose families once had enough capital to run warehouse-like stores. Since their respective villages were both in the remote forest, both men, of which there are similar entrepreneurial examples in neighboring villages, created makeshift paper monies for use with their workers and clients. All Maya villagers this author has spoken on the subject highly admire these types of men and their achievements. While Don Julian and Don Teodosio used their profits to benefit themselves and their immediate families, they also diverted profits to projects and causes within their respective village. Part of their deeds extended to paying for villager medical needs and, since there was no community clinic at the time, their actions often included a free ride, both being owners of reliable pick-trucks, to a nearby town clinic. In extreme cases, the patients were required to be taken to a far away hospital in either Chetumal, state capitol of Quintana Roo, or Merida, state capitol of Yucatán. Each hospital was/is approximately six hours away and thus required fuel expenses, meal expenditures, and sometimes lodging costs. According to their respective villagers, Don Julian or Don Teodosio incurred all trip and medical charges. Maya villagers do not have a term for conscious capitalism; however, what they describe, per above, somewhat fits. According to this author’s village consultants, Don Julian and Don Teodosio also not only occasionally distributed food and drinks free of charge to their laborers at end of their work day, but also helped sponsor village rituals such as weddings, shrine activities, and traditional Maya ceremonies held deep in their forest. Don Julian and Don Teodosio no longer being alive, some of the migrant laborers wage work monies are now dedicated for similar just mentioned village level rituals and ceremonies.

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

407

Before the late 1980s, prior to Quintana Roo Maya villagers becoming migrant laborers, the majority of these people would grow, harvest, store, and consume most of their own food. This included selling, trading, or slaughtering house lot animals such as pigs, turkeys, and chickens, and/or consuming, and/or in part selling the butchered meat. Some of the harvest and meat, be it from a domestic animal or from hunted game, most often deer and peccary, would sometimes be gifted to kin with an implied understanding that like reciprocation would later be expected. The Maya assist each other, however, similar assistance is always expected in return. The Maya “k’aam/ch’a’,” receive, from other villagers and also “bo’ol/aantaj,” contribute, to other households in a conscious cooperative manner. Their consciousness shows up in their capitalistic endeavors within their reciprocity, “baatanba,” based traditions. Their give-and-receive reciprocation not only shows up within household-to-household social affairs, including the building and maintenance of their houses, but at the village level at large. Comprehending Maya structural reciprocity is crucial to understanding what underpins their individual action as well as their household-to-village-to-household framework. Understanding this reciprocal Maya cosmovision helps us comprehend how “conscious capitalism,” to call it that, type of mixed economic tasks can function within their villages. A structural reciprocity framework remains, then, within conservative Maya villages; however, the temporal demands on migrant laborers, usually the time not being at home, is causing this system to be less conspicuous. Farming and house building, and their structural maintenance, is not always done in concert with kin and neighbors anymore. Where reciprocity remains visible is in the sponsorship of festivities that, ironically, the villagers’ capitalistic endeavors and/or wage work monies are helping assist. To ignore how entrepreneurial enterprise can sometimes help Indigenous traditions survive is to misconstrue their on the ground complexity. The Maya example above is not rare as the same applies across the world to the Taiwanese Truku. Per Lin (2011, 42), migrant labor earnings are now “the basic mechanism by which Truku people maintain kin [and] social relations in their ‘home’ society… [Within] capitalization, human beings create or reinforce [their] social and economic hierarchies.” Similar to the Truku, Maya reciprocation practices are set upon “kuuch” which is a rotated social load. Kuuch entails the Maya concept of “ku’ub” as referring to something being offered by someone who carries a socially prescribed burden. Both kuuch and ku’ub have Maya cosmological underpinnings in which a complex process of communication with invisible ancestral beings comes into play. The Maya are beholden, through performative acts of reciprocation, to ancestral entities to which they ceremonially offer food and drink (Astor-Aguilera 2010). Migrant labor and capitalistic endeavors, once assumed as being detrimental to native customs, are curiously sustaining traditional practices. Most village level political-economical decisions were/are deliberated amongst elders, along with their immediate families; however, this is rapidly changing whereby migrant workers are seeking a stronger voice within their communities in exchange, albeit usually not mentioned, for monetary redistribution within their community festivities. As

408

M. Astor-Aguilera

most Indigenous households do not produce large surplus amounts of their subsistence needs (Claessen and van de Velde 1991), a mixed economy, as a manner to compensate, is offering some form of resilience, rather than total destruction, to Quintana Roo traditional Maya households. The Maya are not aware of Carnegie’s (1900) Gospel of Wealth, which preceded the coining of conscious capitalism; however, there are commonalities with his mode of redistributing wealth and Maya traditional practice. This includes a dislike, if perhaps nominal, of amassing conspicuous luxury in order to re-circulate surplus so as to support a community wide holistic “greater good” (ibid). In the early 2000s, Maya village women began to migrate to tourist work sites. Both men, but especially women, are received with fanfare back in the village upon their weeklong, or sometimes two week, absence. Both migrant men and women negotiate with their employers, in Maya reciprocation style manner, when it comes to time required off work. Tourist site bosses, who are usually not ethnic Maya, are sometimes invited to the village and arrive with their employee in tow free of charge. The Maya invite their work supervisors to observe traditional festivities and/or participate in adaptations of Western style weddings and/or debutante parties when daughters and nieces turn fifteen years old. As Friedman (1999) and Ayers (2004) argue, for other Indigenous cases engaged in world-systems, although the Maya increasingly live in a global world, the degrees to which they are globalized varies. Kuokkanen (2011, 286) argues, while variously contradicting herself, that there is an inherent incompatibility between free-market ideologies and Indigenous self-­ determination. This difference, she states, is rooted in “the deep-seated ontological differences between neoliberal ideologies and Indigenous philosophies based on a close interaction with the land emphasizing individual and collective responsibilities.” Understood; however, must we essentialize the situation as being so binary extreme? If so, what does one make, then, of Kuokkanen’s (ibid, 280) admittance that, this is “not to suggest that Indigenous peoples did not trade with one another or have trading relations prior to colonization. Nor is it to say that trade and trading practices with settlers and other colonists always resulted in the obliteration of economic and political autonomy of Indigenous communities.” Kuokkanen (2011, 289) further admits, referencing Rude and Deiter (2004) and also Slowey (2008), that, “First Nations communities are often divided about the issue of resource development on their territory and partnerships with corporations.” The purpose is not single out Kuokkanen, but to explain how academic contradictions like this do not serve Indigenous people very well since there is a great complexity here that cannot be reduced to either/or scenarios. As Kuokkanen (ibid, 291) herself concludes, Indigenous “history is much more complex than a dialectic of development and underdevelopment… I do not suggest that the conventional economic development approach should be entirely rejected in pursuing greater self-reliance for Indigenous communities. Instead, I argue that there is a need for a broader and more critical approach which includes a historical understanding.”

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

409

21.5 Hybrid Indigenous American Conscious Capitalisms Lin (2011, 35) notes that reciprocation based acts for the Taiwanese Truku entails that even a gifted portion of pork is kept track of and said reception is then held as debt. As he elaborates, all participants “hold positions of both creditor and debtor [who] must reciprocate by fulfilling parallel obligations [as] represented in the exchange of pork and labor. While fulfilling existing exchange relations, both guests and hosts shape new [ritual or ceremony] obligations in labor and pork distribution.” We need models embedded with Indigenous perceptions of the role their traditional economies, as based on household subsistence production, fare within and outside villages. In proposing a new model, this chapter addressed five questions concerning conscious capitalism as best adapted to the Indigenous Maya region. Considering the pre-Columbian, the historical, and the modern data presented earlier within this chapter, each question is briefly addressed in the following.

21.5.1 Are Conscious Capitalism Higher Purposes Consistent with Maya Religious/Spiritual Perspectives? Mackey and Sisodia (2013a, b) state that capitalism can be more than just profit oriented. Their ideas pertain to the industrialized world; however, how, does their best business model, as aligned with their higher purpose principles align, or not, with their goal of being in harmony with nature? Mackey and Sisodia strive for business practices to be in environmental harmony. This seems partly derived from an assumed worldwide Indigenous practice. Indigeneity driven trade, stemming from traditional values, interlink yet vary somewhat from conscious capitalism characteristics. Karl Marx (1887, 51) supposed that Indigenous tribes exhibited simplistic trade production. Tribal people, per Marx and Engels (1965, 33), were gatherers, hunters, and fisherman that might occasionally rear animals and conduct basic agriculture. Marx’ view (1887, 51) was that tribal production would eventually cease to exist along with the people practicing it (Simon 2011, 6). Silko (1977, 1991, 2010), an American literary poet and novelist, implies that Indigenous traditions and Marxism cannot be aligned since Marxist policies, like capitalism, exploit earth’s resources. Hipwell (2004, 370) similarly argues that both capitalism and socialism, attributing an overarching system of “Industria” to both, not only destroy Earth but also the Indigenous human spirit which, he claims, erroneously, did not have elites prior to European colonization. Archaeological and historical records indicate that many Indigenous American societies, North to Central to South America, had chiefs and that larger more sedentary populations, living in large pre-capitalistic towns and cities, had, to varying degrees, elite local administrators, governors, and rulers (Conrad and Demarest 1984; Farriss 1984; Hammond and Willey 1979; Lekson 2006; Patterson 1992;

410

M. Astor-Aguilera

Pauketat 2009; Pollard 1993; Pohl 2005; Sharer 1994; Warren 1985). Teale’s (1998) claim that to Indigenous peoples the Earth is sacred and, therefore, should not to be used in utilitarian manner is presumptuous and cross-disciplinary data contradictory. The homogenizing agenda within this polar romantic argument is that Marxism and capitalism are secularprofane while all Indigenous production is primordial sacral. Sacred and profane dichotomies are atypical of monolingual Indigenous Americans least acculturated to Christian theology (Astor-Aguilera 2010). A polar dissonance often stems from part-native Western raised individuals who, like Silko (with a Bachelor of Arts degree and having attended law school), were not entirely reared within an Indigenous tradition. Many live/lived on the fringe with rarely, if ever, participating in conservative Indigenous rituals which they, then, claim to comprehend and, further, doing so while often not being able to fluently speak the native language of which concepts they claim to understand and, therefore, represent.

21.5.2 Can Maya Spiritualities Contribute to the Existential Quest for Meaning in Modern Capitalistic Driven Life? Many Maya attest that their local Indigenous economies extend beyond a simple livelihood and that their ancestors ancient kinship structures, which they strive to maintain, is crucial to their present day social organization. Indigenous systems, as local structures based on culturally embedded values and way of knowing the world, should be considered within conscious capitalistic endeavors. For Indigenous peoples, all is one and related to as a whole instead of independent parts (Kuokkanen 2011, 278). A take away from conscious capitalism to the Maya, refers to ensuring that their spiritual value system controls prestige and profit in order to further kinship alliances which in turn ensure the cultural continuance of their communities. Indigenous conscious capitalism is an ongoing social experiment that can potentially lead to empowerment by permitting people to actively negotiate, rather than simply being cast as the passive recipients of oppressive laissez-faire capitalistic marketing, where profit making takes a free and non-interfered course. As noted previously, the Maya incorporate their tourist site bosses, who usually wind up pitching in economically, in the observance and/or participation of Maya village festivities. Their practice is in accord with Indigenous holistic kinship relations and fits, this author argues, into a capitalism with a heart or, in this case, a conscience that bears the marks of what conscious capitalistic movements aspire to in terms of social relations. Whether Western conscious capitalism actions are genuinely altruistic or are deployed to depict a positive public brand image is debatable; however, the same applies to the Maya. For the Maya, whatever favor is distributed has to be repaid through performative debt-and-merit based reciprocation.

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

411

21.5.3 Conscious Capitalism Implies That Its Leaders Can Move Beyond Self-Interest. Can Conscious Capitalistic Empathy Approximate the Reciprocity Exhibited Within Maya Spirituality? According to Wallerstein (2002), there is a structural crisis brewing within the modern world-system and this situation is prodding capitalism into a transitional period. Within this transition, it is not understood what form capitalism will eventually take; however, Mackey and Sisodia (2013b) and Sisodia et al. (2018) are pushing toward conscious capitalism being a stronger factor in the new direction for the world-system. Sisodia and Gelb (2019) stress that the modern approach to capitalism is no longer viable and that capitalist businesses are at an inflection period where a “conscience of business” must lead toward healing the current world crisis. Forsythe (2022) adds that we can, in our transition toward a conscious capitalism composed of how a conscious business can help “design a conscious culture” and strive for an “emotional and spiritual intelligence.” Conscious capitalism can try to approximate the reciprocity exhibited within Indigenous spirituality, such as that of the Maya; however, it is not clear whether the move toward establishing a conscious management, as led by Western “conscious leadership,” actually forms a society composed of a “conscious culture.” The suggested move toward a conscious leadership may be, after all, slogans and catch phrases composed of feel good tips, tricks, and techniques. The argument for the good and highest potential in capitalism and business might be, then, simply to advance toward a less guilt-ridden modern Western world-system.

21.5.4 Is Conscious Capitalism Consistent with Traditional Maya Leadership? An apparent oxymoron is assumed between the tendencies of Indigenous Maya leaders to seek out capitalistic entrepreneurial opportunities within and outside their home villages. The underlying question is whether market economies are a detrimental force in present Indigenous Maya society; that is, if global capitalism based markets have played a role in the loss of economic and political autonomy of collective Indigenous societies or is it blunted by socially conscious actions on the part of Indigenous leadership? Researchers, working on Indigenous peoples, have a tendency to ignore native causation and volition and typically divide themselves within oppositional theoretical schools where proponents claim precedence for their particular causal paradigm. We need, therefore, to develop fine-grained archaeological, historical, and ethnographic, hopefully immersed, contextual understandings of individual Indigenous agency.

412

M. Astor-Aguilera

Individual achievement was not ignored in the pre-European contact Americas. Accomplishments were celebrated and provided leadership legitimation for the political construction of homeland boundary strategies, as set against neighboring communities and, as exhibited by most, if not all, ancient Indigenous Americans (Blanton et al. 1992, 423–424). Any social theory capable of truly comprehending holistic Indigenous social histories, ancient to present, must account for both individual and group actions, as privately and public displayed, as well, and perhaps more importantly, their interactions and inherent contradictions. After five centuries of European colonialism and nation-state imperialism, the Maya are almost, yet not completely, caught within the Mexican federal capitalistic system (for a general perspective on Indigenous peoples and capitalism, see Bodley 2008). Indigenous Americans, including the Maya, have stereotypically been cast as victim icons set against Western capitalism. This motif, of the helpless Indian, however, ironically denigrates Indigenous Americans by relieving them of agency and any conscious action not befitting the well-intentioned “noble savage.” Immersed ethnographic fieldwork, this author argues, contributes to a better and more nuanced understanding of not only Maya economic views but that of Indigenous peoples as a whole. Money earned from wage work, earned in conscious capitalistic manner, does not seem alienating to the Maya; to the contrary, these monies have become an adapted mechanism for the continuance of conservative village rituals and ceremonies that help maintain traditional social relations. Conscious capitalism, then, has the potential to empower the Maya, Indigenous Americans at large, and Indigenous populations worldwide. Non-agenda laden archaeological and historical analyses need also be taken into account, when considering our models in relation to contemporary Indigenous economic development. Holistic scholarship contributes to a better critical comprehension of the socially embedded cultural dynamics at play within Indigenous local economic decisions. Elias (1995) and Aslaksen et al. (2008), for example, point to the continued tenacity of Indigenous subsistence level and/or mixed economic practices. The Maya are no exception to this and want to strengthen their Indigenous economies with a significant continuance of subsistence-based village activities anchored at, and around, household production. At the same time, however, they are aware that Mexican businesses and their corporate partnerships with local, state and federal governments, have improved their living conditions. Teixeira and Iyall Smith (2008: 23), note that, “anti-systemic [Maya] movements are working within the state and international systems while attempting to shape an alternate framework for attaining political power.” The Maya want wage work and do not often oppose capitalistic endeavors; however, they do typically insist that these projects have a “puksi’ik’al,” heart, that is, a conscience, and this is where conscious capitalism can contribute. Indigenous knowledge, and its inherent social values, are often, but not always, present in  local economic development within Maya villages. Indigenous endeavors linked to ancestral practices can be used for modern principles of conservation and sustainability as per Newhouse’s (1993) so-­ called “capitalism with an Aboriginal face.” A Maya strategy here, however, rather than a focus on something being sustainable, is best contextualized by what they

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

413

term “ya’ab u ya’abtal ba’alo’ob,” that is, “an abundant growing/reproducing/flourishing of things.” The Maya, in direct contradiction to Western romanticism, both need and want things and economic endeavors fulfill those needs.

21.5.5 Is Conscious Capitalism Complimentary to Indigenous Worldviews and Practical to Implement? Despite archaeological, historical, and ethnographic data, we tend to romanticize the “primitive” and ignore evidence that Indigenous people are, after all, people. Various Native Americans run large casino resorts and it is insulting for us to conclude that they do so only because they have degenerated and lost their way from their days as primordial sacred keepers of holy traditions. We often choose to ignore the complexity of Indigenous American thought and agency. A survey of Indigenous American behaviors provides a complex non-monolithic picture. Telling is that some Native Americans sometimes hitch their futures on what seem odd political allies. One such connection is to ex-President Donald Trump. Various First Nation leaders from the Choctaw and Muscogee Creek (Oklahoma), the Diné-Navajo (Arizona and New Mexico), the Mashpee Wampanoag (Massachusetts), and the Tliglit-Haida (Alaska), for example, voiced their enthusiastic support for Trump’s policies (Taylor 2017). Not lost on the First Nations are Trump’s various massive casino resorts and his ties to Markwayne Mullin who is a Cherokee tribe member, a five-term Oklahoma Congressman, and was co-chair of Trump’s Native American Affairs Coalition (Brewer 2019; Marcelo 2017). Trump is an avid golfer and golf parks use up much land and water in what could hardly be claimed to be sustainable practice and, yet, various Native Americans visited the White House during his tenure as President. Further, during the Native Americans’ White House visits with then President Trump, they posed with him in the Oval Office in front of Andrew Jackson’s portrait (Glasser 2018; Grier 2017; Rosenberg 2017). Andrew Jackson being in large part responsible, as seventh United States President, for the Indian Removal Act of 1830. This infamous “trail of tears” Native American relocation left approximately four thousand Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek, Seminole, and Cherokee dead during its arduous military operation (Cave 2003; Ehle 2011, 390–392; Grant 1972; Inskeep 2015; Prucha 1995; Wallace 1993 [1923]). Internal differences, what to us appear as contradictions, are what “gives rise to multiple voices” within each Indigenous community. Individual multiplicities of opinion and behaviors to us appear as inconsistent views and actions; however, this is dependent on the local context within which the individual lives and this has an impact on whether he/she chooses to endeavor in enterprising and, if so, how to do so (Vakkayil 2017, 411). Per Vakkayil (ibid), people “vary between stances along different themes [and] articulations” and recognizing this allows us to see how not straight-forward Indigenous “agency operates within structural constraints and

414

M. Astor-Aguilera

historical contingencies.” Due to its complexity, Graham and Penny (2014) stress Indigenous performative actions and how they link and unlink themselves to capitalistic ventures. Indigeneity, and adapted Indigenous authenticity, including that of the Maya, is enacted through performative actions (Srinivas 2012). Indigenous “authenticity” is performative since cultural meanings and their social forms are “made, unmade, and remade” according to each community’s shared selective individual memories (Clifford 2001, 79). Indigenous capitalisms, per Bunten (2011, 61), revolve around native practices, anchored on an epistemology of “shared consciousness of a moral economy,” and this is related to accumulation, wealth, and its distribution. Within expanding global capitalism, the Maya, like other Indigenous populations have the choice to opt-out and, yet, many choose to opt-in. In their choice to opt-in, many Indigenous people attempt to adapt capitalism in manners aimed to transform it to suit their local customs and values (Anderson et al. 2006). Although we often ignore data that create doubt within our analyses, Indigenous peoples variously opt-in, opt-out, and opt-in again, etc., of Western capital building opportunities (Vakkayil 2017, 410). The Maya do not have to be either just caretakers of their traditions, as we like to caricature them, or solely become conscious capitalists since they can simultaneously do both. When it comes to political economy, Indigenous American societies are dynamic, multifaceted, and complex (Cattelino 2008, 2010; Champagne 2007). The Maya reject that state and corporate partnerships with their villages have not improved their day-to-day lives (similar to Perkins 2010). The Maya, like other Indigenous populations, are not just pawns within world-systems: they are subjects, rather than objects, who incorporate mixed economies within local, state, and federal capitalisms, in a conscious self-determined manner that can contribute, as they, rather than we, see fit. Maya forms of conscious-like capitalisms are anchored on ancient forms of accumulation and reciprocation based distribution. Maya style conscious capitalism is distinguished by a consciousness transformed from colonial and imperialistic Western economic relations while retaining some of their native values as articulated within modified capitalist sponsored goals. Herein, then, are the dual possibilities of self-determination and subsumption as facilitated by and fused by newly found economic capital. The compromised differentiation, between non-Indigenous conscious capitalism and its adapted Indigenous Maya form, is that Indigenous mixed economies remain embedded, as much as possible, within a Mesoamerican values structural template that includes contribution to village life as sustained through its rituals and ceremonies. The Maya, since the European conquest, have been in continuous cultural dialectic; first with the Spanish Empire and then with the Mexican nation-state. The Maya have somewhat retained their internal class systems and with it concepts related to wealth accumulation and its redistribution. Bunten (2011, 65) refers to modern native political economies as alternative forms of capitalism that she terms Indigenous capitalisms. We need to, then, challenge popular notions concerning Indigenous people and not uncritically follow reified assumptions (Astor-Aguilera 2010; Bunten 2011:69). Challenging existing stereotypes, both academic and popular, and having great implications for how Indigenous people actually practice their

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

415

day-to-day living, there is an articulation, “concerning indigeneity at the intersection of the discourses/structures of capitalism and pre-capitalist structures” (Vakkayil 2017, 409). Individual households can retain great autonomy and control over their deployment of labor (Wolf 1990). Monies earned by Maya communities can be utilized, in conscious capitalism style, to meet village cultural activity needs such as, for example, the maintenance of traditional rituals and ceremonies. A common binary either/ or assumption is that by embracing various forms of capitalisms, Indigenous peoples “will have lost something inherently ‘Indigenous’” where “success comes at the cost of internal colonization” (Bunten 2011, 67). Per Vakkayil (2017, 409), however, Indigenous people should not “be caricatured as engaging in unanimous…resistance to the forces of capitalist integration through collective struggles to preserve traditional elements… [Instead,] the dynamics of that articulation results in complex formations rather than the binary possibilities of pure resistance or total integration.”

21.6 Conclusion Scholarship needs to attend to the various spheres of Indigenous lives as related to their subsistence based traditional economies (Bunten 2011, 69). Within their capitalistic transition, in striving to retain native worldviews, First Nations are navigating internal questions while embracing a conscious type of capitalism from which may result an increase in their national and international voice (Teixeira and Iyall Smith 2008, 30). Indigenous populations, like the Maya, are neither completely overwhelmed by capitalism nor fully autonomous within it. As a compliment to Mackey and Sisodia’s (2013) higher principles, an Indigenous perspective, per the Maya within this chapter, can be influential toward the current world-system (see Teixeira and Iyall Smith 2008, 46). This chapter shed light on the complexity that is often glossed over, if not outright ignored, on Indigenous American pre-European contact to contemporary economic practices. A critical approach to understanding Indigenous American economies is required. An approach that includes how actual Indigenous actors perceive their actions, rather than how we would like them to be, within local, state, national, and global economic endeavors. The Maya feel that they need to be allowed to engage in trade extending outward from their village communities and this chapter seeks an approach to better contextualize and comprehend indigeneity articulated enterprising ventures by asking whether it is contradictory for Maya entrepreneurs, as a sort of internal colonization, to integrate themselves within conscious capitalism. In their alternating relationship to their environment, their culture, and their cosmological traditions, the Maya, just like other Indigenous Mesoamericans, are justified in freely pursuing self-determination as related to their social cultural practices and any political economic status and development. In their articulation with an

416

M. Astor-Aguilera

evolving conscious capitalism, Maya villagers, as similar to other Indigenous Americans, North to South, can be simultaneously willing partners and active resisters. Being all too human, the Maya can at the same time resist, be ambivalent to, and/or align themselves with conscious capitalism. Any polar binary economic issues are ours and not theirs.

References Abu-Lughod, Janet. 1989. Before European Hegemony: World-System A.D. 1250–1350. New York: Oxford University Press. Albert, Michael, and Robin Hahnel. 1990. Participatory Economics for Twenty First Century. Boston: South End. Alexander, Rani. 1996. Emerging World System and Colonial Yucatan. Journal of World-Systems Research 2 (1): 291–321. ———. 2008. Macroregional Systems Theory in Mesoamerica. Journal of Anthropological Research 64 (3): 383–394. Anaya, James. 1996. Indigenous Peoples in International Law. New York: Oxford University Press. Anderson, M. Kat. 2005. Native American Knowledge and Management of California’s Natural Resources. Berkeley: University of California Press. Anderson, Robert, Léo-Paul Dana, and Teresa Dana. 2006. Indigenous Land Rights, Entrepreneurship, and Economic Development: ‘Opting-in’ to the Global Economy. Journal of World Business 41 (1): 45–55. Asad, Talal. 1993. Genealogies of Religion. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Aslaksen, Julie, Winfried Dallman, Davin Holen, Even Høydahl, Jack Kruse, Birger Poppel, Mary Stapleton, and Ellen Inga Turi. 2008. Interdependency of Subsistence and Market Economies. In Economy of the North, ed. Solveig Glomsrad and Julie Aslaksen, 75–98. Oslo: Statistics Norway. Astor-Aguilera, Miguel. 2010. Maya World of Communicating Objects. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. ———. 2016. Latin American Indigenous Cosmovisions. In Religion and Ecology, ed. John Grim, Willis Jenkins, and Mary Tucker, 158–168. New York: Routledge. ———. 2020. Maya Rites, Rituals, and Ceremonies. In Maya World, ed. Scott Hutson and Traci Ardren, 648–668. New York: Routledge. ———. 2021. La visión mesoamericana. Contemporánea 7 (14): 1–18. Ayres, Jeffrey. 2004. Framing Collective Action Against Neoliberalism: ‘Anti-Globalization Movement’. Journal of World-Systems Research 10: 11–34. Bergman, John. 1969. Distribution of Cacao in Pre-Columbian America. Association of American Geographers 59: 85–96. Binford, Lewis. 1978. Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. New York: Academic. ———. 1983. Pursuit of the Past. New York: Thames and Hudson. Blanton, Richard, and Gary Feinman. 1984. Mesoamerican World System. American Anthropologist 86 (3): 673–682. Blanton, Richard, Stephen Kowalewski, and Gary Feinman. 1992. Mesoamerican World-System. Review 15 (3): 419–426. Bodley, John. 2008. Victims of Progress. Lanham: Altamira. Brading, David, and Harry Cross. 1985. Colonial Silver Mining in Mexico and Peru. In Formative Centuries in Latin America, 1, ed. John Johnson, Peter Bakewell, and Meredith Dodge, 129–156. Durham: Duke University Press. Braudel, Fernand. 1984. Civilization and Capitalism 15th-18th Century, III. London: Collins.

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

417

Brewer, Graham. 2019. Cherokee Congressman is for Trump—and Indian Country. High Country, December 9. https://www.hcn.org/issues/51.21-­22/indigenous-­affairs-­this-­cherokee­congressman-­is-­for-­trump-­and-­indian-­country Bunten, Alexis. 2011. Indigenous Capitalisms. Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry 5 (1): 60–71. C.I.A. 2015. World Factbook of Central Intelligence Agency. Virginia: Langley. Carnegie, Andrew. 1900. Gospel of Wealth. New York: De Vinne. Cattelino, Jessica. 2008. Florida Gaming and Sovereignty. Durham: Duke University Press. ———. 2010. Double Bind of American Indian Need-Based Sovereignty. Cultural Anthropology 25 (2): 235–262. Cave, Alfred. 2003. Andrew Jackson and Indian Removal Act of 1830. Historian 65 (6): 1330–1353. Champagne, Duane. 2007. Social Change and Cultural Continuity Among Native Nations. Plymouth: Alta Mira. Claessen, Henri, and Pieter van de Velde. 1991. Introduction. In Early State Economics, ed. Henri Claessen and Pieter van de Velde, 1–29. New Brunswick: Transaction. Clayton, Lawrence. 1985. Trade and Navigation in Seventeenth-Century Viceroyalty of Peru. In Formative Centuries in Latin America, 1, ed. John Johnson, Peter Bakewell, and Meredith Dodge, 174–191. Durham: Duke University Press. Clifford, James. 1997 [1994]. Diasporas. In Ethnicity: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Migration, ed. Montserrat Guibernau and John Rex, 283–290. Cambridge: Polity. ———. 2001. Indigenous Articulations. Contemporary Pacific 13 (2): 467–490. Cline, Howard. 1950. Early Nineteenth Century Yucatecan Social History. In Middle American Cultural Anthropology, 32. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Conrad, Geoffrey, and Arthur Demarest. 1984. Religion and Empire: Dynamics of Aztec and Inca Expansionism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cook, Scott, and Leigh Binford. 1990. Rural Petty Industry in Mexican Capitalism. Austin: University of Texas Press. Corntassel, Jeff. 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethnonationalist Approaches Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 9: 75–100. Drennan, Robert, Philip Fitzgibbons, and Heinz Dehn. 1990. Import and Exports in Classic Mesoamerican Political Economy. In Economic Aspects of Prehispanic Highland Mexico, ed. Barry Isaac, 23–74. Greenwich: JAI Press. Dumond, Don. 1997. Machete and the Cross. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Ehle, John. 2011. Trail of Tears: Rise and Fall of Cherokee Nation. New York: Knopf Doubleday. Elias, Peter. 1995. Northern Economies. In Northern Aboriginal Communities: Economics and Development, ed. Peter Elias, 3–31. New York: Captus University Press. Farriss, Nancy. 1984. Maya Society Under Colonial Rule. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ———. 1986. Indians in Colonial Northern Yucatan. In Ethnohistory, 4, ed. Ronald Spores, 88–102. Austin: University of Texas Press. Forsythe, DeLinda. 2022. Inspiring Generational Leadership: Guide to Design a Conscious Culture. New York: Morgan James. Foucault, Michel. 1970 [1966]. Order of Things: Archaeology of Human Sciences. New  York: Pantheon. ———. 1972 [1969]. Archaeology of Knowledge and Discourse on Language. New  York: Pantheon. Frank, Andre. 1978. World Accumulation, 1492–1789. New York: Monthly Review. Friedman, Jonathan. 1999. Indigenous Struggles and Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie. Journal of World-Systems Research 5: 391–411. Giddens, Anthony. 1994 [1985]. Nation as Power-Container. In Nationalism, ed. John Hutchinson and Anthony Smith, 34–35. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Glasser, Susan. 2018. Man Who Put Andrew Jackson in Trump’s Oval Office. In Global Politico. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/22/andrew-­jackson-­donald-­trump-­216493/

418

M. Astor-Aguilera

Graham, Laura, and Glenn Penny. 2014. Performing Indigeneity: Global Histories and Contemporary Experiences. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Granado Baeza, Bartólome. 1845. Informe: Cura de Yaxcabá, Rcgistro Yucatcco, 1. Mérida: INAH Centro Regional Yucatán. Grann, David. 2017. Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage. New York: Double Day. Grant, Foreman. 1972. Indian Removal: The Emigration of the Five Civilized Tribes of Indians. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Graziano, Luigi. 1975. Conceptual Framework for Study of Clientalism. Ithaca: Cornell Center for International Studies. Grier, Peter. 2017. Trump’s Andrew Jackson Portrait. In Christian Science Monitor. https:// www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2017/0209/The-­semi-­secret-­history-­of-­Trump-­s­Andrew-­Jackson-­portrait Guibernau, Montserrat. 1999. Nations Without States: Political Communities in Global Age. Cambridge: Polity. Hahnel, Robin, and Michael Albert. 1991. Quiet Revolution In Welfare Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Hammond, Norman, and Gordon Willey, eds. 1979. Maya Archaeology and Ethnohistory. Austin: University of Texas Press. Harmon, Alexandra. 2010. Rich Indians: Native People and Wealth. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Hayden, Brian, and Rob Gargett. 1990. Mesoamerican Emergence of Complex Society. Ancient Mesoamerica 1: 3–20. Hipwell, William. 2004. Deleuzian Critique of Resource-use Management Politics in Industria. Canadian Geographer 48 (3): 356–377. Hirth, Kenneth. 1993. Household as Analytical Unit. In Prehispanic Domestic Units, ed. Robert Santley and Kenneth Hirth, 21–36. Boca Raton: CRC. Hosler, Dorothy. 1988. Ancient West Mexican Metallurgy: South and Central American Origins. American Anthropologist 90 (4): 832–855. Inskeep, Steve. 2015. Jackson, Cherokee Chief John Ross, and a Great American Land Grab. New York: Penguin. Iyall Smith, Keri. 2006. The State and Indigenous Movements. New York: Routledge. Krech, Shepard. 1999. Ecological Indian: Myth and History. New York: Norton. Kuokkanen, Rauna. 2011. Indigenous Economies to Market-Based Self-Governance. Canadian Journal of Political Science 44 (2): 275–297. LaDuke, Winona. 1999. Native Struggles for Land and Life. Boston: South End. Lekson, Stephen. 2006. Chaco Canyon: Eleventh Century Pueblo Regional Center. Santa Fe: School of American Research. Lin, Ching-Hsiu. 2011. Circulation of Labour and Money: Monetary Kinship Practices. Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry 5 (1): 27–44. Little, Peter. 1987. Domestic Production and Regional Markets. American Ethnologist 14: 295–308. Mackey, John and Raj Sisodia. 2013a. Conscious Capitalism Is Not an Oxymoron. Harvard Business Review, January 14. https://hbr.org/2013/01/cultivating-­a-­higher-­conscious Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013b. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Brighton: Harvard Business Review. Marcelo, Philip. 2017. Tribes Hope Trump’s ‘America First’ Helps First Americans. In St. Louis Post-Dispatch. https://www.stltoday.com/business/local/tribes-­hope-­trumps-­america-­first-­ helps-­first-­americans/article51bd8699-­fdd8-­5811-­8a1b-­4a89d0b4f892.html Marx, Karl. 1887 [1867]. Capital: Critique of Political Economy, I. Moscow: Progress. ———. 1964 [1952]. Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations. New York: International. Marx, Karl, and Frederick Engels. 1965 [1846]. German Ideology. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Masson, Marilyn, and David Freidel. 2012. Classic Maya Market Exchange. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 31: 455–484.

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

419

McAlister, Lyle. 1984. Spain and Portugal in the New World, 1492–1700. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Netting, Robert. 1993. Householders: Farm Families and Ecology of Intensive Sustainable Agriculture. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Newhouse, David. 1993. Modern Aboriginal Economics: Capitalism with Aboriginal Face. In Sharing the Harvest: Road to Self-Reliance. Ottawa: Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Pailes, Richard, and Joseph Whitecotton. 1979. Greater Southwest and Mesoamerican ‘World System’. In Frontier Comparative Studies, ed. William Savage and Stephen Thompson, 105–121. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Patch, Robert. 1985. Agrarian Change in Eighteenth-Century Yucatan. Hispanic American Historical Review 65 (1): 21–49. ———. 1993. Maya and Spaniard in Yucatan. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Patterson, Thomas. 1992. Inca Empire: Formation and Disintegration of a Pre-Capitalist State. Oxford: Berg. Pauketat, Timothy. 2009. Cahokia: Ancient America’s Great City. New York: Viking. Perkins, Tara. 2010. First Nations, CEOs Signal New Era. In Toronto Globe, January 19. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-­on-­business/first-­nations-­ceos-­signal-­new-­era/ article1207833/ Pohl, John. 2005. Aztecs and Conquistadores: Spanish Invasion. Oxford: Osprey. Pollard, Helen. 1993. Taríacuri’s Legacy: Prehispanic Tarascan State. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Poole, Ross. 2000. Justice or Appropriation? Indigenous Claims and Liberal Theory. Radical Philosophy 101: 5–17. Price, Barbara. 1986. Teotihuacan as World-System: Applicability of Wallerstein’s Model. In Origen y formación del estado en Mesoamerica, ed. Andrés Medina, Alfredo López Austin, and Mari Carmen Serra Puche, 169–194. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Prucha, Francis. 1995. Great Father: United States Government and American Indians. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Reed, Nelson. 1964. Caste War of Yucatán. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Ringrose, David. 1983. Madrid and Spanish Economy, 1560–1850. Berkeley: University of California Press. Robinson, William. 2004. Global Capitalism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Rosenberg, Eli. 2017. Andrew Jackson ‘Indian killer.’ Trump honored Navajos in front of portrait. In Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/11/28/ andrew-­jackson-­was-­called-­indian-­killer-­trump-­honored-­navajos-­in-­front-­of-­his-­portrait/ Rude, Darlene, and Connie Deiter. 2004. Fur Trade to Free Trade: Forestry and First Nations. Ottawa: Status of Women Canada. Rugeley, Terry. 1996. Yucatán’s Maya Peasantry and Origins of Caste War. Austin: University of Texas Press. Santley, Robert. 1983. Obsidian Trade in Mesoamerica. In Highland-Lowland Interaction in Mesoamerica, ed. Arthur Miller, 69–124. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks. Schneider, Jane. 1977. Pre-Capitalist World-System? Peasant Studies 6: 20–29. Schortman, Edward, and Patricia Urban. 1987. Interregional Interaction in Prehistory. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, XI, ed. Michael Schiffer, 37–95. San Diego: Academic. Schweickart, David. 2006. Nonsense on Stilts: A Parecon Critique. In Postcapitalism, http://postcapitalisme.ch/non-­sense-­on-­stilts-­schweickart-­parecon-­critiques/ Sharer, Robert. 1994. Ancient Maya. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Silko, Leslie. 1977. Ceremony. New York: Viking. ———. 1991. Almanac of the Dead. New York: Simon and Schuster. ———. 1997. Yellow Woman and Beauty of Spirit: Native American Life. New York: Simon and Schuster. ———. 2010. Turquoise Ledge. New York: Viking.

420

M. Astor-Aguilera

Simon, Scott. 2011. Introduction: Indigenous Peoples, Marxism and Late Capitalism. Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry 5 (1): 6–9. Sisodia, Raj, and Michael Gelb. 2019. The Healing Organization. Awakening the Conscience of Business to Save the World. New York: HarperCollins. Sisodia, Raj, Timothy Henry, and Thomas Eckschmidt. 2018. Conscious Capitalism: Tools for Transforming Your Organization. Brighton: Harvard Business Review. Skinner, William. 1977. Regional Urbanization in Nineteenth-Century China. In City in Late Imperial China, ed. William Skinner, 211–249. Stanford: University of Stanford Press. Slowey, Gabrielle. 2008. Navigating Neoliberalism: Self-Determination and the Mikisew Cree First Nation. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Smith, Michael, and Frances Berdan. 2000. Postclassic Mesoamerican World-System. Current Anthropology 41 (2): 283–286. Smith, Joan, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Hans-Dieter Evers, eds. 1984. Households and World Economy. London: Sage. Spannos, Chris, ed. 2008. Utopia: Participatory Society for 21st Century. Oakland: AK. Srinivas, Nidhi. 2012. Epistemic and Performative Quests for Authentic Management. Organization 19 (2): 145–158. Tallbear, Kimberly. 2000. Shepard Krech’s Ecological Indian: One Indian’s Perspective. Ecological Indian Review, September:1–5. ———. 2002. Reviewed Work(s): All Our Relations: Native Struggles for Land and Life by Winona LaDuke. Wicazo Sa Review 17 (1): 234–242. Taylor, Melanie. 2017. Convenient Indian: How Activists Get Native Americans Wrong. In Los Angeles Review of Books, April. https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/ the-­convenient-­indian-­how-­liberals-­get-­native-­americans-­wrong/ Teale, Tamara. 1998. Silko Road from Chiapas, Why Native Americans Cannot Be Marxists. MELUS 23 (4): 157–166. Teixeira, Stephanie, and Keri Iyall Smith. 2008. Core and Periphery Relations: Case Study of the Maya. Journal of World-Systems Research 14 (1): 22–49. Trask, Haunani-Kay. 1999. Colonialism and Sovereignty. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Vakkayil, Jacob. 2017. Resistance and Integration: Working with Capitalism at Fringes. Management 20 (4): 394–417. Wallace, Anthony. 1993 [1923]. Long, Bitter Trail: Andrew Jackson and Indians. New York: Hill and Wang. Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974a. Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and Origins of European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic. ———. 1974b. Rise and Future Demise of World Capitalist System. Comparative Studies in Society and History 16: 387–415. ———. 1976. World-System Perspective on Social Sciences. British Journal of Sociology 27: 343–352. ———. 1984. Household Structures and Labor-Force Formation in Capitalist World-Economy. In Households and the World Economy, ed. Joan Smith, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Hans-Dieter Evers, 17–22. London: Sage. ———. 2002. New Revolts Against the System. New Left Review 18: 29–39. Wallerstein, Immanuel, and Joan Smith. 1992. Households as Institution of the World-Economy. In Creating and Transforming Households: Constraints of World-Economy, ed. Immanuel Wallerstein and Joan Smith, 3–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Warren, Benedict. 1985. Conquest of Michoacan: Spanish Domination of Tarascan Kingdom. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Weigand, Phil, and Gretchen Gwynne, eds. 1982. Mining and Mining Techniques in Ancient Mesoamerica. Stony Brook: State University of New York, Stony Brook. Weigand, Phil, Garman Harbottle, and Edward Sayre. 1977. Turquoise: Mesoamerica and Southwestern USA.  In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, ed. Timothy Earle and Jonathan Ericson, 15–34. New York: Academic.

21  The Maya and Conscious Capitalism: Indigenous American Integration…

421

Wilk, Richard. 1991. Household Ecology, Economic Change, and Domestic Life among the Kekchi Maya. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Wilk, Richard, and Robert Netting. 1984. Households: Changing Forms and Functions. In Households: Comparative and Historical Studies of’ the Domestic Group, ed. Robert Netting, Richard Wilk, and Eric Arnould, 1–28. Berkeley: University of California Press. Wilmer, Franke. 1997 [1993]. First USA Nations. In Ethnicity: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Migration, ed. Montserrat Guibernau and John Rex, 186–201. Cambridge: Polity. Wolf, Eric. 1990. Facing Power. American Anthropologist 92: 586–596. Miguel Astor-Aguilera is an Associate Professor at Arizona State University (USA). Trained in anthropology, his scholarship concentrates on ethnography, material culture, archaeology, and religious studies. He specializes in pre-­Columbian, colonial, and contemporary Mesoamerican traditions. Being an ethnographer, ethnohistorian, and archaeologist, his research is transdisciplinary and social historically holistic in method and theory. He was coeditor (with Graham Harvey) of Rethinking Relations and Animism. Personhood and Materiality (Routledge, 2020).  

Chapter 22

A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual Intelligence for Conscious Capitalism Gianni Zappalà

22.1 Introduction The aim of this chapter is to introduce the Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership (MPMCL). Conscious Leadership is a key pillar and tenet of Conscious Capitalism as expounded by John Mackey and Raj Sisodia (2014). The MPMCL is a systemic and holistic framework that provides a means to understand, communicate and teach Conscious Leadership across all levels of learning. Rooted in a participatory and transformative approach through the cultivation of Spiritual Intelligence (SQ), it is consistent with recent calls for business schools to develop curricula that deconstructs the traditional ‘identikit hero’ models of leadership and instead use ‘alternative pedagogies to encourage bespoke leadership competencies which can be adapted for individuality’ (Fleming et al. 2018, p. 606; Wiggins and Smallwood 2018). Spiritual Intelligence has no necessary connection with religion, but rather draws on what can be termed a biological or secular understanding of spirituality, seen as a unique and innately human trait that is physiologically determined which can have both secular and theist expressions (Walach 2017; Walton 2017; Zappalà 2009a).

G. Zappalà (*) Centre for Social Justice and Inclusion, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_22

423

424

G. Zappalà

According to its proponents, Conscious Capitalism constitutes a new ‘paradigm’1 of capitalism, which is not just another fad, but a ‘paradigm shift that’s here to stay’.2 More scholarly and critical accounts, however, suggest that the transformational potential of Conscious Capitalism rests largely on the qualities and abilities of leaders to act ethically and ‘consciously’ in situations where traditional entrenched systems of power relations occur (Fyke and Buzzanell 2013; O’Toole and Vogel 2011). In turn, greater ethical leadership may depend on a ‘paradigm shift’ occurring within business schools and leadership education more broadly (DeAngelis 2018; Heinzkill 2018). Indeed, a weakness in Mackey and Sisodia’s discussion of Conscious Leadership is the lack of a unifying pedagogical frame that ties it into the broader notion of Conscious Capitalism. Mackey and Sisodia (2014, p.182) also note that leadership is about embarking on the hero’s journey, which involves becoming more conscious, acting in ways that improve the wellbeing of others and the planet and then sharing that wisdom. Often left out of the traditional ‘hollow hero’ models of leadership (Fleming et al. 2018) however is a spiritual dimension and the Conscious Leader is in a sense a Spiritual Hero (Racionero 2018), for whom the archetypal Hero’s Journey envisioned by Joseph Campbell (1968) becomes in Jungian terms a road to individuation (Cavalli 2018). While spirituality as a concept and focus of study has made inroads in the leadership and management field over the last decade (Fry and Sadler Nisiewicz 2013; Giacalone and Jurkiewicz 2003; Neal 2018; Zappalà 2009a, 2009b), the concept of SQ has failed to capture the scholarly and popular imagination in the way achieved by Emotional Intelligence (Goleman 1995). Furthermore, SQ has made little headway into educational theory and pedagogy at a time when it should be critical for  Thomas Kuhn (1970) used the term paradigm in his account of how science and innovation progresses by means of revolutions rather than a rational linear process. A paradigm is more than just a single explanatory theory but more akin to a broader conceptual model or worldview that underpins and delineates how ‘normal science’ should proceed. A paradigm comprises a distinct set of concepts, ideas, theories, methodologies, as well as official arbiters of knowledge such as teachers, texts and pedagogies, which sustain and give it legitimacy. Although Kuhn used the term as an historian and philosopher of science using the Copernican revolution as his exemplar, ‘paradigm’ has become widely used in the social sciences to either describe the commonly accepted or mainstream approach to understanding a particular concept or to describe an alternate theory or model of that concept (Chalmers 1982; Tarnas 1993). 2  In a recent interview with Conscious Capitalism CEO Alexander McCobin, for example, he explicitly refers to Conscious Capitalism as a ‘new paradigm’ and points to evidence that a ‘paradigm shift’ is occurring in how business is operating. He states that, ‘as more and more people adopt this paradigm of (conscious) capitalism we will eventually reach a point where the term Conscious Capitalism is redundant. And that point may not be far off’ (Aziz 2019). In other words, conscious capitalism will become the new ‘normal’ mode for how capitalism operates. According to Kuhn, a paradigm shift occurs in scientific knowledge when the gradual accumulation of conflicting data leads to a crisis/revolution and a new synthesis emerges (which in turn becomes ‘normal science’) to explain a phenomenon or worldview. According to Kuhn, science (or knowledge) evolves not in any rational, linear manner towards an objective truth. Instead, rival ‘paradigms’ are often excluded by the established power structures and customs within the academy, as well as a range of sociological, political and psychological factors. 1

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

425

solving society’s complex social and environmental problems and enabling the creation of a sustainable society for future generations (Green and Noble 2010; Zappalà and Scott 2013). Early optimism that SQ ‘may soon become a vital and vibrant component of leadership education, expanding the array of competencies in every leader’s repertoire’ (Cowan 2005, p. 31), was somewhat misplaced. The concept of Conscious Capitalism, which has resonated widely within sections of the business community, provides an opportunity for a renewed sense of optimism as SQ is foundational to the notion of Conscious Leadership. As Cowan (2005, p.  26) argued, however, bringing SQ into the leadership and educational domain will need to accommodate diverse people and various ways of knowing and learning, and would benefit from the application of metaphors. This chapter presents a possible unifying frame for Conscious Leadership and its cultivation using the metaphor of meaning, consistent with Mackey and Sisodia’s claim that conscious leaders are spiritually intelligent and play a key role in making work and life meaningful.3 The next section summarises Conscious Leadership as defined by Mackey and Sisodia, followed by a review of the concept of SQ. The remainder of the chapter presents the main parts of the MPMCL using the Systems theory constructs of Structure, Pattern and Process. The framework emerges from two decades of teaching and facilitating graduate students and business and community leaders in the areas of Social Impact, Corporate Responsibility, Leadership and SQ at Business Schools using many of the concepts and practices discussed in this chapter.4 The intention is not to offer yet another model of leadership, but instead provide a general framework and orientation to facilitate the teaching and training of Conscious Leadership as part of the broader conceptual model of Conscious Business (Zappalà 2010).

22.2 Conscious Leadership According to Mackey and Sisodia Conscious Capitalism requires Conscious Leadership according to Mackey and Sisodia, namely, leaders that can put aside their own self-interests to serve the greater organisational and societal purpose. That leadership is about raising consciousness is not new in fact it was a key idea in the foundational texts that informed the formal study of leadership (Burns 1978). What is new is the embedding of

 Tarnas (1993) has forcefully argued that the resonance of different metaphors are instrumental in the process of paradigm shifts as they form part of the broader range of non-empirical factors that play roles in determining the relative dominance of different conceptual models. 4  Key courses developed and taught include: Spirituality & Business in the Master of Public Policy at the University of Sydney; Corporate Responsibility & Accountability; Demonstrating Social Impact within the Graduate Certificate and MBA in Social Impact at the University of NSW; and the Adaptive Leadership for Social Impact Master Class run by Centre for Social Impact at UNSW with Social Leadership Australia. 3

426

G. Zappalà

conscious leadership within the broader conceptual model of Conscious Capitalism, and what distinguishes Conscious Leadership from other similar ideas about leadership (e.g. transformational leadership) is its foundation on SQ. In Part III of their book Mackey and Sisodia outline their key thesis with respect to Conscious Leadership, and focus on the qualities of conscious leaders, referring to Gardner’s (1993) multiple intelligence thesis. Highlighting the role of SQ, understood as the cognitive ability to find higher meaning, values, and purpose in life through transcending traditional rational intelligence (Zohar and Marshall 2004), Conscious Leaders, according to Mackey and Sisodia, have high SQ which enables them to align their organisations to its higher purpose. They also possess a strong intuitive sense of how to respond to problems and can see the bigger picture and context (Mackey and Sisodia 2014, p. 160). While they also refer to Emotional Intelligence (EQ) and Systems Intelligence, the attributes they ascribe to these (e.g. ability to see the bigger picture and understanding how components interconnect over time) are in fact important characteristics of SQ. Their discussion also refers to a range of values and virtues important to Conscious Leadership, such as integrity and the capacity for love and care as well as highlighting what Conscious Leaders do. Conscious leaders, according to Mackey and Sisodia, seek to ‘make a positive impact on the world through their organization…(and) embed a sense of shared purpose, enabling people to derive meaning from their work’ (p. 163; emphasis added). Becoming a Conscious Leader requires listening to and following your inner heart; undertaking contemplative practices (e.g. meditation, yoga, prayer); following role models; having a coach and/or mentor; increasing self-awareness; cultivating empathy; studying disciplines that embody systems principles (e.g. ecology); learning from and being willing to make mistakes; keeping a Journal; and maintaining physical health (Mackey and Sisodia 2014, Ch 14).

22.3 Scientific Empiricism and SQ The dominant approach within psychology to SQ is conceived within and adheres to the framework of scientific empiricism, which gives primacy to empirical scientific methods (Hartelius 2019).5 The seminal work in this group is Howard Gardner’s (1993) pioneering work on Multiple Intelligences. Gardner defined intelligence as a set of abilities used to solve problems and fashion products that are valuable within

 While Hartelius (2019) used this dichotomy to describe and categorize recent developments in Transpersonal Psychology (TPP), it is useful to also understand and categorize the main approaches and models of SQ. As the name suggests, TPP has focused on going beyond the ego, examining the whole person in an interconnected world and the process of transformation (Hartelius et al. 2012). With its origins in the work of William James and Depth Psychology (especially Carl Jung), unlike mainstream approaches, TPP recognizes the importance of the spiritual and transcendent dimensions to human experience. 5

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

427

a particular cultural setting or community. He outlined eight intelligences with each being a system, which existed based on their cultural significance and relationship to underlying neural structures. He also outlined a range of criteria for distinguishing an intelligence, which required neurological, developmental, evolutionary, and psychological evidence. In a later work, Gardner (1999) proposed Existential Intelligence (EI) (in preference to SQ) as a possible ninth intelligence but concluded that it failed to meet at least two of his criteria (identified brain structure and clearly defined cognitive components) for what constitutes an intelligence. He described EI as a concern for the cosmos, the mystery of existence, addressing the ultimate questions of meaning and remained open to its future inclusion as an intelligence, if supportive evidence became available. In contrast to Gardner, Emmons (2000a, p. 10) argued the case for SQ based on Gardner’s (1993) original criteria of intelligence, suggesting it met at least five core abilities. First, the capacity for transcendence, or the ability to transcend the material realm and be able to sense a synchronicity to life. Second, the ability to enter heightened spiritual states of consciousness. Third, the ability to imbue the mundane experience of life with a sense of the sacred. Fourth, the ability to utilize spiritual resources to solve problems, and finally, the capacity to engage in virtuous behaviour (e.g. forgiveness, gratitude, humility and compassion). Emmons (2000b) subsequently removed this final point as he conceded that virtuosity is a behaviour rather than a capacity (Mayer 2000). Emmons saw these abilities as a starting point for a ‘legitimate case (to be) made for spirituality as a set of related competencies and abilities that provide a reasonable fit to the …criteria’ (2000a, p. 8). Emmons believed that Gardner prematurely dismissed spirituality as an intelligence due to his narrow definition of the term and provided supportive evidence related to Gardner’s intelligence criteria of core abilities, evolutionary plausibility, genetics, neurobiology, and psychometric properties. He concluded that ‘viewing spirituality as a set of skills, resources, capacities, or abilities enables spirituality to take on active, dynamic properties. Spirituality not only is something, it does something…(it) provides an interpretive context for negotiating demands of daily life’ (Emmons 2000a, p. 20). Furthermore, he argued that SQ exists along a continuum and can be nurtured and acquired and should be cultivated in the education system and society. Finally, in his discussion of the psychometric evidence, Emmons’ expressed scepticism and caution in developing self-­report measures to gauge people’s SQ (2000a, p. 15). Despite Emmons’ warning that measuring SQ would be misguided, the focus on measurement has dominated discussions of SQ by those working within the scientific empiricist approach. King and DeCicco (2009, p. 69) for instance, put forward a model that encompasses Gardner’s previous preference for EI, albeit an SQ that ‘exists as a set of mental abilities that are distinct from behavioural traits and experiences’ hence satisfying the stricter intelligence criteria. They define SQ as ‘a set of mental capacities which contribute to the awareness, integration, and adaptive application of the nonmaterial and transcendent aspects of one’s existence, leading to such outcomes as deep existential reflection, enhancement of meaning,

428

G. Zappalà

recognition of a transcendent self, and mastery of spiritual states’ (King and DeCicco 2009, p. 69). Based on a review of the literature and only including cognitive abilities rather than beliefs and attitudes, they tested and refined a psychometrically valid and viable model of SQ, the Spiritual Intelligence Self Report Inventory (SISRI  – 24). SISRI comprises four core components: first, Critical Existential Thinking, the ‘capacity to critically contemplate meaning, purpose, and other existential or metaphysical issues.’ Second, Personal Meaning Production or the ‘ability to construct personal meaning and purpose in all physical and mental experiences, including the capacity to create and master a life purpose’. Third, Transcendental Awareness, the ‘capacity to perceive transcendent dimensions of the self, of others, and of the physical world (e.g. nonmaterialism, interconnectedness) during the normal, waking state of consciousness’; and finally, Conscious State Expansion, the ‘ability to enter spiritual states of consciousness at one’s own discretion’ (King and DeCicco 2009, pp. 70–71). In addition to these cognitive abilities, they outlined how SQ has adaptive applications, such as helping individuals deal with situations of distress, assist problem solving, increases with age and experience and relates to physiological elements in the brain, all key criteria of what constitutes an intelligence. While other empirically derived self-report models of SQ have been advanced (e.g. Wolman 2001; Amran and Dryer 2007; Wigglesworth 2012), SISRI remains the gold standard within the scientific empiricist approach, and has been adapted and applied in a variety of different cultural and contextual settings (Chan and Siu 2016; Antunes et al. 2017). The scientific empiricist approach to SQ has made significant progress in both conceptual and empirical terms as well as ‘mainstreaming’ the discussion of spirituality within academia. Whether one agrees with the notion that SQ can (or should) be measured, this work has brought a greater level of sophistication and rigor to the concept. As King et al. (2012, p. 18) concluded, ‘spiritual intelligence is not some obscure esoteric concept that has no place in the intelligence literature…[but] appears to be connected to at least one other established intellectual component of the human mind [emotional intelligence], implicating it in the larger contemporary conceptualization of human intelligence.’

22.4 Participatory Thought and SQ In contrast to scientific empiricist approaches to SQ that have focused on achieving definitional clarity through the development and validation of self-report measures, participatory approaches to SQ, which ‘understands the world to be a dynamic and open-ended living system that is continually involved in co-creating itself, that mind and matter are necessarily woven of the same fabric, and that therefore consciousness in some form goes all the way down to the basic materials of physicality’ (Hartelius 2019, vi) bring together insights from Quantum physics, Complexity Theory, Psychology and neuroscience to understand the evolution of consciousness

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

429

and the role that different types of intelligence play in that process (Sisk and Torrance 2001; Sisk 2002, 2008, 2016; Zohar and Marshall 2000, 2004; Zohar 2016). SQ, defined as the ‘ability to access higher meanings, values, abiding purposes, and unconscious aspects of the self and to embed these meanings, values and purposes in living a richer and more creative life’ is a prerequisite for both IQ and EQ to function effectively (Zohar and Marshall 2004, p. 3). The different types of intelligence can function separately or together, IQ and EQ work within boundaries while SQ allows people to change the rules and to alter situations, enabling the changing of the boundaries. The transformative potential arises because, in a participatory world, subject and object are both part of an interconnected living system underpinned by an undivided cosmic consciousness, unlike the ‘rational’ intelligence born from the traditional Cartesian Subject/Object split. Instead, conscious observers and agents co-create reality as the observer is always inside and part of the observed reality. This approach restores meaning and a sense of purpose as ‘it describes that source of the self that precedes divisions into mind and body, into the mental, emotional and the spiritual…it is the thinking that precedes categories, structures, and accepted patterns of thought or mind sets’ (Zohar 2016, pp. 47–48). Zohar (2016) outlines three kinds of thinking and associated intelligences. The first is Rational thinking, which is logical, rule bound, produces concepts, categories, and mental models like structures described by Newtonian science. This corresponds to similar notions of System 2 Thinking or left-brain, slow or ‘serial thinking’. Neurons behave as though connected one on one in a series, with rote learning encouraging this kind of wiring. This kind of thinking is associated with IQ or rational intelligence and has been instrumental in building material capital. It is useful for problem solving or achieving tasks that are amenable to linear causality and logic and operate within rules. The second type of thinking is Associative or parallel thinking, based on our emotions, felt bodily experiences, and the associations we make between elements of our experience and the patterns we detect. It is habit rather than rule bound and it is thinking with the heart and body, also characterised as System 1, right brain, or fast thinking. It is the thinking that comprises Emotional Intelligence (EQ), showing empathy or compassion with someone else’s situation, and it is important to building Social Capital. It is the intelligence we associate with ‘hunches’, ‘gut instinct’ or intuition, and physiologically, neural networks have the ability to relearn and rewire, based on seeing patterns and learning through trial and error. The third type of thinking is Quantum thinking, which breaks old rules and creates new ones, recognises, and questions assumptions and accepted mental models. It behaves like systems found in the quantum model and rewires the brain to invent new categories of thought. Zohar (2016, p. 65) calls this whole brain thinking, that ‘synthesises and synchronizes the mental activity from all over the brain, including its bodily cues’. This holistic thinking integrates the brain’s serial and associative systems (gamma wave activity at the 40 Hz oscillation field, which is most coherent

430

G. Zappalà

and effective when in deep meditation).6 This is SQ, important for building Spiritual Capital, which is rooted in and motivated by our deep sense of meaning and value. Showing how SQ is a complex adaptive intelligence, Zohar and Marshall (2004) draw on the distinctive characteristics of Complex Adaptive Systems to derive SQ’s various qualities and principles (see Table 22.1). In summary, Zohar and Marshall (2004) propose a triskelion model of intelligence in which SQ sits at the top representing the brain’s integrative processes that are involved in meaning making, values, and morals. The two other points of the Table 22.1  The twelve principles of SQ CAS behaviour & characteristic Self-organization

Exploratory

SQ principle SQ1: Self-awareness SQ2: Vision & Value led SQ3: Ask why?

Holistic

SQ4: Holism

In dialogue with environment Evolutionary mutations n/a

SQ5: Compassion

Emergent

n/a Bounded instability Re-contextualize environment Order out of chaos External control destructive

Explanation Know what I believe in & value & what deeply motivates me Act from principles & deep beliefs & live life accordingly Question things, get to the bottom, criticize the given See larger patterns, relationships, connections. Have a strong sense of belonging ‘Feel with’ and have deep empathy

Value other people & unfamiliar situations for their differences, not despite them Feel ‘called’ to serve something larger than myself. Have gratitude toward those that have helped me & want to give something back SQ8: Humility Have a sense of being a player in a larger drama, of my true place in the world SQ9: Spontaneity Live in & be responsive to the moment & all it contains SQ10: Reframe Stand back from the problem or situation & look for the bigger picture & wider context SQ11: Positive use Own & learn from mistakes & see problems as of adversity opportunities SQ12: Field Stand against the crowd & maintain my convictions independence SQ6: Celebration of diversity SQ7: Vocation

Source: Zohar and Marshall (2004) Notes: Zohar and Marshall (2004) derived SQ7 and SQ8 from the broader literature on spirituality, the other ten were derived from the operation of CAS. The SQ principles are numbered solely for ease of reference rather than implying a particular ranking

 Reminiscent of McGilchrist (2009) divided brain hypothesis, which suggests that the Newtonian ‘left brain’ has come to dominate the western worldview, at the expense of the Quantum right brain hemisphere, Zohar (2016) suggests that ‘Newtonian thinkers’ use their brains in a partial, left-brain dominated way, whereas ‘quantum thinkers’ use their whole brains, combining the skills of left and right hemispheres. 6

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

431

triskelion are emotional intelligence (EQ), reflecting the brain’s associative processes, and rational intelligence (IQ). One could also add physical or (bodily-­ kinesthetics) at the bottom (Wigglesworth 2012). These three forms of intelligence are not mutually exclusive, in fact Zohar and Marshall (2004) argue that SQ is a prerequisite for both IQ and EQ to function effectively. IQ, EQ, and SQ can function separately or together, and more importantly, the authors show how IQ and EQ work within boundaries while SQ allows humans to change the rules and to alter situations and allows us to play with the boundaries and provides access to higher levels of consciousness. Furthermore, Participatory approaches emphasise the ways that SQ is fostered through forms of multisensory knowing, including the use of ‘intuition, meditation, and visualization – to access one’s inner knowledge in order to solve problems of a global nature’ (Sisk 2008, p. 24).

22.5 A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership The core metaphor of the Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership (MPMCL) is the idea echoed by Mackey and Sisodia, and common to all the approaches and definitions of SQ, namely, that SQ is what we use to access and enhance meaning. The MPMCL fuses together and adapts three main bodies of thought to create a conceptual and pedagogical framework for Conscious Leadership, couched within the constructs of Systems Theory developed by Capra and Luisi (2014), namely a system’s Structure, Pattern and Process. First, the Map of Meaning (MoM), a simple yet profound model originally developed to engage with meaning and purpose in work (Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2011, 2018). Based and validated on empirical research in cross-national settings, a community of certified MoM practitioners has developed over the last two-decades, applying the MoM successfully in Counselling, Coaching, Leadership, Organizational and community change and evaluation.7 The MoM provides the main Structure for the MPMCL. Second, Zohar and Marshall’s work on SQ discussed previously. Together with the four Pathways within the MoM (referred to as: Reflect, Connect, Respect, Express), which provide a grounding for conceptualizing, understanding and discussing the related principles of SQ, comprises the model’s Pattern of Organization. Third, ideas from Integral Education (Ferrer et  al. 2005; Sisk 2002, 2008), concerned with nurturing and developing SQ and applying it to solve complex problems, provides the Process for the MPMCL. Using the MPMCL to structure courses and curricula provides a simple but holistic and systemic container for understanding Conscious Leadership as a living

 See (www.themapofmeaning.org/about-us/certified-practitioners). On its application to evaluation and social impact see Zappalà (2020). 7

432

G. Zappalà

and dynamic system that changes with time and contexts. It is both a way to conceptualise Conscious Leadership and structure leadership education programs that enable such leadership to flourish. The remainder of this chapter outlines the MPMCL in terms of its structure, pattern, and process.

22.5.1 Structure In the Systems view, the structure of a system or cell is the ‘physical embodiment of its pattern of organization…the system’s actual physical components’ (Capra and Luisi 2014, p. 302). The structure of the MPMCL is a description of its component parts and imagining the shape in Fig. 22.1 as a cell with Conscious Leadership as the nucleus, the structure of the MPMCL refers to the external circular boundary that represents the contextual environment within which leadership occurs. This outer boundary also embodies its pattern of organisation. The context can be the individual’s particular circumstances in the case of Self-leadership, for example, or to the reality of a particular firm or organization in the case of business leadership or the wider socio-political environment in the case of political/civil leadership. In brief, for Conscious Leadership to be authentic it needs to accept the reality of the

Fig. 22.1  The Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership (MPMCL). (Source: Developed and adapted from the ideas in Lips-Wiersma and Morris (2011); Ferrer et al. (2005); Zohar and Marshall (2004); Sisk (2008, 2016) and the various sources cited in the section on Process)

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

433

context within which leadership is exercised. Authenticity in the context of conscious leadership means not pretending ‘either in relation to ourselves or to our circumstances’ (Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2018, p. 37). Within the boundary, the cell is divided into four main Pathways that comprise a meaningful approach to Conscious Leadership: Reflect; Connect; Respect; and Express and relate to the Model’s pattern of organization.8

22.5.2 Pattern of Organization Pattern or form in the Systems view is a ‘configuration of relationships characteristic of a particular system’ (Capra and Luisi 2014, p. 94). Recognising the correspondence and complimentary aspect between the four Pathways to meaning and the twelve key Principles of SQ, the pattern of the MPMCL is the dynamic relationship between each of the Pathways and the Principles of SQ. While each Pathway has a specific set of SQ principles, there are feedback loops between and across the Principles and Pathways, such that an SQ principle can relate to more than one Pathway. The ability to think holistically (SQ4), for instance, is not just important for forming connections between patterns and people (the Connect Pathway) but may also help in terms of the Express Pathway, and the ability to reframe (SQ10) an issue. In other words, the SQ principles are multi-dimensional as well as multivalent in the way they express themselves across all the Pathways in the model. Reflect Pathway  Conscious Leadership requires a degree of self-development and personal growth that comes from inner reflection. This can comprise (a) Moral development – the ability to distinguish between different values, perspectives and right and wrong; (b) Personal Growth  – the ability to learn new aspects of ourselves; and (c) Being true to self – the ability to be and act authentically in all situations (Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2011, 2018). The MPMCL takes an explicitly Jungian understanding of authenticity, that is, acting from a self-awareness that arises from having a deep relationship with the unconscious while recognizing the role that the wider context plays in creating the Self (Ladkin et al. 2016; Cavalli 2018). The Reflect pathway is in other words a means to undertake Jung’s process of ‘individuation’, that process of psychological development and transformation that involves the encounter between the conscious and the unconscious and the ego and the Self, leading to living and leading with authenticity (Ladkin et al. 2016; Le Grice 2016). Principles of SQ relevant to this Pathway include cultivating Self Awareness (SQ1  – knowing what one believes in and values); being Vision and Value led (SQ2 – acting from principles and deep beliefs; and Asking Why (SQ3 – questioning  The terms used for these Pathways in Lips-Wiersma and Morris (2011, 2018) are respectively: Developing the Inner Self (later changed to Integrity with Self); Unity with Others; Service to Others and Expressing Full Potential. 8

434

G. Zappalà

and getting to the root causes of issues). Cultivating these three principles leads to the ability to self-reflect and rely on one’s inner values to question business as usual (Kay 2018), and understand one’s own worldview before being able to become more aware of the worldview of others (Wigglesworth 2012). Connect Pathway  Conscious Leadership is relational and involves being able to connect with and experience unity with others even when diversity and opposition is present. Conscious Leaders need to create and cultivate the conditions that enable people to (a) Work together – the sense of being able to achieve more with the support of others, whether colleagues or co-participants; (b) Share values – the ability to raise and make values public; and (c) Belong – the sense of being part of a larger community or tribe with whom we feel connected (Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2011, 2018). Principles of SQ relevant to this Pathway include Holism (SQ4 – the ability to see larger patterns, relationships, and connections); Compassion (SQ5  – ‘feeling with’ and having deep empathy); and Celebration of Diversity (SQ6 – valuing other people and unfamiliar situations for their differences). Cultivating these principles leads to the ability to see and form connections between patterns, people, and circumstances as well as understanding the worldview of others (Wigglesworth 2012). Respect Pathway  Conscious Leaders are Servant leaders (Greenleaf 1977), they serve others through contributing to their well-being and making a positive difference in people’s lives, including the broader environment (Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2011, 2018). Principles of SQ relevant to this Pathway include Vocation (SQ7  – feeling ‘called’ to serve something larger); and Humility (SQ8 – having a sense of being a player in a larger drama). Cultivating these principles leads to becoming wise and effective Servant Leaders (Wigglesworth 2012). Express Pathway  Conscious Leaders express their full potential through utilising and demonstrating their unique gifts, talents, and skills. In contrast to the Reflect Pathway, which is passive in nature, this Pathway focusses on active, external actions, including: (a) Creativity – the ability to be creative and discover new ways of doing things; (b) Achieving – the sense of accomplishment that comes from completing a job or task; and (c) Influencing – the power and ability to affect change in something or someone (Lips-Wiersma and Morris 2011, 2018). Principles of SQ relevant to this Pathway are Spontaneity (SQ9 – living in and being responsive to the moment); Reframing (SQ10 – standing back from a problem or situation to see the bigger picture and context); Positive use of adversity (SQ11 – owning and learning from mistakes and seeing problems as opportunities); and Field independence (SQ12  – standing against the crowd and maintaining one’s convictions).

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

435

22.5.3 Process The process is the activity involved in the continual embodiment of a system’s pattern of organisation (Capra and Luisi 2014, p. 302). The process elements of the MPMCL bring together two key disciplinary and pedagogical tensions of transformative education, represented in the two main axes dividing the ‘cell’ in Fig. 22.1 into the four Pathways (Ferrer et al. 2005). The horizontal axis represents the focus on integrating the content, training, and intellectual aspects of knowledge and learning and forms a spectrum from traditional disciplinary to more recent transdisciplinary approaches.9 Transdisciplinarity can be defined as a ‘practice that transcends disciplines and fields, extending the notion of what is known and knowable and what is possible to discover and create across, between, and beyond all our disciplines’ (Le Hunte 2021). While there is an often-implicit view that we are experiencing a progressive movement from left to right, with transdisciplinarity representing the ‘most developed type of disciplinary interaction’ (Pipere and Lorenzi 2021, p. 6), Fig. 22.1 acknowledges that discipline-based knowledge systems continue to play an important role in educational pedagogy. The vertical axis refers to the way we integrate ‘multiple ways of knowing’ and multidimensional inquiry (Ferrer et  al. 2005, p.  309). This is represented as the distinction between learning focused on the head (IQ) at one end of the axis and heart/body centred learning (EQ/SQ) at the other end. Traditional approaches to leadership and education primarily privilege the head (Fleming et  al. 2018) and need to be balanced by approaches that facilitate the ‘cocreative participation of all human dimensions at all stages of the inquiry and learning process…body, vital, heart, mind, and consciousness’ (Ferrer et al. 2005, p. 312; Heinzkill 2018).10 As Ferrer et al. (2005) note, it is the vertical dimension that offers both the greatest challenge but also benefit as it elicits the transformative and spiritual potential of education, and it is through accessing our inner experiences and knowing that we learn to nurture and develop SQ (Sisk 2002). The challenge, of course, is how to implement approaches that are not solely ‘head-based’ in business schools (Ferrer et al. 2005; Fleming et al. 2018; Wiggins and Smallwood 2018).

 Disciplinary refers to one discipline of academic research, usually with a single, integrated research paradigm and methodology, with discipline specific language. Multi-disciplinary refers to the study of an issue from several disciplinary perspectives. It maintains a hierarchical structure with a dominant discipline, and other disciplines keeping separate boundaries. Inter-disciplinary refers to the greater integration between two or more disciplines in dealing with specific problems, the transfer of methods/principles from one discipline to another and is more democratic in nature. Transdisciplinary refers to the integration of disciplines to transcend disciplinary boundaries of knowledge. It is usually inquiry driven, has a greater focus on creating social impact, forming new ways of thinking about knowledge, and solving complex problems, values different types of knowledge, and includes non-academic stakeholders in the process. 10  The other two approaches noted by Ferrer et al. (2005) are Mind centred/intellectualist (use of logical/rational, primarily IQ) and Bricolage/eclectic (the use of some experiential practices such as meditation). 9

436

G. Zappalà

The common thread among studies that have examined the cultivation of SQ is the importance of the participatory approach, this bringing to bear of all human dimensions to the learning process and the need to use a multisensory approach to problem solving and life, including visualization, meditation, and deep intuition in addition to reliance on the five senses (Sisk 2002). While all the practices (including those cited in Mackey and Sisodia’s chapter on becoming a Conscious Leader) listed in Fig. 22.1 form a key part of the model’s process and contribute to the overall cultivation of SQ, they are placed according to which principles they most contribute towards. What follows is a summary of the practices (illustrative rather than exhaustive) that can best cultivate SQ and thus contribute to the development of Conscious Leadership. Reflect  The key educational pedagogy in the Reflect pathway is the inclusion of contemplative educational practices (e.g. the use of meditation, mindfulness and breath work) within the leadership curriculum (Hart 2004; Shapiro et  al. 2008; Holland 2004; Morgan 2015; Carroll 2007; Marques et al. 2014; Lawrence et al. 2018; Heinzkill 2018). Meditation and mindfulness practices aid increasing self-­ awareness; and understanding one’s deep beliefs and principles, and together with breathing exercises, facilitate a ‘brainwave pattern that promotes unitive thinking and thus the development of SQ’ (Ferreira and Schultz 2015, p. 6; Green and Noble 2010; Zohar 2016; Childre and Martin 2000). Others highlight meditation’s importance to developing concentration and critical reflection and thinking (Altobello 2007), and specifically as an aid to management practice (Marques et  al. 2014; DeAngelis 2018; Frizzell and Banner 2018; Kay 2018). Other practices include Reflective thinking (together with the use of visioning exercises and guided visualizations with music to facilitate the setting of goals and focusing on values and beliefs to develop inner knowing) (Moon 1999); using Reflective journals and journal writing as part of the required assessment in leadership courses (which also complements other principles of such as Holism, Compassion, Humility; and learning from one’s mistakes) (Brockett and Hiemstra 1991; Brookfield 1987; Lawrence et al. 2018; Kay 2018; Ferreira and Schultz 2015; Sisk 2008, 2016; Progroff 1992)11; as well as the use of Archetypal analysis to facilitate dialogue and creative inquiry (Basquez 2014; Zappalà 2021). In addition, surveys that aim to measure SQ (e.g. King and DiCecco 2009; Wigglesworth 2012) can provide baseline ‘measures’ of SQ at the start of any course or journaling process to enable people to track changes that may occur over time. Connect  The key educational and pedagogical practices in the Connect pathway include the use of frameworks and processes such as Bohmian dialogue and Theory U. Bohmian dialogue, pioneered by Quantum physicist David Bohm (1995), saw his ‘quantum’ approach to dialogue as conversation, which welcomed ambiguity,  Journaling refers not to the keeping of a traditional diary but journaling processes that enable one to access inner levels of truth and reality, such as the Intensive Journal method (Progroff 1992), leading to greater self-awareness. 11

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

437

differing points of view and non-confrontation, and had the possibility of transformative change. Bohmian dialogue was originally popularised in the business world through the work of Peter Senge and colleagues at MIT (Senge 1990), and Isaacs (1999), who also identified four key skills involved in collaborative dialogue: deep Listening (to individual and collective contributions); Respecting (other people’s views); Suspending (deeply held assumptions and theories); and Voicing (the ability to speak authentically). Zohar subsequently championed and illustrated the use of Bohmian dialogue in her work on SQ (Zohar and Marshall 2004; Zohar 2016). Also known as Dialogue Groups, small groups of people (7–20) sit in a circle with one or two acting as facilitators. Facilitators also participate as members of the group but they also hold space to guide the conversation in such a way that encourages the activation of the 12 principles of SQ. Zohar distinguishes ‘Dialogue’ from the traditional approach to conversation in the West, which is more akin to debate. She states: ‘like good quantum thinking, (Bohmian) dialogue makes us surface and challenge our assumptions…leads to us changing our existing mental models, to reframing. It…dissolves previous structures’ (Zohar 2016, p.  242). In contrast, conversation as debate is based on ‘knowing and fighting for a personal position’ (Zohar and Marshall 2004, p. 119), on providing answers rather than posing questions, on winning rather than sharing, on power rather than respect and proving a point rather than listening (Zohar and Marshall 2004, p. 119; Zohar 2016, pp. 240–242). While dialogue still primarily privileges the head/mind as a way of knowing, taking a Bohmian dialogue approach to problem solving makes room for solutions to emerge spontaneously from intuition, encourages a holistic and big picture orientation, values difference, and diversity, reconfigures, and looks at the issue from outside the traditional boundaries. The second practice, also related to dialogue and listening, is Theory U, developed by Otto Scharmer and colleagues at MIT (Senge et al. 2004; Scharmer 2007). Theory U is an action research method, which draws on participatory ways of knowing (Heron and Reason 1997) and has many principles like those of SQ to bring about transformative change in business and society (Sisk 2016). Its scope is too broad to provide details here, but it has achieved widespread success and recognition through the work of the Presencing Institute, and its Theory U Foundations Program and together with his book (Scharmer 2007) contain wide ranging examples and exercises for using this ‘social technology’.12 Its relevance lies in its adoption of multiple ways of knowing and the involvement of all human dimensions (mind, body, heart, consciousness) in the process and therefore sits at the heart/body end of the spectrum. Theory U distinguishes between how we operate from different types of listening. Listening 1, or downloading, where the conversation merely reconfirms existing knowledge and habits of thought and response. Listening 2, or factual listening, 12

 See www.presencing.org

438

G. Zappalà

is disconfirming existing knowledge and taking note of the new evidence. Listening 3, or empathic listening, is seeing a situation through another’s perspective. Finally, Listening 4, or generative listening, is the realisation that by connecting with a deeper source of knowing, a subtle but profound change has occurred, including the ability to know possible future options. Scharmer argues that effective leadership requires understanding the field, or inner space, from which we operate but usually take for granted. Theory U has four field structures resulting in four different ways of operating: thinking (individual); conversing (group); structuring (institutions); and ecosystem coordination (global systems). The U process/journey mark the five key stages (see Fig. 22.2) to move from the reactive fields (thinking and conversing) to the generative field responses (group and institutions).13 The Presencing Institute provides tools and training in Theory U and involves exercises such as encouraging people to ‘step into the footsteps’ of other stakeholders as part of co-sensing, journaling as part of co-presencing, and ‘ideation’ and planning as part of co-creation. The U Journey is also about allowing space and time for people to open their ‘mind, heart, and will’ to engage in the practice of ‘presencing’, defined as to ‘sense, tune in, and act from one’s highest future potential – the future that depends on us to bring it into being’ (Scharmer 2007, p. 8). Theory U training uses a variety of activities and exercises that engage the body (individual and collective movement), the deeper unconscious mind (e.g. intuition, deeper listening, empathic resonance, mindfulness) and the heart (generative dialogue, empathy walks in nature).

1. Co-initiate common intent: Listen to others and to what life calls you to do

2. Co-sense the field of change: Go to the places of most poten al and listen with your mind and heart wide open

5. Co-evolve through innovaons: Grow innova on ecosystems by seeing and ac ng from the emerging whole 4. Co-create microcosms: Prototype a microcosm of the new to explore the future by doing

3. Presence inspiraon and common will: Retreat and reflect, allow the inner knowing to emerge

Fig. 22.2  The Five movements of Theory U. (Source: Scharmer 2007, p. 378)

 Scharmer argues that seven essential leadership capacities are required to navigate the U journey and explicitly links SQ to the Presencing capacity (open will and the ability to act from what is emerging) (Scharmer 2007, p. 41, 448). 13

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

439

Related to Theory U is the notion of ‘stretch collaboration’, which relates to the principle of celebrating and valuing difference and being able to collaborate with colleagues but also with those we may see as opponents or enemies (Kahane 2017). Kahane outlines a series of ‘stretch collaboration’ exercises that require three basic shifts. First, embracing conflict and connection alternately through the drivers of power and love; second, using dialogue and ‘presencing’, to enable new collaborative possibilities to emerge; and third, being prepared to participate in the action rather than remaining removed from it, and changing yourself as well as only trying to change other people. Kahane (2017, p. 107) concludes that in learning to collaborate, the ‘people you think of as your enemies can, surprisingly, play a helpful role. Stretching requires you to move toward rather than away from different others’. While the principle of Holism, the ability to see larger patterns and connections between seemingly disparate areas, or seeing things in the context of their whole, corresponds most closely to the Connect Pathway, it also underpins and grounds the entire MPMCL.14 Systems Thinking, or thinking about systems holistically, is not just the realisation that the whole has an existence that extends beyond the sum of its parts, but a way of examining systems that preserves the connectedness within them. It looks at the behaviour of wholes (i.e. is systemic) and the interaction between components using a variety of methods15 as well as taking multiple and partial views16 (Meadows 2009; Shaked and Schechter 2017). Holistic approaches provide understanding rather than prediction and are about ‘concatenating’ (Kaplan 1964) or networking and linking together different explanations and patterns, often relying on one’s intuitive sense of how things are connected (Capra and Luisi 2014; Zohar and Marshall 2004). Emerging from Theory U, the idea of ‘Systems leadership’, sees leadership as a collective phenomenon, moving away from the ‘hero’ models of leadership (a form of ‘ego-system’ leadership) to highlighting the well-being of the collective (a form of ‘ecosystem’

 The opposite of Holism is reductionism. The South African Imperialist and scholar Jan Smuts coined the term ‘Holism’ in 1926, from the Greek word holos, meaning whole, to capture the idea that a key underlying principle in nature is the creation of wholes. The then newly emerging theories of evolution, radioactivity, and relativity signaled the beginning of a ‘paradigm shift’ away from the mechanistic and scientific theories of Newton which posited a largely static and atomistic worldview, towards a science which Smuts described as ‘holistic’, seeing nature as an evolving dynamic whole (Wilber and Harrison 1978). 15  Methods that engender holistic thinking are common to several approaches in the social sciences where a systematic ‘pattern model’ form of storytelling examines economic and political systems as the pattern of relations among parts and the whole (Wilber and Harrison 1978). A method that best lends itself to constructing holistic explanations in the social sciences that has fallen out of favor is the participant-observer method, where the researcher becomes embedded within the norms and categories of the ‘system’ in order to reach an understanding of it (Kaplan 1964; Diesing 1971). 16  Some argue that Systems Thinking also contains elements of reductionist thinking as there is always a larger whole we need to abstract from. Systems Thinking is therefore balanced thinking, according to this view, as it contains both holistic and reductionist approaches (see Cabrera and Cabrera 2015). 14

440

G. Zappalà

leadership) (Scharmer and Kaufer 2013, p. 2). It shifts the focus to leaders recognising that they are participants in as well as affected by changes to the system (Senge et al. 2015). Similarly, Mackey and Sisodia (2014, p. 160) agree that Conscious Leaders have Systems Intelligence, that they are natural systems thinkers able to feel the interconnection and unity of the system within themselves. They can see the larger system as well as help others see that larger system to build shared understanding of complex problems. They also foster reflection and generative conversations, including metacognition (thinking about our thinking), questioning assumptions, reframing, appreciating different points of view; and shift the collective focus from reactive problem solving to co-creating the future (a la Theory U) (Senge et  al. 2015, pp. 28–29).17 Capra’s (2003) application of systems thinking to the social sciences (including business and leadership) and more recently his integration of its key principles and methodology into a coherent framework (Capra and Luisi 2014), which is both transdisciplinary (horizontal axis) and integrates multiple ways of knowing (vertical axis) in its approach, provides a suitable starting point for a Conscious Leadership curriculum (Capra and Luisi 2014).18 The work of psychologists Ferreira and Schulze (2015, 2016), aiming to facilitate and cultivate SQ as an educational strategy to transform the post-apartheid education system among high school students in South Africa offers interesting insights with respect to cultivating a holistic mindset. They found that the use of storytelling involving parables and facilitating group discussions in response to thought-­ provoking quotes on the nature of connectedness and living things from science, psychology, and spirituality, increased holistic thinking. These practices also elicited a greater sense of connection to self and others, giving students the motivation and curiosity to understand other viewpoints while maintaining their own convictions. Using whole-brain integration exercises that involved somatic movements linked to certain words also enhanced holistic and unitive thinking (Ferreira and Schulze 2015). Other practices in this Pathway aim primarily at cultivating the ability to lead with compassion and valuing the importance of other worldviews in decision-­ making (Wigglesworth 2012; Neal 2018).19 Sisk and Torrance (2001) and Sisk (2008, 2016) outline how compassion in decision making and problem solving is developed using moral and ethical dilemmas in teaching and training curricula. Drawing on the work of Kidder (1999), having students evaluate moral dilemmas using the three principles of: ends-based (the greatest good for the greatest number);  Earlier work by Senge (1990) contained several tools and practices to support such capabilities.  Many students of management are already familiar with frameworks that help to distinguish between different types of systems, the nature of the problem, and the most appropriate corresponding response (Kahane 2004; Snowden and Boone 2007). 19  Although aimed at Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) curriculum, the IONS Worldview Explorations and Worldview Literacy project is a rich and valuable resource in terms of practices and tools that can be adapted for cultivating SQ competencies related to the Connect Pathway for leadership-based training (Petersen et al. 2012). 17 18

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

441

rule-based (principle-based decision making) and care-based thinking (putting yourself in another’s shoes), can develop SQ and elicit responses of compassion, honesty, fairness, responsibility, and respect. Similar outcomes have been achieved when using arts-based interventions such as poetry, music, painting, and sculpture for teaching compassion in leadership training and education (Antonacopoulou and Bento 2018; Fleming et al. 2018). Respect  Practices in this Pathway include cultivating Servant Leadership (Greenleaf 1977) through service-learning projects and personal growth and reflective activities (Sisk 2008, 2016; Ferreira and Schulze 2015). Servant (and Conscious) leaders have the ‘humility, courage, and insight to admit that they can benefit from the expertise of others who have less power than them. They actively seek the ideas and unique contributions of the employees that they serve. This is how servant leaders create a culture of learning, and an atmosphere that encourages followers to become the very best they can’ (Cable 2018, p.  2). Activities that generate gratitude (the recognition that one has obtained a benefit from an external person or event), and experiencing awe (e.g. through observing the vastness of a natural landscape) encourage humility and greater prosocial behaviour through shifting attention away from the ego self and engender a feeling of being part of something bigger than ourselves (Allen 2018b; Ballantyne 2018; De Cruz 2020). Awe stimulates our cognitive abilities in a way that leads to a change in the mental structures of how we understand the world and can cause realignments in our world view, can lead to greater generosity, and helps us see that we are but one player in a larger drama of life, feeling a greater sense of connectedness, and encourages greater openness to new information and evidence (Allen 2018a; De Cruz 2020). Intellectual Humility (IH), defined as ‘a mindset that guides our intellectual conduct [and] regulates our response to the evidence (arguments, reasons, and information) we have concerning our beliefs’ (Ballantyne 2018, p. 1), assists leaders to avoid making wrong decisions based on their personal beliefs. Being intellectually humble (fostered using metacognitive skills or the ability to think about thinking), means recognizing our intellectual limitations to pursue deeper knowledge and understanding about an issue or situation. As a mindset that attunes less to our own egoistic and self-based views of an issue, IH encourages taking broader views and perspectives on board, and so also relates to the Connect Pathway and the ability to see the worldview of others. Express  Educational and pedagogical practices in the Express pathway include Theory U, which aims to enable participants to feel comfortable surrendering to one’s intuition and spontaneous responses; re-framing situations; and maintaining views that may not be popular within mainstream thought (Scharmer 2007, Ch. 21). Socio-drama, a method where a group of people spontaneously enact a specific role-­ play exercise relating to a particular situation can effectively foster spontaneity and an understanding of its role in the leadership context (Blatner 2006). Socio-drama also fosters critical questioning, awareness of others as well as self-awareness (Blatner 2006; Kellar et  al. 2002). The use of ‘non-rational’ processes such as dreams, visions, contemplative practices, prayer, dance, sound, improvisation,

442

G. Zappalà

writing, and visual art and intuition all foster accepting the unexpected and feeling comfortable following our intuition or ‘gut instincts’ (Albrechtsen et  al. 2009; Huang and Pearce 2015; Huang 2016; Klein 2003; Petitmengin-Peugeot 1999). The development and use of Intuitive inquiry, ‘an epistemology of the heart that joins intuition to intellectual precision in a hermeneutical process of interpretation’ (Anderson 2004, p. 308) enables the understanding of an issue by using personal and in-depth reflection through a series of iterative ‘cycles of interpretation’. The use of arts-­based interventions such as poetry, music, painting, and sculpture are also beneficial for cultivating leadership intuition (Antonacopoulou and Bento 2018; Fleming et al. 2018). Other powerful practices for this Pathway include using Rites of Passage frameworks involving the three stages of separation, transformation (with its elements of story, challenge, vision and spiritual awakening) and re-integration, as an experiential element in leadership training or to structure the flow of courses (Rubinstein 2017; Cavalli 2018).20 The use of storytelling, especially parables, to generate deeper insights and provide opportunities to present alternative views has a range of benefits including engendering intuition, being participative, encouraging multiple perspectives and holistic thinking and has been found to be one of the most effective teaching tools in leadership education as it has a ‘participative element and crystallize(s) the message in a concrete manner that augurs assimilation and facilitates understanding of organization behaviour concepts. Their message stays longer with the listener and/or the reader than conventional devices of learning’ (Marques et al. 2014, p. 209; Ferreira and Schultz 2015; Driscoll and McKee 2007).21 Apart from the more traditional business style techniques that exist to encourage looking at problems from different perspectives (e.g. the Reframing Matrix  – Morgan 1993), storytelling is key to systems thinking through its ability to connect with our emotions, people and situations, create meaning from patterns, empathise with others and address complex social issues (Saltmarshe 2018; Neimand 2018; Quesenberry and Coolsen 2014). Stories enable the reframing of situations and placing them in a wider context by providing a sense of perspective. Stories ‘make, prop up, and bring down systems…shape how we understand the world, our place in it, and our ability to change it’ (Saltmarshe 2018, p.  1). Exposure to different stories, parables, and myths, often in unrelated fields and containing plots with different and varied experiences, also helps to understand our own mental models or worldviews as well as those of others (Clear 2018). Stories that focus on the lives of Spiritual Pathfinders such as Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, and Mahatma Gandhi can develop abilities related to turning adversity into opportunities; and standing up for and maintaining unpopular convictions. Studying such stories  See for example the leadership training programs facilitated by Arne Rubinstein through The Rites of Passage Institute (https://ritesofpassageinstitute.org) accessed 28/10/2020. 21  See Marques et al. (2011) for a collection of stories used in teaching spirituality and related areas to business students. 20

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

443

illustrate the overcoming of tragedy and how pain and suffering are often necessary for inner growth and put in service to the wider benefit of society (Ferreira and Schulze 2015; Sisk 2008). The SQ principles in this Pathway relate to resilience, and recent research in psychology suggests that building up people’s ‘grit factor’ is more likely to be successful by focussing on feelings like gratitude, compassion and pride than exposing them to trials and ordeals that test resistance to adversity (DeSteno 2018). Like journaling, storytelling might be considered old fashioned, but it is the very ubiquity of narrative to the evolution of life and culture that can make the use of good storytelling a strategic and powerful tool in changing attitudes, behaviour, and mind sets (Monarth 2014).

22.6 Conclusion Capitalism (which developed from IQ thinking) has provided many benefits but also contributed to significant social and environmental challenges across the globe. Conscious Capitalism is one possible approach to address such challenges through realigning the power of business to higher purposes and meaning, potentially serving the interests of all key stakeholders. Conscious Capitalism requires conscious leaders who are aware of the interconnectedness of business, people, and the planet. Conscious leaders require a deep and cultivated SQ to participate in the communal journey of leadership, to undertake an authentic rather than hollow hero’s journey. The current leadership curriculum and pedagogies are no longer fit for purpose and alternatives more aligned to the emergence and growth of conscious capitalism are required. This chapter introduced the Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership (MPMCL), a systemic and holistic framework to better understand, communicate and teach Conscious Leadership. Rooted in a participatory and transformative approach through the cultivation of SQ, it provides an alternative orientation to facilitating the development of Conscious Leadership competencies that remained underdeveloped in Mackey and Sisodia’s original thesis. Consistent with Mackey and Sisodia’s claim that conscious leaders are spiritually intelligent and play a key role in making work and life meaningful, the chapter presented a unifying frame for Conscious Leadership and its cultivation using the metaphor of meaning and the Systems theory constructs of Structure, Pattern and Process. This frame facilitates the incorporation of SQ into educational theory and pedagogy at a critical time in the history of capitalism. The MPMCL provides a balanced and holistic approach in terms of content and understanding as well as ways of learning for leadership curricula, necessary if Conscious Leadership is to be accepted within the academy and importantly, achieve its transformative potential.

444

G. Zappalà

References Albrechtsen, J.S., C.A. Meissner, and K.J. Susa. 2009. Can Intuition Improve Deception Detection Performance? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45: 1052–1055. Allen, S. 2018a. The Science of Awe. Greater Good Science Center at UC Berkeley, John Templeton Foundation, September 2018. ———. 2018b. The Science of Gratitude. Greater Good Science Center at UC Berkeley, John Templeton Foundation, May 2018. Altobello, R. 2007. Concentration and Contemplation: A Lesson in Learning to Learn. Journal of Transformative Education 5 (4): 354–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344607312549. Amran, Y., and C.  Dryer. 2007. The Development and Preliminary Validation of the Integrated Spiritual Intelligence Scale (ISIS). Palo Alto: Institute of Transpersonal Psychology Working Paper. Anderson, R. 2004. Intuitive Inquiry: An Epistemology of the Heart for Scientific Inquiry. The Humanistic Psychologist 32: 307–341. Antonacopoulou, E., and R.F.  Bento. 2018. From Laurels to Learners: Leadership with Virtue. Journal of Management Development 37 (8): 624–633. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JMD-­12-­2016-­0269. Antunes, R.R., A.P. Silva, and J. Oliveira. 2017. Spiritual Intelligence Self-Assessment Inventory: Psychometric Properties of the PORTUGUESE VERSION of SISRI-24. Journal of Religion, Spirituality & Aging 30 (1): 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15528030.2017.1324350. Aziz, A. 2019. The Power Of Purpose: How Conscious Capitalism Is Helping Shape The New Paradigm For Business. Forbes, September 5. https://www.forbes.com/sites/afdhelaziz/2019/09/05/the-­power-­of-­purpose-­how-­conscious-­capitalism-­is-­helping-­shape-­the-­ new-­paradigm-­for-­business/?sh=79d8e3ab79eb. Accessed 10 Feb 2020. Ballantyne, N. 2018. Intellectual Humility: A Brief Introduction. Prepared for the John Templeton Foundation, February. Basquez, K. 2014. Taking the Archetypes to School. Assisi Institute Journal 1 (1): 15–35. Blatner, A. 2006. Enacting the New Academy: Sociodrama as a Powerful Tool in Higher Education. ReVision: A Journal of Consciousness & Transformation 29: 30–35. Bohm, D. 1995. On dialogue. London: Routledge. Brockett, R.G., and R. Hiemstra. 1991. Self-Direction in Adult Learning: Perspectives on Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Routledge. Brookfield, S.D. 1987. Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Burns, J.M. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper and Row. Cable, D. 2018. How Humble Leadership Really Works. Harvard Business Review, April 23, 2018. Cabrera, D., and L. Cabrera. 2015. Systems Thinking Made Simple: New hope for Solving Wicked Problems. Ithaca: Odyssean Press. Campbell, J. 1968. The Hero With a Thousand Faces. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Capra, F. 2003. The Hidden Connections. London: Flamingo. Capra, F., and P.L.  Luisi. 2014. The Systems View of Life  – A Unifying Vision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carroll, M. 2007. The Mindful Leader – Ten Principles for Bringing Out the Best in Ourselves and Others. Boston: Trumpeter Books. Cavalli, C. 2018. Identity and Meaning in Transformation. In Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. Chalmers, A.F. 1982. What Is This Thing Called Science? St. Lucia (Queensland): University of Queensland Press. Chan, A.W., and A.F. Siu. 2016. Application of the Spiritual Intelligence Self-Report Inventory (SISRI-24) Among Hong Kong University Students. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 35 (1): 1–12.

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

445

Childre, D., and H. Martin. 2000. The HeartMath Solution. New York: Harper Collins. Clear, J. 2018. Atomic Habits: An easy & proven Way to build good habits & break Bad ones. London: Random House. Cowan, D.A. 2005. Translating Spiritual Intelligence into Leadership Competencies. Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion 2 (1): 3–38. De Cruz, E. 2020. The necessity of Awe. aeon magazine, 10 July. Accessed 25 Oct 2020. https:// aeon.co/essays/how-­awe-­drives-­scientists-­to-­make-­a-­leap-­into-­the-­unknown. DeAngelis, L. 2018. Clarifying the Relationship between Transformative Teaching and Transformative Learning. In Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. DeSteno, D. 2018. Emotional Success: The power of Gratitude, Compassion and Pride. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Diesing, P. 1971. Patterns of Discovery in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Driscoll, C., and M. McKee. 2007. Restorying a Culture of Ethical and Spiritual Values: A Role for Leader Storytelling. Journal of Business Ethics 73: 205–217. Emmons, R.A. 2000a. Is Spirituality an Intelligence? Motivation, Cognition, and the Psychology of Ultimate Concern. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 10 (1): 3–26. ———. 2000b. Spirituality and Intelligence: Problems and Prospects. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 10 (1): 57–64. Ferreira, C., and S. Schulze. 2015. Facilitating Spiritual Intelligence in South African Secondary School Learners. KOERS – Bulletin for Christian Scholarship 80 (2): 1–8. ———. 2016. Cultivating Spiritual Intelligence in Adolescence in a Divisive Religion Education Classroom: A Bridge Over Troubled Waters. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 21 (3–4): 230–242. Ferrer, J.N., M.T.  Romero, and R.V.  Albareda. 2005. Integral Transformative Education  – A Participatory Proposal. Journal of Transformative Education 3 (4): 306–330. Fleming, K., C. Millar, and V. Culpin. 2018. From Hollow Hero to Expert Empathiser: Leadership in Transition. Journal of Management Development 37 (8): 606–612. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JMD-­07-­2018-­0209. Frizzell, D., and D.K.  Banner. 2018. Leader Self Development, Maturation and Meditation: Elements of a Transformative Journey. In Handbook of personal and organizational transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. Fry, L.W., and M. Sadler Nisiewicz. 2013. Maximizing the Triple Bottom Line Through Spiritual Leadership. Redwood: Stanford University Press. Fyke, J.P., and P.M. Buzzanell. 2013. The Ethics of Conscious Capitalism: Wicked Problems in Leading Change and Changing Leaders. Human Relations 66 (12): 1619–1643. https://doi. org/10.1177/0018726713485306. Gardner, H. 1993. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books. ———. 1999. Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the New Millennium. New York: Basic Books. Giacalone, R.A., and C.L.  Jurkiewicz, eds. 2003. Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe. Goleman, D. 1995. Emotional Intelligence  – Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Green, W.N., and K.D. Noble. 2010. Fostering Spiritual Intelligence: Undergraduates’ Growth in a Course About Consciousness. Advanced Development Journal 12: 26–48. Greenleaf, R. 1977. Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. New York: Paulist Press. Hart, T. 2004. Opening the Contemplative Mind in the Classroom. Journal of Transformative Education 2 (1): 28–46. Hartelius, G. 2019. Science and a Whole Person Psychology: Can Participatory Empiricism Ease the Way Forward? International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 38 (1): iii–xiii.

446

G. Zappalà

Heinzkill, M.C. 2018. Leadership Convergence: The Dawn of Practical Wisdom. In Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. Heron, J., and P.  Reason. 1997. A Participatory Inquiry Paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry 3 (3): 274–294. Holland, D. 2004. Integrating Mindfulness Meditation and Somatic Awareness into a Public Educational Setting. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 44 (4): 468–484. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022167804266100. Huang, L., and Jone L. Pearce. 2015. Managing the Unknowable: The Effectiveness of Early-stage Investor Gut Feel in Entrepreneurial Investment Decisions. Administrative Science Quarterly 60 (4): 634–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839215597270. Huang, L. 2016. The Role of Investor Gut Feel in Managing Complexity and Extreme Risk. Academy of Management Journal 61 (5): 1821–1847. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.1009. Isaacs, W. 1999. Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. New York: Currency and Doubleday. Kahane, A. 2004. Solving tough problems – An open way of talking, listening, and creating new realities. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. ———. 2017. Collaborating with the Enemy – How to Work with People You Don’t Agree with or Like or Trust. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Kaplan, A. 1964. The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for behavioral Science. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co. Kay, N.C. 2018. Self-Awareness in Personal Transformation. In Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. Kellar, H., T.W. Treadwell, V.K. Kumar, and E.S. Leach. 2002. The Personal Attitude Scale-II: A Revised Measure of Spontaneity. Journal of Group Psychotherapy, Psychodrama, & Sociometry 55 (1): 35–46. Kidder, R. 1999. Resolving ethical dilemmas in the classroom. Educational Leadership 56 (4): 38–41. King, D.B., and T.L.  DeCicco. 2009. A Viable Model and Self-Report Measure of Spiritual Intelligence. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 28 (1): 68–85. King, D.B., C.A.  Mara, and T.L.  DeCicco. 2012. Connecting the Spiritual and Emotional Intelligences: Confirming an Intelligence Criterion and Assessing the Role of Empathy. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 31 (1): 11–20. Klein, G.A. 2003. Intuition at Work: Why Developing Your Gut Instincts Will Make You Better at what You Do. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Kuhn, T. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ladkin, D., C. Spiller, and G. Craze. 2016. The Journey of Individuation: A Jungian Alternative to the Theory and Practice of Leading Authentically. Leadership 14 (4): 415–434. https://doi. org/10.1177/1742715016681942. Lawrence, E., M.W.  Dunn, and S.  Weisfeld-Spolter. 2018. Developing Leadership Potential in Graduate Students with Assessment, Self-Awareness, Reflection and Coaching. Journal of Management Development 37 (8): 634–651. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-­11-­2017-­0390. Le Grice, K. 2016. Archetypal Reflections: Insights and Ideas from Jungian Psychology. London: Muswell Hill Press. Le Hunte, B. 2021. Transdisciplinarity. In The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible, 1–8. Palgrave Macmillan. http://hdl.handle.net/10453/15025. Lips-Wiersma, M., and L.  Morris. 2011. The Map of Meaning  – A Guide to Sustaining Our Humanity in the World of Work. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing. Lips-Wiersma, M. and Morris. L. 2018. The Map of Meaningful Work  – A Practical Guide to Sustaining Our Humanity (Revised & updated 2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Mackey, J., and R.S. Sisodia. 2014. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Marques, J., Dhiman, S.K, and Biberman, J. (eds.). 2011. Stories to Tell Your OB Students. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

447

Marques, J., S.K. Dhiman, and J. Biberman. 2014. Teaching the Un-Teachable: Storytelling and Meditation in Workplace Spirituality Courses. Journal of Management Development 33 (3): 196–217. Mayer, J.D. 2000. Spiritual Intelligence or Spiritual Consciousness? The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 10 (1): 47–56. McGilchrist, I. 2009. The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World. London: Yale University Press/Bloomsbury. Meadows, D. 2009. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Abingdon: Earthscan. Monarth, H. 2014. The Irresistible Power of Storytelling as a Strategic Business Tool. Harvard Business Review, March 11, 2014. https://hbr.org/2014/03/the-­irresistible-­power-­of-­ storytelling-­as-­a-­strategic-­business-­tool. Accessed 10 Sept 2020. Moon, J.A. 1999. Reflection in Learning and Professional Development: Theory and Practice. London: Kogan Page. Morgan, M. 1993. Creating Workforce Innovation  – Turning Individual Creativity Into Organizational Innovation. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Morgan, P. 2015. A Brief History of the Current Reemergence of Contemplative Education. Journal of Transformative Education 13 (3): 197–218. Neal, J. 2018. An Overview of the Field of Transformation. In Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. Neimand, A. 2018. How to Tell Stories About Complex Issues. Stanford Social Innovation Review, May 2018. O’Toole, J., and D.  Vogel. 2011. Two and a Half Cheers for Conscious Capitalism. California Management Review 53 (3): 60–76. Petersen, K., M.  Schlitz, and C.  Vieten. 2012. Worldview Explorations Facilitator Guide (and Workbook). Institute of Noetic Sciences. Petitmengin-Peugeot, C. 1999. The Intuitive Experience. In The View from Within – First-Person Approaches to the Study of Consciousness, ed. F.J.  Varela and J.  Shear. London: Imprint Academic. Pipere, A., and F.  Lorenzi. 2021. The Dialogical Potential of Transdisciplinary Research: Challenges and Benefits. World Futures. https://doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2021.1875673. Progoff, I. 1992. At a journal workshop. New York: Penguin Putnam. Quesenberry, K.A., and M.K.  Coolsen. 2014. What Makes a Super Bowl Ad Super? Five-Act Dramatic Form Affects Consumer Super Bowl Advertising Ratings. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 22 (4): 437–454. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-­6679220406. Racionero, A. 2018. The New Leader as Spiritual Hero: The Way of Awakening. In Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation, ed. J. Neal. Cham: Springer. Rubinstein, A. 2017. Level 1 Leadership Training – The Rite of Passage Framework Workbook. YarraKoora: The Rites of Passage Institute. Saltmarshe, E. 2018. Using Story to CHANGE SYSTEMS. Stanford Social Innovation Review, February 2018. Scharmer, C.O. 2007. Theory U – Leading From the Future as It Emerges. Cambridge, MA: The Society for Organizational Learning. Scharmer, O., and K. Kaufer. 2013. Leading from the Emerging Future. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler. Senge, P. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Double Day. Senge, P.  Hamilton, H. and Kania, J. 2015. The Dawn of System Leadership. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 2015, 25–33. Senge, P., O. Scharmer, J. Jaworski, and B. Sue Flowers. 2004. Presence: Human Purpose and the Field of the Future. Cambridge, MA: The Society for Organizational Learning. Shaked, H., and C. Schechter. 2017. Systems Thinking for School Leaders: Holistic Leadership for Excellence in Education. Cham: Springer.

448

G. Zappalà

Shapiro, S.L., Warren Brown, K., Astin, J.A. and Duerr, M. 2008. Toward the Integration of Meditation Into Higher Education: A Review of Research. Center for Contemplative Mind in Society, October 2008. Sisk, D. 2002. Spiritual Intelligence: The Tenth Intelligence That Integrates All Other Intelligences. Gifted Education International 16 (3): 208–212. ———. 2008. Engaging the Spiritual Intelligence of Gifted Students to Build Global Awareness in the Classroom. Roeper Review 30: 24–30. ———. 2016. Spiritual Intelligence: Developing Higher Consciousness Revisited. Gifted Education International 32 (3): 194–208. Sisk, D.A., and E.P.  Torrance. 2001. Spiritual Intelligence: Developing Higher Consciousness. Buffalo: Creative Education Foundation Press. Snowden, D.J. and Boone, M.E. 2007. A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. HBR Magazine, November 2007. https://hbr.org/2007/11/a-­leaders-­framework-­for-­decision-­making. Accessed 13 Oct 2020. Tarnas, R. 1993. The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas That Have Shaped Our World View. New York: Ballantine Books. Walach, H. 2017. Secular Spirituality – What It Is. Why We Need It. How to Proceed. Journal for the Study of Spirituality 7 (1): 7–20. Walton, J. 2017. The Significance of Consciousness Studies and Quantum Physics for Researching Spirituality. Journal for the Study of Spirituality 7 (1): 21–34. Wiggins, L., and J. Smallwood. 2018. An OD Approach to Leadership Development: Questions and Consequences. Journal of Management Development 37 (8): 613–623. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JMD-­12-­2016-­0306. Wigglesworth, C. 2012. SQ21: The Twenty-One Skills of Spiritual Intelligence. New  York: SelectBooks. Wilber, C.K., and R.S.  Harrison. 1978. The Methodological Basis of Institutional Economics: Pattern Models, Storytelling, and Holism. Journal of Economic Issues 12 (1): 61–87. Wolman, R.N. 2001. Thinking With Your Soul: Spiritual Intelligence & Why It Matters. New York: Harmony Books. Zappalà, G. and Scott, A. 2013. Intelligence for Purpose and Meaning: Foundations for Achieving Social Impact. Knowledge Connect, Autumn 2013, Issue No.17, Centre for Social Impact, UNSW. Zappalà, G. 2009a. Spirituality Is the New Black and It Has a Social Impact! Part 1 – Definitions and Concepts. Background Paper No. 1, May 2009, Centre for Social Impact, UNSW. ———. 2009b. Spirituality Is the New Black and It Has Social Impact! Part II  – Explaining the Increased Interest in Spirituality. Background Paper No. 3, June 2009, Centre for Social Impact, UNSW. ———. 2010. Beyond Corporate Responsibility: The ‘Spiritual Turn’ and the Rise of Conscious Business. Background Paper No. 6, February 2010, Centre for Social Impact, UNSW. ———. 2020. Meaningful Evaluation: A Holistic and Systemic Approach to Understanding and Assessing Outcomes. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 12 (2–3): 125–143. https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v12.i2-­3.7034. ———. 2021. Cultivating Spiritual Intelligence for a Participatory Worldview: The Contribution of Archetypal Cosmology. Journal for the Study of Spirituality 11 (2): 159–173. https://doi. org/10.1080/20440243.2021.1961463. Zohar, D., and I. Marshall. 2000. SQ: The Ultimate Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. ———. 2004. Spiritual Capital – Wealth We Can Live By. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. ———. 2016. The Quantum Leader – A Revolution in Business Thinking and Practice. New York: Prometheus Books.

22  A Meaningful Participatory Model of Conscious Leadership: Cultivating Spiritual…

449

Gianni Zappalà is an educator, facilitator, and social impact expert with over three decades experience in the University, commercial, Government and For Purpose sectors. He is an Associate Professor and Professional Fellow at the Centre for Social Justice and Inclusion at the University of Technology Sydney (Australia) and Principal of Orfeus SQ, a niche advisory service that applies Spiritual Intelligence (SQ) based frameworks to program design, evaluation, workshop facilitation and leadership training. He has been an Adjunct A/Professor at the University of Sydney and the Centre for Social Impact, University of New South Wales, as well having held various teaching, research and policy positions at the University of Cambridge, the University of Wollongong, the Australian National University, and the Parliament House Canberra. Prof. Zappalà has taught and published on a wide range of social and economic policy issues including corporate responsibility, spirituality and business, social impact assessment and education.  

Part IV

Further Thoughts

Chapter 23

The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion in the Organizational Life: A Different Outlook on Conscious Capitalism Michel Dion

23.1 Introduction The Conscious Capitalism movement does not precisely define the meaning and scope of compassion. Conscious leaders can “have a great capacity for love and care”. They can deeply enhance virtues of love, generosity, compassion, empathy, and forgiveness (Mackey and Sisodia 2014, 189, 200, 227). But what does it mean to have a great capacity for compassion? Even the HEALING organizations (Sisodia and Gelb 2019) do not define the meaning and scope of caring and empathy. Compassion is neglected, as though it were not different from caring and empathy. When dealing with the “TACTILE Principles”, Sisodia et  al. (2018, 188–189, 253–254, 259–260) endorsed the same perspective: caring and empathy seem to be self-sufficient. It is not crystal-clear that there is room for compassion. Aburdene (2012, 88, 119) believed that compassion is a “transcendent value”: compassion would mirror a “higher consciousness”. But in what sense can compassion be a “transcendent value”, when compared with other human values? We will examine how an “encompassing” compassion could be philosophically justified and spiritually/religiously applied in the organizational setting. The meaning of an “encompassing compassion” will be analyzed from a threefold perspective. Firstly, organizational life could be the locus for an encompassing compassion: individual/group suffering (micro-suffering), institutionally−/socially based suffering (meso-suffering), globalized suffering (macro-suffering), and environmentally based suffering (ecosystem suffering). An encompassing compassion in the business milieu implies the interdependence of those four organizational loci of suffering. Confucianist and Buddhist businesspeople could attempt to apply their non-theistic notion of compassion to the four organizational loci of suffering. M. Dion (*) École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_23

453

454

M. Dion

Muslim businesspeople can put their theistic notion of compassion into practice, although they are always facing the same four organizational loci of suffering. Whether conscious capitalism implies a spirituality of immanence (Frémeaux and Michelson 2017, 705) or not, it could benefit from an encompassing compassion as applied to organizational life. The religious/spiritual variable could even influence corporate financial reporting (Kanagaretnam et al. 2015, 293). The notion of encompassing compassion can contribute to widen the scope of conscious capitalism, given that theistic and non-theistic spiritualities can allow businesspeople to improve their experiences of self-transcendence. The encompassing compassion is an ideal type of compassion that constitutes the path of infinite self-improvement. It can nurture the attempts of leaders’ self-transcendence, especially for “conscious leaders” looking at a “higher purpose”. Secondly, encompassing compassion could be philosophically grounded. However, it should avoid the pitfalls of self-interest, of rationalization, and of virtues’ compartmentalization. From a philosophical viewpoint, we will analyze how various patterns for compassion stem from very important philosophical representatives of the Enlightenment (Aufklärung): David Hume (1711–1776), Adam Smith (1723–1790), and Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). In each case, rationality and sensory experiences are emphasized to criticize any blind faith in absolute realities. On the other hand, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860) was deeply influenced by Buddhism (non-theistic spirituality). We will see how those philosophers addressed the issue of compassion. Buddhism and Confucianism are philosophies endowed with spiritual import since they emphasize the human power of self-transcendence. That is why their notion of compassion can be compared with Enlightenment-based concepts of compassion (Hume, Smith, Kant) and with any philosophy influenced by Buddhism (Schopenhauer). The path to an encompassing compassion meets the following philosophical challenges. Firstly, it could widen the temporal scope of compassion. David Hume considered that compassion is an integral part of human nature. Adam Smith described the intrinsic link between self-interest and natural sympathy, given the structure of human nature. However, Hume and Smith did not describe how compassion can be related to the past, the present, and the future. Secondly, the path to an encompassing compassion could overcome any attempt to rationalize compassion through practical reason. Kantian compassion is a natural sympathy that must be cultivated in daily life and criticized by practical reason. Thirdly, the path to an encompassing compassion in the organizational life could assert that compassion is the basis of morality and is rooted in a higher level of open-mindedness (Schopenhauer). However, open-mindedness cannot be the sine qua non condition for reaching the level of the encompassing compassion since it does not provide any criterion for widening the scope of compassion. Moreover, the path to an encompassing compassion cannot avoid the issue of “responsibility-for-­ others” (Emmanuel Levinas), since organizational life is being, working, and speaking with-others. Our personal freedom can never be isolated from others’ freedom. We are responsible for others’ freedom. If others do not have access to the same level of freedom, then we cannot be free beings.

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 455

Thirdly, compassion will be encompassing from a temporal perspective (past, present, and future), referring to three important religions/spiritualities: Confucianism, Buddhism, and Islam. From a non-theistic perspective, we will examine how Confucianism and Buddhism convey different notions of compassion. Their basic principles are very different. Confucianism makes an interconnectedness between compassion and virtuous conduct, while Buddhism acknowledges the interconnectedness between compassion and the encompassing emptiness. From a theistic perspective, we will see how the Qur’an deals with the issue of Divine Compassion. We have chosen Islam because Allah is defined, in the Qur’an, as the “All-forgiving, All-merciful, and All-compassionate”. Divine Compassion is then strictly linked to God’s Infinite Mercy and Forgiveness (see: Kassis’ Concordance of the Qur’an: 1006–1009). For Quranic references, we will use Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation of the Qur’an (2001). For Muslims, God’s Infinite Compassion is the focal point of any human compassion. Of course, we could address the issue of encompassing compassion developed in other theistic (Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism) and non-theistic (Daoism) perspectives. Examining Confucian, Buddhist and Islamic texts about compassion requires to define an encompassing compassion from a temporal perspective, given that Time can have a spiritual or religious meaning. Believers can experience three kinds of temporally based compassion: retroactive compassion (towards the victims of past events and their impact on our present situation), effective compassion (towards suffering people in the here-and-now), and anticipatory compassion (for the potential impact of present decisions and actions on given people and groups). Confucian, Buddhist, and Islamic texts will be used to mirror such threefold compassion.

23.2 The Organizational Loci of the Encompassing Compassion John Mackey and Raj Sisodia (2014, 30–31, 202, 218–227, 257–258) asserted that love, caring, empathy, and compassion are basic values of the more humanistic philosophy at the real basis of ‘conscious capitalism’. However, they did not define such fundamental values. What does it mean to care for all stakeholders? What does it mean to be empathetic to all stakeholders? Focusing on humaneness does not imply that the meaning of humaneness is crystal-clear. Mackey and Sisodia (2014, 16–17) referred to Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments and claimed that Smith enhanced a balance between self-interest and empathy. However, they did not understand that Smith acknowledged a limited role of empathy in the daily life. The primacy of self-interest remains the basic motive behind all human actions. However, individuals could be compassionate when the ‘impartial spectator using his/her reason’ would perceive a strict connection between the causal event and the individual reaction (pain). Even compassion will be briefly felt since individuals must go ahead with their quest for self-interest (Smith). Compassion then plays a minor role

456

M. Dion

in decision-making processes. But unlike Hobbes, Smith was able to let it room within our inner life. Mackey et al. (2020, p. 44–46) considered that compassion is a basic component of love. However, when they defined compassion, they did not explain the interconnectedness between compassion and love: “compassion arises out of a recognition of our shared suffering and pain (…) True compassion creates trust, commitment, and loyalty in others”. Perhaps, it is crystal-clear that being compassionate toward suffering people is loving them. However, Mackey et  al. (2020, p. 43–45) referred to care as a component of love. So, how can we distinguish a compassionate love and a caring love? Authors did not address such issue. Developing an encompassing compassion in the business milieu implies to make all stakeholders deeply involved in its implementation processes: Stakeholders at the Organizational Level • Employees: If there is any hope for an encompassing compassion in the workplace, it is in the hands of employees, since they exert a decisive role in the way compassion could be actualized in the organizational life. Interpersonal relationships constitute the main way to develop an encompassing compassion in the organizational life and culture. Employees could then develop their ethical awareness, so that they could prevent ethical dilemmas/conflicts, or solve then in a very efficient way. Ethical awareness could allow directors to seize the way the scope of compassion could be widened in the organizational daily life (the individual locus of an encompassing compassion); • Top managers (executives): Their ethical leadership could make possible to favour and strengthen compassionate attitudes and behaviors in the organizational life. Conscious leaders must be mindful of their own ethical values and convictions (Fyke and Buzzanell 2013, 1623). Only executives could make the institutionalization of the ethics of compassion possible in the long run (the hierarchical locus of an encompassing compassion); • Directors: In the agency theory, directors represent the interests of shareholders and must check the way executives lead the organization to favour the interests of shareholders in the long-term. Directors could guarantee a balance between organizational goals (performance, productivity, corporate growth) and compassionate attitudes/behaviors towards all suffering beings (the decisional locus of an encompassing compassion); • Shareholders: Shareholders of the (focal) organization could be more or less sensitive to the various kinds of suffering in the organizational life. In some cases, they could express specific expectations of compassion towards the (focal) organizational culture. In other cases, they could seem indifferent to such organizational compassion (shareholders’ potential expectations of organizational compassion); Stakeholders in the Organizational Field • Suppliers and distributors: Executives and directors of a given (focal) organization should make possible to share with suppliers and distributors the same sense of compassion. Otherwise, there could be a value-centered clash between the focal organizational culture and the corporate culture of suppliers and distribu-

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 457

•

•

•

•

tors. Ethical coherence requires to extend the applicability of an encompassing compassion to the organizational culture of suppliers and distributors (the inter-­ organizational locus of an encompassing compassion); Consumers: The (focal) organization can be sensitive to its consumers’ suffering. But it is unable to impose any notion of compassion to its own consumers. Rather, consumers could mirror given expectations of compassion towards the (focal) organization (consumers’ potential expectations of organizational compassion); Local communities: The (focal) organizational has operations and plants in given local communities. Local communities are not necessarily equivalent to a local-­ based sum of consumers. In a local community, some citizens could be consumers for the (focal) organization, others not. Globally, they constitute a wholeness the (focal) organization is related to. Any expectation of organizational compassion from local communities expresses the need to take others’ suffering into account (local communities’ potential expectations of organizational compassion); Government Departments and Regulatory Bodies: The (focal) organization is often related to government procedures and norms (from government departments and regulatory bodies) it must comply with. Government departments and regulatory bodies could check the application of given regulations that can be intrinsically connected to compassion. In some situations, compassion is clearly at the midst of some regulations, particularly in the health care system. In other cases, compassion is more implicit: health and safety regulations try to avoid human suffering. In all cases, there is a “compassion basis” behind such regulations that have an intrinsic connection to compassion: the basic intent behind those regulations is compassion (government potential expectations of organizational compassion). Competitors: The (focal) organization could learn new means and mechanisms to actualize compassion in the organizational daily life. Competitors do not have any potential expectation of organizational compassion towards the (focal) organization. Nonetheless, there could be a phenomenon of “mimetic isomorphism” (DiMaggio and Powell 1983) between competitors, so that the “compassion basis” behind given organizational norms and procedures is unveiled and strengthened (competitors’ isomorphism of organizational compassion).

In the business milieu, compassion could be expressed in various ways. It could be closely linked to good citizenship organizational behavior (Vallabh and Singhal 2014; Pio 2005), sustainable development (Lamm et  al. 2013; Boiral and Paillé 2012; Daily et  al. 2009; Boiral 2009; Waddock 2004), and volunteer activities. Compassion could even be strengthened by prosocial values, whether they are endorsed by individuals, groups, organizations, and even sector-based associations (Muethel et al. 2011). Prosocial values unveil how good citizenship organizational behavior could be actualized in the daily life and be sustainable in the very long-run (Mayfield and Taber 2010). Compassion is not equivalent to good will, mutual agreement, and organizational commitment (Jørgensen and Isaksson 2015). Good

458

M. Dion

will, mutual agreement, and organizational commitment do not necessarily imply an attitude of compassion towards others, or at the very least, an attitude of caring. However, compassion should ever be defined as pure caring (Solomon 2001). There is an undeterminable number of living beings which could suffer, if we take the past, the present, and the future as the global temporal basis of compassion. Moreover, being compassionate is being always focused on the requirement to have good thoughts (mind), good words (discourse), and good deeds (action). Our whole being is involved in the attitude of compassion, so that a lot of time is spent to put it in practice. Empathy and caring are integral components of compassion. But compassion should never be identified to those components. Compassion is deeper and wider than caring and empathy. Kanov et al. (2004) explained the three basic elements of compassion: (a) being aware that someone is suffering: it presupposes the awareness of others’ presence; (b) perceiving others’ suffering and understanding the meaning of such pain for the individual: imagining that we are in the other’s shoes (empathy); (c) responding to others’ suffering: trying to reduce, and eventually to erase such suffering (caring): caring could involve a practical engagement to strengthen interdependence and fight all forms of exploitation and domination (Puig de la Bellacasa 2012). Compassion requires unconditional love. We are infinitely compassionate when we do not make any distinction between people we love and people we dislike/hate. In the organizational culture, people need leadership that is centered on compassion, since such leadership is the most altruistic one (Grant 2008). Compassion is applied in interpersonal relationships. But it is also intrinsically linked to corporate social responsibility (Moon et  al. 2014). The business milieu could radically change if it were impregnated with unconditional compassion. Volkmann Simpson et al. (2015) asserted that compassion requires a deep commitment to improve community life, and more generally common good (public interest). If it is true, then compassionate beings are concerned with all forms of suffering. They cannot prioritize any stakeholder who could suffer from business decisions/ activities. Compassionate beings will not choose actions that could make any stakeholder suffering, in a way or another. Capitalism is not annihilated. It is rather reinvented. Compassion is one of the basic (new) grounds of the renewal of capitalism. The Buddhist notion of compassion (as it is related to emptiness) could contribute to train better managers in the future (Kernochan et al. 2007). In the business milieu, there are various expressions of suffering for which an encompassing compassion could be expressed. In each case, suffering is subjected to various conditioning factors: power games, egocentric motives, and respect for others; preconceptions, prejudices, and stereotypes; and the various degrees of moral sensitiveness at the individual/group, institutional/societal, global, and environmental level. Those conditioning factors can affect the different loci of suffering: individual/group, social institutions and society, the whole world, and the environment. We can easily define four axiological issues that stem from the various kinds of suffering in the organizational life: respect for the Other and compassion; compassion; justice; power and respect for the Other. In each case, values give birth to a morally justifiable attitude toward people who suffer.

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 459

Individual/Group Suffering (Micro-suffering) Respect for the Other and Compassion • Discrimination and harassment; equal opportunities in the workplace • Sickness: alcoholism, drug addiction, HIV/AID employees • Occupational sickness: burn-out • Negative emotions: denigration and hatred, anger, jealousy, vengeance • Lack of civility in the organizational life Compassion • Workplace accidents Justice • Unfair wages Respect for the Other • Clash between organizational values and personal values Overcoming Self-interest and Expressing Respect for the Other • Unethical/destructive leadership and the impact of power games (and “power trip”). Institutionally/Socially Based Suffering (Meso-suffering) Respect for the Other and Compassion • Unemployment • Inflation and reduced consumption habits Globalized Suffering (Macro-suffering) Justice • Money laundering • Bribery • Extortion • Occupational fraud Environmentally Based Suffering (Ecosystemic Suffering) Respect and Compassion • Animal testing • Destruction of the environment (ecosystem damages) • Abusive exploitation of resources. Three main values are at the midst of the various levels of suffering in the organizational life: compassion, respect, and justice. Moreover, the issue of self-interest can hardly be avoided in the organizational life. The various loci of suffering in the organizational life open the way to philosophical and spiritual/religious questioning about the nature and scope of compassion. At the individual/group level, self-­ interest is contradicted by compassion. On one hand, Adam Smith’s philosophy

460

M. Dion

attempted to balance self-interest and sympathy (compassion), although self-­interest remained the basic natural trend. David Hume’s philosophy rather asserted that compassion constitutes the basic natural trend, although human being is always searching for his/her own self-interest. On the other hand, Islam puts the emphasis on community interests and rights, although private ownership is allowed. The natural quest for self-interest is then continuously reduced by a community orientation. That is why Islamic economy has often be represented as the intermediary positioning between capitalism and socialism (Abdul-Rauf 1979, 17–19; Pryor 1985; Siddiqi 1986, 156; Haneef 1995, 52–65). The individual/group suffering (micro-­ suffering) unveils the basic importance of interpersonal relationships. Respect for the Other becomes a crucial issue. In Confucianism, social conformism, and virtuous behavior (including benevolence) strongly enhance respect for the Other. Levinas’ philosophy is one of the most influential philosophies of Otherness. The ecosystem suffering refers to animals and ecosystem damages. It reveals the structure of human relationships with Nature. The scope of compassion is then largely widened. Some philosophies (such as Schopenhauer’s philosophy) and spiritualities (like Buddhism) include a wide notion of compassion.

23.3 The Philosophical Path to Encompassing Compassion Philosophical reflection could allow us to walk on the “encompassing compassion road”. An encompassing compassion could be cultivated and strengthened insofar as we take three ethical challenges upon ourselves: (1) widening the temporal scope of compassion, whether compassion is always counterbalanced with self-interest (Adam Smith), or not necessarily (David Hume); (2) overcoming the Kantian rationalization of compassion realized by practical reason; (3) opening our mind/heart to an unlimited compassion (towards all sentient beings) as the basis of all virtues (Arthur Schopenhauer), or as the perfect expression of a responsibility for others’ freedom (Emmanuel Levinas). Those three challenges overcome the pitfalls of self-­ interest (Smith, Hume), rationalization (Kant) and virtues compartmentalization (Schopenhauer, Levinas). David Hume (1711–1776): could sympathy be temporally encompassing? David Hume’s philosophy unveiled the impossibility to reach the level of an encompassing compassion, since it emphasized the psychological processes of emotion management. Hume believed that the idea of happiness (as well as the idea of joy and that of wealth) is connected to situations in which it could naturally be expressed. The idea of happiness provokes a sentiment of humanity and sympathy that can only be pleasant for the individual (Hume 1983, 52). According to Habermas (2021, 26), the notion of pleasant, useful, and prosocial behaviors can never be morally and rationally justified, in a Humean perspective. Hume mentioned that love and hatred are joined with benevolence and anger. Love and hatred make someone transcend his/her state of mind. Love produces the desire for others’ happiness, while hatred

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 461

gives birth to the desire for others’ suffering. However, love could coexist with the desire for other’s suffering, as well as hatred could coexist with the desire for other’s happiness (Hume 1969, 415–417). We could be unhappy for other’s suffering (pity), or joyful for other’s pain (malice). Pity implies the use of imagination: we must imagine how others’ suffering could eventually be ours. Compassion for others’ suffering makes our sensitiveness to our own pain decrease (Hume 1969, 417–420). We wish happiness for people we love. We do not want to see them suffer (this is benevolence). When we wish that people hated will be unhappy and are reluctant to see them happy, we feel hatred. But pity is an encompassing desire for others’ happiness, whoever those others could be. It is thus closely linked to benevolence. Malice is an encompassing desire for others’ unhappiness, whoever those others could be. So, Hume asserted that pity and malice are strictly connected to love and hatred. Hatred presupposes conflicting interests and thus a loss of harmonious relationships. Love rather requires mutual understanding and union of interests. Loving someone means being sympathetic to his/her pleasure, while hating him/her involves the absence of such sympathy. Being sympathetic is not being focused on the present moment. Sympathy does not have any temporal limitation. It could aim at a better future, given the possible or probable conditioning factors the individual could be subjected to. It could even focus on past events and phenomena. We could sympathize with people who are subjected to passions of anger and hatred. We could also sympathize with people showing a high level of love and benevolence. The ultimate level of compassion covers both kinds of situations. It is not the case when we feel pity for people who are suffering and hatred for those who have caused such suffering. In such situation, pity produces both love and hatred (Hume 1969, 429–437). Adam Smith (1723–1790): how could we reach a balance between self-interest and compassion? Adam Smith’s philosophy cannot open the way to an encompassing compassion, since it seeks to balance self-interest and compassion. Self-interest safeguards the gap between our self and others’ self. If the quest for self-interest is a natural trend, then any encompassing compassion is utopian. Smith acknowledged that human being basically searches for his/her self-interest. We are much more concerned with our self-interest than with others’ interests (Smith 1999, 135). However, human nature is much more complex than that. Compassion is an integral part of human nature which counterbalances the large impact of self-interest. We must imagine how we would react (as spectator of the other’s suffering) if we were in the other’s shoes - as if we could become the other self. We are then “spectator of our own behavior” (Smith 1999, 174). In doing so, the spectator must internalize other’s specific situation and the conditioning factors to which he/she was subjected. This is the “imaginary change of situation” (Smith 1999, 23–29, 45–46). In his Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), Adam Smith asserted the primacy of self-interest in human existence. However, human nature also implies the orientation towards others’ happiness, although his/her own self-interest only lies in the pleasure to see others quite happy. That is why compassion makes an integral part of human nature.

462

M. Dion

Compassion is a universal sentiment, although some individuals could be more sensitive to people’s suffering than others. But I am not someone else. So, I cannot feel how a given suffering event could deeply impact others’ heart and mind. I must then use my imagination to grasp how I could feel myself if I were in the same situation (Smith 1999, 23–24). When considering other’s situation, we could feel either a match, or a lack of match between his/her feelings (suffering, anxiety) and ours. If there is a match, then we consider that others’ feelings can rationally be accepted and are adequate. If there is no match, then we interpret that other’s feelings do not have any rational basis. Moreover, reason checks to what extent the original source of suffering (circumstances and conditioning factors) and the intensity of suffering itself (the effect) are interconnected: we are then the “impartial spectator of our own behavior” (Smith 1999, 178). If the cause of suffering and the intensity of its effect are interconnected, then the other’s suffering is rationally rooted. The spectator could feel compassionate with people who suffer. If the cause and the intensity of its effects are not interconnected, then the other’s suffering cannot be rationally based. The spectator cannot feel any compassion towards those people who are still suffering (Smith 1999, 37–40). Any match or absence of match between the cause of one’s suffering and the intensity of its effect is analyzed through the prism of the “impartial spectator” (Smith 1999, 138, 163, 172). The impartial (and well informed) spectator is “deep within our heart”: it is the ideal human being within our heart. Reason is the great (and natural) judge of our behaviours (Smith 1999, 191–194, 199–200, 210–212, 224, 268, 358–359). Sometimes, the spectator cannot become the “impartial spectator of his/her own suffering” and can only remain the “partial and self-indulgent spectator” (Smith 1999, 211–212, 219). The ideal human being within our heart is the representative of the impartial spectator (Smith 1999, 298). Immanuel Kant (1724–1804): is compassion a natural sympathy that must be cultivated in daily life and criticized by practical reason? Immanuel Kant’s philosophy acknowledged natural compassion, while strengthening the duty to cultivate it in our daily life. This is the way an encompassing compassion could eventually be realized. In his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), Kant gave the example of an individual who is so much suffering that he/she is unable to have any “sympathetic participation in the fate of others”. The individual is still able to be beneficent to others’ suffering, although he/she cannot temporarily do so. He/she could seem indifferent towards others’ pains. However, although he/she is not prone to feel sympathetic to others’ suffering, he/ she can express such sympathy from duty. Kant rightly saw that the individual could require as much patience and strength from others as he/she actually has himself/ herself. There is a slight possibility that the personality of such individual has a weak sense of humanity. Nonetheless, the individual could be sympathetic to others’ suffering not from an (already present) inclination, but rather from duty (Kant 2002, 14). In his Metaphysics of Morals (1797), Kant suggested that humanity could be expressed “in the susceptibility, given by nature itself, to feel joy and sadness in common with others”. Joy and sadness are natural feelings of pleasure (joy) and pain (sadness) that we share with other sentient beings. When the sense of

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 463

humanity is called “compassion”, then it is an integral part of human nature. However, our natural compassion must be expressed and deepened in daily life. That is why Kant said that there is an “indirect duty to cultivate the compassionate natural (aesthetic) feeling in us” (Kant 1991, 250–251). Compassion must be cultivated and deepened in its daily actualization. It does not follow from theoretical insight (or the use of pure reason). The various expressions of compassion must be analyzed and criticized by practical reason (Guyer 2012, 425–426). Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860): is compassion the basis of all virtues? Arthur Schopenhauer’s philosophy has been strongly influenced by Buddhism. That is why it enhanced an unlimited compassion as the basic way to get rid of egoistic thoughts, emotions, words, attitudes, and deeds. Schopenhauer’s notion of compassion could be compatible with an encompassing compassion. Love is basically compassion. Compassion is a virtue since it is pure and true love. Any love that does not imply compassion is pure egoism. Our own self is an object for our compassionate attitude. We are existentially suffering beings. Thus, we need others’ compassion. But we could also be compassionate towards our own suffering. Loving someone is being compassionate towards his/her suffering. We could even feel compassion for the future of humankind, since suffering is an integral part of human existence (Schopenhauer 2009a, 695–698; 2009b, 337–343, 349, 387–388, 392). Nietzsche (1968, 34, 198) strongly criticized Schopenhauer’s notion of pity as the basis of all virtues, and thus as the “root of all moral impulse”. Unlimited compassion for all sentient beings can guarantee moral behavior. Compassion is the basic morally oriented motive of action, said Schopenhauer (2009b, 339, 374–375). Compassion is the basis of justice and liberality. It is the antidote against anger (Schopenhauer 2009b, 346, 362, 376–377, 392). The intuitive knowledge of our true self is expressed in compassionate attitudes and behaviors. That is why compassion is the basic of all authentic (altruistic) virtues (Schopenhauer 2009b, 388, 421). Schopenhauer (2009b, 320–324) acknowledged that egoism (unlimited self-­interest) is the fundamental motive of human behavior, as it is rooted in our will-to-live. Egoism opposes to justice and liberality. Schopenhauer (2009b, 332) concluded that egoism expresses the absence of any moral motive. As the basis of justice and liberality, compassion is the ultimate tool to make egoism disappear. Compassion mirrors an unconditional altruism (Schopenhauer 2009b, 339, 342–343, 388). Compassion is a natural emotion for human beings: it is an integral part of human nature (Schopenhauer 2009b, 343). Emmanuel Levinas (1906–1995): is compassion related to our responsibility for others’ freedom? Emmanuel Levinas’ philosophy focused on our responsibility for others’ responsibility. Compassion is not excluded from the global picture. However, it does not constitute the true focus of Levinas’ philosophy of Otherness. Levinas defined the ‘face of the Other’ as the way the Other presents himself/herself in-front-of-us, so that the idea of the Other within ourselves is always overcome by the radical otherness of the Other (Levinas 1968, 21). The Other is always Absolutely other than our

464

M. Dion

perceptions and ideas. The Other is the Unknown that can neither be empirically described, nor objectively known. Being-for-others is historically/ontically situated, so that it can only be a subjective thinker, while being in existential loneliness (Levinas 2010, 209–211; Levinas 1974, 119–126). Existing is being subjected to various (unsurpassable) conditioning factors, being alone in one’s existence, and being-for-others (Levinas 2007, 21–25). Existing is being aware that we are subjected to the fundamental structures of existence. Existing is being-for-others. Being-for-others means that we are collectively responsible for others’ responsibility, said Levinas (1963, 38). At every instant, we must fight to set up required ontic conditions (existentiell level: being as an existing entity) for making others’ responsibility possible. There is no subjectivity without responsibility (Levinas 1996, 91–94). Every relationship with other people is intertwined with responsibility. Every communicational exchange has both personal responsibility for his/her own actions/words and part of collective responsibility for others’ responsibility. Being ourselves is being responsible for our actions as well as for others’ responsibility. Being responsible for others’ responsibility does not mean that we are expecting for reciprocity. Nobody can avoid his/her own responsibility for others’ responsibility. The process for creating our own self needs the acceptance to take upon ourselves our personal responsibility for our words/deeds (because of our individual freedom) and part of collective responsibility for others’ responsibility (Levinas 1996, 97). We are responsible for own freedom and others’ freedom. Being free is being responsible to build up a world in which all human beings could be free. We cannot be free if others live in ontic conditions of reduced freedom (Levinas 1968, 140; 1972, 86–87; 1974, 228; 1996, 93–95; 2010, 117). The Other is infinitely different than our self. Its infinity is actualized through his/her face, when lying in-front-of-us. The Other’s face can ever be reduced to our perceptions and interpretations. That is why metaphysical Desire is the main principle of interpersonal relationships. Other’s strangeness makes an integral part of his/her self as it is distinct from our own self. Other’s face overcomes our prejudices, expectations, and interpretations. Welcoming Other’s face could question the way we actualize our freedom, and even the way we are reacting against social injustice. Consciously or not, we participate in the social construct of injustices. Other’s face is the exteriority of his/her being as it is present in-front-of-us. Other’s face mirrors our duty to build up the ontic conditions for authentic community life. The radical otherness of the Other makes possible for us to become who-we-are and to participate in a ceaseless dialogue with others. Dialogical relationships with others improve our own self-understanding as well as the way we know and understand others’ situation and self. They unveil that we all share the same ontic conditions for freedom/responsibility. Responsibility requires authentic relationships with Other as well as a basic concern for social/economic/political justice (Levinas 1996, 82–84). Our collective responsibility for others’ responsibility is what makes us free, since it implies a concrete commitment for goodness, generosity, and compassion. Being responsible for others’ responsibility is living with others. We do not clearly know if we are undertaking the morally right actions, since we cannot know Other’s face. Others always transcend what we are perceiving from their self.

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 465

Others’ self can ever be circumscribed. This is the infinite transcendence of the Other (Levinas 1972, 11, 39–43). Building up a world in which everyone could be as much free as the others requires a strong reform of social, economic, political, and even religious institutions. That is why Levinas’ philosophy could be quite subversive in the business community. If ethical leadership is grounded on Levinasian philosophy of responsibility, then it could redirect the basic trends in organizational life and culture (Mansell 2008; Knights and O’Leary 2006). Even organizational ethics cannot remain the same, when designed in continuity with Levinas’ philosophy (Aasland 2007; Bevan and Corvellec 2007; Lewis and Farnsworth 2007). Marketing and managerial issues are radically reinterpreted, when taking Levinas’ philosophy of responsibility into account (Desmond 2007).

∗∗∗



What are the main interpretative pitfalls to avoid, when designing and applying an encompassing compassion in daily life? An encompassing compassion: • cannot be subjected to an unsurpassable and active role of self-interest: self-­ interest makes impossible to mix compassion with altruistic joy (for others’ ­happiness). Using compassion for profit maximization would be a way to distort the altruistic nature of compassion in the organizational life. Compassion cannot be a strategic tool for favouring our own self-interest. If it were the case, then compassion would lose its disinterestedness that allows us to embrace altruistic thoughts, emotions, words, attitudes, and behaviors. This is the pitfall of self-­ interest that Adam Smith’s and David Hume’s philosophy has fallen into, • cannot be dependent on a Kantian rationalization of compassion, as it is accomplished by practical reason: rationalizing compassion is considering compassion as concept, thus excluding that it is intrinsically linked to emptiness. This is the pitfall of Kantian rationalization, • cannot be isolated from other crucial virtues, such as love, kindness, altruism, respect, and equanimity: compassion presupposes loving kindness, respect, altruism, and equanimity towards all living beings. But compassion can never be identified to kindness, love, respect, altruism, or equanimity (about kindness and compassion, see: Gilbert et al. 2019). Compassion presupposes and overcomes each of those virtues. Virtues’ compartmentalization is the pitfall that has snared Arthur Schopenhauer’s and Emmanuel Levinas’ philosophy. If an encompassing compassion overcomes any self-interest as well as any attempt to rationalize compassionate attitudes and behaviors and if it presupposes loving kindness, respect, altruism, and equanimity towards all living beings, then it must be an unlimited and unconditional compassion. In Buddhism, an “encompassing compassion“is the great compassion that covers all sentient beings, without any discrimination (Lama Zopa Rinpoche 2019, 10, 17, 31, 144–159). Compassion towards all sentient beings is so important in Mahāyāna Buddhism that it is a prerequisite for Enlightenment. Lama Zopa Rinpoche (2019, 147–153) insisted on the need to educate everybody in compassion. Compassion is the source of inner,

466

M. Dion

relational, social, and world peace. There can never be any happiness without compassion. Compassion makes our life more meaningful (Lama Zopa Rinpoche 2019, 149, 153, 243). An encompassing compassion must widen the temporal scope of compassion, while ever particularly focusing on past, present, or future.

23.4 The Spiritual/Religious Path Toward an Encompassing Compassion Compassion could be defined in various ways, depending of our philosophical and/ or religious/spiritual viewpoint. Compassion is actualized through our temporality. It must then be related to past, present, and future. Understanding compassion in its temporal basis implies to grasp how compassion could be related to the pastness of present (memory), to the presentness of present (direct intuition), and to the futureness of present (expectation)  – the threefold ex-stasis of Time that have been explained by Augustine (1964, 263–279). This is a temporally based encompassing compassion. We will examine how Confucianism, Buddhism, and Islam deal with the temporal grounds of compassion.

23.4.1 Compassion and the Pastness of the Present (Retroactive Compassion) Compassion could be actualized in taking the past into account, insofar as past events are still efficient in the here-and-now: reminiscences are active in our mind and heart. This is the pastness of the present. The past remains comprehensible and unchanging, but its reminiscences make it change, when they arise in our personalized here-and-now. There are three basic modes of retroactive compassion. Firstly, compassionate stakeholders are aware of the negative impact of their past decisions and actions on people, groups, and even the whole society they live in. They know that ethical decision-making as well as the implementation processes could have been quite harmful for some people (and even for nonhuman beings). Peter Senge (2006, 160–161) explained that compassion could be grounded on a high level of awareness that involves a better understanding of the various systems and of the social pressures influencing organizational members. Compassionate stakeholder expresses compassion towards people (and nonhuman beings) who have been adversely affected by their decisions. They could have feelings of remorse and guilt, when thinking at their own past actions and decisions. Secondly, compassionate stakeholders could express their compassion for individuals/groups who have suffered, although they have not participated in the causal event. We could be compassionate for all people who have suffered in the past (Lama Zopa Rinpoche 2019, 151). We could feel compassion for victims of tragical events and environmental

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 467

disasters. Thirdly, compassionate stakeholders could observe similarities between their painful (present) experience and their own hurtful (past) experience. Reminiscences from the past are then the source of compassion for others’ suffering. Retroactive compassion implies: Confucianism • Respecting ancestors’ face; • Correcting our mistakes, vices, and faults; expressing humility and self-control (Confucius 1979: Book VII.22; IX.24–25; XIII.13; XV.2; XV.30; Hsün Tzu 1963: section 22.15); • Complying to rituals and social rituals/habits/customs (‘li’) (Hsün Tzu 1963: section 1.9, 23.9–16; Romar 2013; Ip 2009; Lam 2003), past traditions (Confucius 1979: Book VII.1); • Keeping in mind the “walk the talk” principle (Confucius 1979: Book XIV.27): what we have said must be actualized in given deeds; • Imitating virtuous people (Confucius 1979: Book I.6–8): when we have identified virtuous people we admire, we face the challenge to imitate their mode of being, speaking, and acting in the world. Buddhism • Meditating about our mother in our previous lives: Lo Lotsāwa (twelfth–thirteenth century) explained that compassion is firstly oriented towards the “perpetrators of harm”. The meditative practice of compassion focusing on our “multiple mothers” includes the following components: (1) being aware that our mother shows us infinite love and kindness, (2) having compassion for our suffering mother in our present life, (3) understanding that our enemy (in this life) has been our mother in some of our previous lives, (4) seeing that the enemy (who has been my mother in a previous life) does not control her mind and heart, and could eventually be reborn in lower states of existence (such as hells and animal life), (5) wishing to reach buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings, particularly those “perpetrators of harm”; (6) realizing an unconditional compassion: our anger, jealousy, and anger will disappear (Lo Lotsāwa 2006, 270–271). A similar meditative process of compassion has been developed by Goram Sönam Sengé (1429–1489; Śākya lineage of Tibetan Buddhism), but in less detail (Goram Sönam Sengé 2006, 535–536). In both cases, we could seize that the dualism friend/enemy is an illusion. • Understanding that ethnocentrism contradicts Buddhist principles: from a conventional/relative reality perspective, there are differences between people. But from an ultimate reality perspective, every sentient being bears the same Buddha-­ nature that makes possible for him/her to eventually reach Enlightenment. So, an “ethnocentric Buddhism” would be a contradiction. From a spiritual viewpoint, Buddhists cannot claim that their Buddhist identity includes ideological and political import, said Fuller (2018). • Acknowledging our own faults and defining ways not to commit them again.

468

M. Dion

Islam • Forgiveness hinders the arising of violent words/deeds (Surah VII.199): it is a prerequisite for our hereafter life in Heaven.

23.4.2 Compassion and the Presentness of the Present (Effective Compassion) Compassion could be actualized in the here-and-now, that is, the presentness of the present. Unlike the past, the present is elusive, although it is unchanging as an infinitesimal te19mporal unit. Compassionate stakeholders are aware of the negative (present) impact of their own decisions and actions. They know that ethical decision-­ making as well as the implementation processes could be harmful for some people (and nonhuman beings). In the here-and-now, compassionate stakeholders express compassion towards people (and nonhuman beings) who are adversely (and presently) affected by their decisions. Effective compassion implies: Confucianism • Two basic Confucian virtues define socially acceptable behaviours: (a) benevolence and compassion towards all people (Confucius 1979: Book I.3; IV.1–5; VI.22; VIII.2; XII.1; XII.22; XIII.27; XIV.6; XV.35–36; XVII.17; Hsün Tzu 1963: section 2.9; Wang, Li and Sun 2018); (b) righteousness, or moral rightness of individual behaviour; always searching for harmonious relationships, that is, the social and environmental harmony of things and beings (Confucius 1979: Book VIII.2; XVII.8; Hsün Tzu 1963: section 9.18; 20.2; 21.25). Mencius (1970) said that compassion is naturally present in human mind: “we cannot see the sufferings of others”. Benevolence makes an integral part of human mind, and thus of human nature (Mencius, 1970: Book VI, Part I, chap. XI.1; Book VII, Part II, chap. XVI). Compassion (or feeling of commiseration) implies the principle of benevolence. It is a strong expectation of Confucian organizational members (Lin et  al. 2013). The metaphor of the archer is used to unveil the individual responsibility to actualize benevolence and compassion in daily life. We are responsible, when failing to do so (Mencius 1970: Book II, Part I, chap. VI-VII; Book VI, Part I, chap. VI.7). Metaphors are used to mirror different aspects of human nature and thus as means to deepen and widen the scope of our understanding (Wong 2015, 190). • Respecting everyone (Confucius 1979: Book I.13; XII.5; Hsün Tzu 1963: section 21.20); • Loving everyone: benevolence includes love for others (Confucius 1979: Book I.6; XII.22; XVII.4; Mencius 1970: Book IV, Part II, chap. XXVIII.2). • Expressing generosity, righteousness, impartiality, and social justice (Confucius 1979: Book II.14; V.16; VIII.2; XIV.10; XVII.6; Hsün Tzu 1963: section 2.13–14);

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 469

• Showing a sense of adaptability (Confucius 1979: Book IX.4; XV.37); • Being courageous: benevolence implies to be courageous (Confucius 1979: Book VIII.2; IX.29; XIV.4; XIV.28; Hsün Tzu 1963: section 2.13). • As the virtue of humanity, compassion pervades love, respect, righteousness, and ethical conduct (loyalty, decency, and moral sense) (Chu Hsi 1963, 594–595). Buddhism • Abstaining to intentionally kill living beings (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Dasakanipāta, 217 (295); Aṅguttara Nikāya, Navakanipāta, 20 (395); Suttanipāta, Uragavagga, 220; Majjhima Nikāya, Angulimāla Sutta, 15 (103); Majjhima Nikāya, Sevitabbāsevitabba Sutta, 4 (47), and abstaining to approve others who kill living beings (Suttanipāta, Cūḷavagga, 394) • Having a mind of loving kindness towards all living beings (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Catukkanipāta, 67 (72); Saṃyutta Nikāya, Opammasaṃyutta, 3–4 (264); focusing on selflessness, empathy, and unconditional love/compassion towards all living beings (Marques 2012); • Being compassionate towards those who are harassed, particularly elder monks (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Pañcakanipāta, 166 (194); • Universal and unconditional compassion towards all living beings (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Aṭṭhakanipāta, 1 (151); Saṃyutta Nikāya, Sagāthāvagga, 14 (111); Majjhima Nikāya, Cūḷakammavibhanga Sutta, 6 (203–204), and thus loving kindness towards the whole world (Suttanipāta, 149–150); compassion is expressed through tender concerns with others’ happiness and wellbeing (Saṃyutta Nikāya, Nidānavagga, 3 (199); • Loving kindness, compassion, altruistic joy, and equanimity are the fundamental ways to release our mind from disruptive emotions (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Ekādasakanipāta, 15 (342); Saṃyutta Nikāya, Mahāvagga, Bojjhaṅgasaṃyutta, 54 (119–120). Compassion, loving kindness, harmlessness, and patience protects others as well as ourselves from disruptive emotions (Saṃyutta Nikāya, Mahāvagga, Satipatthānasaṃyutta, 19 (169). They hinder the growth of anger, jealousy, and hatred (ill will) in our mind and heart (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Pañcakanipāta, 75 (92); 167 (196); Saṃyutta Nikāya, Mahāvagga, Bojjhaṅgasaṃyutta, 51 (105–106); Majjhima Nikāya, Subha Sutta, 24 (207). • Abstaining to inflict any kind of harm to others, regardless of intentional means and ends (Bhikkhu Anālayo 2015a, 8); • Releasing ourselves from basic hindrances to Enlightenment and from corruptions of our mind does not require the wish to release the whole world from samsaric suffering (Aṅguttara Nikāya, Dasakanipāta, 95 (195). However, Bhikkhu Anālayo (2015b, 7) rightly explained that the compassionate wish to save all sentient beings has been developed when the bodhisattva ideal was arising in Buddhist communities. In his Ornament of Precious Liberation, Gampopa (1079–1153; Kagyü lineage of Tibetan Buddhism) has made the point quite clear: “when loving kindness and compassion become part of you, you have so much care for other conscious beings that personal liberation alone would be unbearable” (Gampopa 2015, 189). The wish for others’ happiness (loving kind-

470

M. Dion

ness) precedes the wish for others’ releasement from suffering (compassion) (Gampopa 2015, 194, 196); • Atiśa Dīpaṃkara (982–1054) made an unsurpassable and non-dualistic togetherness between compassion and emptiness: compassion arises and grows from emptiness, and eventually ceases in emptiness. Compassion is emptiness. Compassion has neither an intrinsic existence, nor an intrinsic import. Practicing compassion is realizing emptiness. Emptiness is compassion, since compassion is the only way to realize emptiness (Atiśa Dīpaṃkara 2006, 265–267); • Being altruistic and humble: enhancing others’ virtues (Gould 1995); • Acknowledging that from a perspective of ultimate reality, there are no differences between human beings, since the self is unsubstantial, impermanent, and interdependent: in doing so, we will not be attached to anything at all. Detachment from our opinions and words as well as from religious/spiritual rituals and practices is liberating (Gross 2014, 7). Detachment makes unconditional compassion possible. Islam • Patience and perseverance (Surah XXXI.17). Ibn Kathir (701–774) explained that believers should be patient “when people cause harm or annoyance” (Tafsir, volume 7: 583). Patience is alwas related to God: “for thy Lord’s (Cause), be patient and constant!” (Surah LXXIV.7). Ibn Kathir (Tafsir, volume 10: 244) said that “your patience with their harms be for the Face of your Lord, the Mighty and Majestic”; • Generosity towards the poor and the needy (Surah VIII.3–4); Charity is divinely enhanced: “God will deprive usury of all blessing, but will give increase for deeds of charity: for He loveth not creatures ungrateful and wicked” (Surah II.276). Regular charity is thus basically linked to God’s rewards (Surah II.277); • Tolerance and respect for others’ religious/spiritual traditions: “If it had been thy Lord’s Will, they would all have believed, - All who are on earth! Wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!” (Surah X.99) (see also: Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, volume 4, 661–662); • ‘Saving others’ face’ (Surah XLIX.12; CIV.1); • Words of kindness: “And even it thou hast to turn away from them in pursuit of the Mercy from thy Lord which thou dost expect yet speak to them a word of easy kindness” (Surah XVII.28). Words of kindness can allow us to avoid conflictual relationships (Surah XLIX.12; CIV.1; Sahih al-Bukhâri, vol. 3, book 43, no 637; vol. 9, book 89, no 298); • Loyalty towards people, particularly in business transactions (Ali 1995); • The interconnectedness between ethical concerns and religious principles can widen the scope of participation and cooperation in business communities (Azid and Asutay 2007); • Human being is an existentially finite and free being (“Surah IV.28: “Man was created weak (in flesh)”) who is the ultimate steward of God’s Creation (human being is the “vicegerent on earth” (Surah II.30), explained Mohammed Arkoun (2012, 64). If there is any mischievousness and evil in human heart, it stems from

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 471

human wills, motivations, and desires. Human beings have “wronged their own souls” (Surah XVI.33). The Sufi poet Rumi (1207–1273) said that our passion for God allows us to be detached from innumerable desires (Rumi 2003, 179). Our moral consciousness comes from God. Moral discernment is a human capacity that stems from God’s Creation (Surah XXI.35), although good deeds are divinely inspired (Surah XXI.73). But God will never change human souls, although Divine punishments follow from God’s Will: “Verily never will God change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (in their own souls). But when (once) God willeth a people’s punishment, there can be no turning back, nor will they find, besides Him, any to protect” (Surah XIII.11). • Human being is the ultimate steward of God’s Creation (Surah II.30; VI.165; VII.10; X.24). He/she has huge moral responsibilities toward the physical environment, natural beings, and the whole Universe. God is the Owner of the Universe (Surah II.116; 284; III.109; 129; IV.131; 171; VI.101; XI.7; XIV.2; XV.85; XVI.3; 52; XX.6; XXI.19; 56; XXII.64; XXIV.64; XXIX.19; XXXII.4; XXXV.1; 17; XXXVI.22; 36; XLV.22; LVII.10; LXXXV.13). Any human steward of God’s Creation is existentially finite. So, he/she must develop his/her thought and wisdom, when dealing with environmental issues (Surah XVI.11–12). He/she must also “celebrate the praises of God (in gratitude)” (Surah XVI.13). Praising God is not enough. Every believer must also improve his/her wisdom and deepen his/her own thoughts about environmental issues. God’s Creation needs a natural equilibrium between all existing powers and beings, although natural beings have been created for the profit of human beings (Surah II.29; XV.19; 21; XXII.34; 36; XXXI.20; LXXI.19; LXXX.24). Every living being has been divinely created so that it can realize its own potentialities. God takes care of all creatures (Surah XIX.94; XXIX.60).

23.4.3 Compassion and the Futureness of the Present (Anticipatory Compassion) Compassion could be actualized in the futureness of the present. Like the present, the future is elusive. Future is continuously changing. There are two basic modes of anticipatory compassion. Firstly, compassionate stakeholders know that their decisions and actions will be harmful for some people (and nonhuman beings). They know that ethical decision-making as well as the implementation processes will be harmful for some people (and nonhuman beings). Compassionate stakeholders have the capacity to express compassion towards people (and nonhuman beings) who will be adversely affected by their decisions. Secondly, compassionate stakeholders know that some people will probably suffer because of their choices. They refer to their (past) life experiences. Of course, their judgment could be wrong. What is true for someone is not necessarily true for someone else. However, anticipatory compassion means that we are taking such probability upon ourselves. We do not wait

472

M. Dion

for his/her real life, but rather presuppose that he/she could suffer because of his/her choices. We could wish that we will ever put harm to others in the future (Lama Zopa Rinpoche 2019, 151). Anticipatory compassion implies: Confucianism • Compassion is the firm resolution to comply with the ‘Golden Rule’: “do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire” (Confucius 1979: Book IV.15; V.12; VI.30; XV.24). Buddhism • Identifying the probable effects of our decisions/actions, so that we could reduce the negative impact (suffering) on human and nonhuman beings: Buddha Śākyamuni explained that compassion should be applied to future generations (Saṃyutta Nikāya, Kassapasaṃyutta, 5 (203). The temporal basis of anticipation is thus extended in the very long-term. Anticipatory compassion then means that in every decision/action, we will try to favour the best quality of life for future generations. It is a very strong moral responsibility. Compassion does not only implies understanding and empathy towards people who have suffered (in the past) and people who are now suffering (in the present), regardless of our personal contribution to such suffering. Compassion also requires choosing given decisions and actions which will not make future generations suffering. It is thus a desire not to make people suffering, in the present as well as in the future. Compassion is a deep concern for the wellbeing of future (human and nonhuman) generations. Unlike craving, compassion implies a desire that does not give birth to any kind of attachment. Negative emotions, such as craving and hatred, must be purified, since they are “fundamental toxins of the mind” (Ekman et al. 2005). Islam • The Sufi theologian Al-Ghazzālī (1058–1111) insisted on God’s ultimate love for His servants: “God shall become responsible for providing such a man’s sustenance and will pay attention to him from time to time without his experiencing any hardship or trouble. God shall be His Friend and Helper and protect him from all evils. God shall become his intimate Companion, so much as that he will not be fearful in loneliness, nor will he be frightened in facing change and altercation” (Al-Ghazzālī 2012, 216). • God’s forgiveness for others’ faults: compassion implies not to focus on others’ faults. We must rather “ask for God’s forgiveness for them” (Surah III.159). Any gentleness, compassion and forgiveness are rooted in Allah’s Mercy, said Ibn Kathir (Tafsir, volume 2: 304). God’s Mercy is given to righteous persons (Surah XXI.75 and XXI.86). Compassion is a basic pillar of Islam faith and one of human qualities for which we will be judged in the hereafter life (Alharbi and Al Hadid, 2019, 1356). Compassion towards guilty people is then a wish for God’s forgiveness. Only God can judge human wills, motivations, and deeds: “The Command Rests with none but God: He declares the Truth, and He is the best of judges” (Surah VI.57).

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 473

• If God is “full of loving-kindness” and thus the Absolutely Compassionate (Surah XI.90; XVI.7; 47; XXII.65; XXIV.20; LVII.9; LXXXV.14), then every believer must always be compassionate towards all created beings. God will give His Infinite Love to all believers who undertake deeds of righteousness (Surah XIX.96). Deeds of righteousness can never exclude compassion towards suffering beings.

∗∗∗



Confucianism, Buddhism, and Islam have developed different strategies to cope with the four organizational loci of suffering (micro-suffering, meso-suffering, macro-suffering, and ecosystem suffering). Confucianism focuses on ethical conduct (Golden Rule) and social conformism (compliance with past traditions). It is basically oriented towards the virtuous components of human nature. A Confucian approach to suffering in business would emphasize virtuous conduct and social conformism. Buddhism puts the emphasis on the growth of a non-dualistic mind and on the need to realize ultimate reality (emptiness): compassion is then connected to previous lives as well as the wellbeing of future generations. But compassion remains emptiness. A Buddhist approach to suffering in business would develop non-dualistic mind and take the omnipresent emptiness into account, whether the organizational realities and phenomena can be. Islam accentuates eternal life, and makes our present life directly linked to our hereafter life: compassion then appears as a basic virtue. The wish that people’s faults will be forgiven by God makes an integral part of compassion. An Islamic approach to suffering in business would make earthly life and eternal life interconnected. Every business reality/phenomenon would then be interpreted as being directly connected to God and the hereafter-­ life. The organizational loci of suffering revealed the importance of compassion, respect, and justice. The encompassing compassion requires an unconditional respect for others. It can be differently applied in theistic (like Islam) and non-­ theistic (like Confucianism and Buddhism) perspectives.

23.5 The Encompassing Compassion as a Higher Purpose for Conscious Capitalism The notion of conscious capitalism refers to a vague necessity to have a “higher purpose than profit maximization”. But what does it precisely mean? Sisodia and Mackey (2014) did not provide any set of guidelines that could cover the various religious/spiritual traditions as agnostic and atheistic perspectives. A purpose that is higher than profit maximization unveils that a higher purpose cannot accept profit maximization at any cost. Making profit is clearly not problematic. However, profit maximization presupposes that making profit is the most important and relevant corporate concern and that the end justifies the means. Having a higher purpose than profit maximization is thus making both presuppositions disappear. We should

474

M. Dion

distinguish a broader purpose and a higher purpose. In both cases, profit maximization is the reference point. On one hand, a broader purpose is located “besides” profit maximization: this purpose could favour both corporate profit and other socially and environmentally based concerns. Petriglieri et al. (2019, 104) said that a broader purpose could include “living a life of service to others and making the planet a better place”. Such social and environmental concerns seem to be quite unclear. They are so vague that organizational members will ever know what kind of behavior is expected and enhanced in business. A broader purpose could allow executives, managers, and employees to better define the meaning of their work, or to widen the scope of empowerment in their organization (Petriglieri et al. 2019, 104). Henderson (2020, 87) defined an “authentic purpose” as “a clear, collective sense of a company’s goals that reaches beyond simply making money and is rooted in deeply held common values and embedded in the firm’s strategy and organization”. According to Quinn and Thakor (2019, 8–14), “authenticity ensures that higher purpose will change the culture of the organization from one of intrafirm competition and conflict to one of shared beliefs, renewed commitment to the purpose, and cooperation”. An authentic higher purpose is then “the arbiter of every decision, the driver of harder choices, and a differentiator for the organization”. The higher purpose is “the constant integrator of all decisions and guide the solving of all problems” (Quinn and Thakor 2019, 130). A higher purpose is “an intention that is grander than conventional self-interest” (Quinn and Thakor 2019, 13). A higher purpose “reflects a desire to contribute, a hunger to serve some greater good”. Quinn and Thakor (2019) identified the paradox of pursuing an organizational higher purpose: a higher purpose requires to serve common good rather than shareholders’ interests. This is the essence of a “prosocial higher purpose of the organization” (Quinn and Thakor 2019, 37). Focusing on a higher purpose could threaten profit maximization. Nonetheless, pursuing an authentic organizational higher purpose produces economic gain. There is also another organizationally driven paradox: enhancing bottom line and focusing on productivity targets “destroy relationships”, and then productivity targets are not met (Quinn and Thakor 2019, 32). That is why employees must become “emotionally connected to the higher purpose” (Quinn and Thakor 2019, 10). An authentic higher purpose often arises during organizational crises, said Quinn and Thakor. It then enhances and strengthens trust and collaboration (2019, 76–78, 188–190). Raworth (2018, 45, 361) believed that the new corporate purpose should be related to the satisfaction of basic human rights and the optimal ecological stability. Freeman et al. (2020, 18–19) asserted that corporate purpose must be grounded on a “sense of values and ethics”. Purpose must also “inspire employees as well as other stakeholders who come to share that purpose”. A higher purpose could take three basic forms. Firstly, a higher purpose could presuppose that social and environmental concerns have priority over the search for corporate profitability. Ideological thinking then replaces the mandatory quest for corporate profitability. Such higher purpose is not viable in the long run. Secondly, a higher purpose could have either a religious ground (embracing God’s Will/Word and trying to apply it in daily life), or non-theistic roots (mirroring the universal presence of Dao/Buddha-nature). Religions favour God’s transcendence (the

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 475

infinity in God), while non-theistic spiritualities put the emphasis on inner transcendence (the infinity in human mind/heart). Here, religions and spiritualities impose some norms of behavior to relativize the human search for wealth. Executives, managers, and employees try to comply with such behavioral norms that have ­religious/ spiritual grounds. Thirdly, the value−/virtue-centered approach to business issues applies the import of religious/spiritual values and virtues to business realities and phenomena, without embracing the whole conceptual set of beliefs and practices. For instance, non-Buddhist executives, managers and employees could refer to the Buddhist notion of compassion, although they do not embrace the principle of universal emptiness on which the universal and unconditional emptiness is rooted. Kriger and Seng (2005, 792) looked at the “primary” spiritual values: forgiveness, kindness, integrity, compassion/empathy, honesty/truthfulness, patience, courage/ inner strength, trust, humility, loving kindness, peacefulness, thankfulness, service to others, guidance, joy, equanimity, stillness/inner peace. This list of “spiritual values” has been drawn from the Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Christian and Islamic Traditions. However, unlike Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (which are theistic spiritualities), Buddhism is strongly atheistic (there is no god in Buddhism). We should not underestimate the “God factor”, since every spiritual value in a theistic spirituality will have a specific meaning that is closely linked to the existence of God. Klaus and Fernando (2016, 88) argued that spiritual leaders can understand a higher purpose as an altruistic attitude and a conscious will to favor common good. Mackey et al. (2020, 226) did not define the contents of a “higher purpose”. Rather, they proposed three different paths of spiritual growth that allow organizational members to find a higher purpose for business activities. The first path explores contemplation and meditation. It can easily be applied in Buddhist practices. It can also give sense to mystical experiences, particularly in theistic religions. The second path unveils the importance of service and devotion, care, and selflessness. The third path focuses on the personal commitment to a transcendent purpose. The three paths can be applied in theistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism) and non-theistic spiritualities (Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism). Mackey et al. (2020) widened the scope of spiritual experience, particularly when spirituality has nothing to do with world religions and spiritualities. Religions and spiritualities could allow businesspeople to define what a higher purpose is all about. From the perspective of monotheistic religions, having a higher purpose in business could imply two basic attitudes. Believers are personally connected either to the Will/Word of God, or to the Infinite (since human being is existentially finite and could feel dependent on the Infinite). An “encompassing compassion” is a universal and unconditional compassion towards all human beings, regardless of personalities and circumstances. It creates a spiritual path to self-­ transcendence, whether it is theistic or non-theistic. The human capacity to reach an encompassing compassion can be defined in various ways, depending on the relationship between the finite and the infinite. In business organizations, encompassing compassion would then be closely linked to the best ways to comply ourselves (as directors, executives, managers, or employees) to the Will/Word of God. The meaning of the encompassing compassion would be strictly connected to the way God

476

M. Dion

expects us to be compassionate towards others. From the perspective of non-theistic spiritualities, people acknowledge that the Infinite is present in everybody: the Infinite is then either the (universal) Dao (Daoism) or the (universal) Buddha-nature (Buddhism). In business organizations, encompassing compassion would then be related to the primordial pureness (and emptiness) of human mind and to unconditional (infinite) altruism and love. It would deeply change the way all stakeholders are interconnected, regardless of specific interests. From a Hindu perspective, a portion of the Infinite (Brahma, Creator of the Universe) is present in everybody: this is the Atman. From the real beginning of the samsaric existence, the Atman merged with Brahma. In business organizations, Hindu believers would take such spiritual path into account. Unlike Buddhists, Hindus believe that reincarnation could coexist with theistic beliefs. It largely changes the context in which encompassing compassion could be put in practice, for Buddhists and Hindus as well. We have described three types of temporally based compassion: retroactive compassion, effective compassion, and anticipatory compassion. Retroactive compassion unveils the crucial importance of temporality, whether it refers to past (collective) traditions (Confucianism), individual previous lives (Buddhism), or the intrinsic link between the past and the hereafter life (Islam). Effective compassion mirrors the fact that compassion can never be isolated from human nature, regardless of its import. Anticipatory compassion unveils the ultimate character of Transcendence, whether it is understood as self-transcendence (Confucianism, Buddhism), or as God (Islam). Those three types of compassion could be applied in the organizational life, although they could be subjected to social, cultural, political, and religious/spiritual conditioning factors. The notion of the encompassing compassion is polysemous. The scope of the encompassing compassion is unlimited in Buddhism, while it is more constrained by Confucian conformism. In Islam, the encompassing compassion can only be found in God, All-Forgiving, All-Merciful and All-Compassionate. The Buddhist and Islamic ideal are then at the opposite side of the “encompassing compassion road”. The Infinite is either within the living being (Buddha-nature, the encompassing emptiness) or in God (Islam). Confucianism does not claim anything about the Infinite.

23.6 Conclusion The world-dream of conscious capitalism (as the “Grand revolutionary narrative”) has been captured by Mackey and Sisodia (2014, 266): “One day, virtually every business will operate with a sense of higher purpose, integrate the interests of all stakeholders, develop and elevate conscious leaders, and build a culture of trust, accountability, and caring”. Because of its quasi-utopian aim, the basic philosophy of conscious capitalism fights postmodernist philosophy. Mackey and Sisodia (2014, 161–162) asserted that postmodernist philosophy denies any possibility to

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 477

reach objective truth. Everything is an interpretation (Nietzsche 1968, 267, 327). Even faith is an interpretation (Brümmer 2010). The act of faith is an interpretation of the way human self, the world, Nature, and God/Ultimate Reality exist and evolve. It is a way to interpret the interconnectedness between the Infinite and the finite. Karl Popper (2002, 278) suggested that science can neither reach any truth, nor enunciate any probability. The search for truth remains the basic motive for scientific research and discovery. But science does not hold any truth. It can only try to falsify given scientific theory, and hopefully could make it more plausible than other theories. As a quasi-utopia, conscious capitalism conveys a certainty to hold the ultimate truth about to possibility of “Win-Win-Win…” solutions for all stakeholders. But advocates of conscious capitalism are unable to make conscious capitalism concretely attractive. As O’Toole (2019) rightly said, “their influence is limited to the like-minded, and they are unlikely to change the practices of investor capitalism that threaten the cultures of enlightened companies”. Colin-Jones and Murthy (2021, 91–92) explained how conscious capitalism is based on the “normative assumptions of stakeholder theory”, thus providing a “metaparadigm” (new way of seeing) and a sociological paradigm (moulding corporate cultures and strategies). However, conscious capitalism provides any concrete way for “navigating the complexities of day-to-day decision-making”. An “economics of mutuality” is then proposed to make paradigm shift more concrete in the organizational life and culture. Nowadays, many business corporations enhance their “corporate world-dream”, that is, a world that the leaders of such enterprises would like to live in. Those corporate world-dreams are particularly described in corporate social responsibility/ sustainable development/good citizenship reports. However, compassion seems not to be explicitly emphasized in such corporate reports. Nonetheless, the actualization of compassion in the organizational life and culture could strengthen such corporate world-dreams. An encompassing compassion could certainly be a long-term objective and require strong reorientation of business practices. Organizations could benefit from the way philosophy and main world religions/spiritualities deal with compassion. Compassionate organizations absolutely need compassionate top managers, directors, and shareholders since they all could make the difference in the long run. Nonetheless, they cannot make their organization more compassionate by themselves. The spiritual awareness that is a sine qua non condition for any compassionate organization must be more widespread in the whole society, among all consumers and business partners. This is the only way to have viable corporate world-dream about an encompassing compassion. However, the notion of an encompassing compassion is not a panacea, when designing the scope of conscious capitalism. It is not an ideological tool for reducing the evolving character of capitalist institutions and organizations. The encompassing compassion should not be used to convey and strengthen ideological beliefs and values. Rather, the encompassing compassion is an anti-ideological notion that may allow businesspeople to define the meaning and scope of conscious capitalism.

478

M. Dion

References Aasland, Dag G. 2007. The Exteriority of Ethics in Management and Its Transition Into Justice: A Levinasian approach to Ethics in Business. Business Ethics: A European Review 16 (3): 220–226. Abdul-Rauf, Mohammed. 1979. The Islamic Doctrine of Economics and Contemporary Economic Thought. Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. Aburdene, Patricia. 2012. Conscious Money. Living, Creating, and Investing with Your Values for a Sustainable New Prosperity. New York: Atria/Beyond Words. Al-Ghazzālī. 2012. The Path of Worshippers to the Paradise of the Lord of the Worlds. Lanham: University Press of America. Alharbi, Jalal, and Lourance Al Hadid. 2019. Towards an Understanding of Compassion from an Islamic Perspective. Journal of Clinical Nursing 28: 1354–1358. Ali, Abbas J. 1995. Cultural Discontinuity and Arab Management Thought. International Studies of Management and Organization 3 (3): 3–70. Arkoun, Mohammed. 2012. La pensée arabe. Paris: Quadrige/PUF. Atiśa Dīpaṃkara. 2006. Advice to Namdak Tusknor, In Mind Training. The Great Collection (trans. Thupten Jinpa), The Library of Tibetan Classics, Vol. 1, 263–268. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Augustine. 1964. Confessions. Paris: GF-Flammarion. Azid, Toseef, and Mehmet Asutay. 2007. Does Ethico-Moral Coalition Complement to Economic Coalition? A Response in the Periphery of Islamic Economics. Humanomics 23 (3): 153–173. Bevan, David, and Hervé Corvellec. 2007. The Impossibility of Corporate Ethics: For a Levinasian Approach to Managerial Ethics. Business Ethics: A European Review 16 (3): 208–219. Bhikkhu Anālayo. 2015a. Compassion and Emptiness in Early Buddhist Meditation. Cambridge: Windhorse Publications. ———. 2015b. Compassion in the Āgamas and Nikāyas. Dharma Drum Journal of Buddhist Studies 16: 1–31. Boiral, O. 2009. Greening the Corporation Through Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics 87: 221–236. Boiral, O., and P.  Paillé. 2012. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour for the Environment: Measurement and Validation. Journal of Business Ethics 109: 431–445. Brümmer, Vincent. 2010. Spirituality and the Hermeneutics of Faith. HTS Teologiese Studies/ Theological Studies 66 (1). https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v66i1.891. Chu Hsi. 1963. A Treatise on Jen, A Source of Chinese Philosophy (trans. Wing-Tsit Chan), 593–597. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Colin-Jones, Alastair, and Sudhir Rama Murthy. 2021. Mutuality and Concepts of Responsible Business. In Putting Purpose Into Practice. The Economics of Mutuality, ed. Colin Mayer and Bruno Roche, 87–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Confucius. 1979. The Analects. London: Penguin Books. Daily, B.F., J.W.  Bishop, and N.  Govindarajulu. 2009. A Conceptual Model for Organizational Citizenship Behavior Directed Toward the Environment. Business and Society 48 (2): 243–256. Desmond, John. 2007. Levinas: Beyond Egoism in Marketing and Management. Business Ethics: A European Review 16 (3): 227–238. DiMaggio, Paul J., and Walter W. Powell. 1983. The Iron Cate Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160. Ekman, Paul, Richard J. Davidson, Matthieu Ricard, and B. Allan Wallace. 2005. Buddhist and Psychological Perspectives on Emotions and Well-Being. Current Directions in Psychological Science 14 (2): 59–63. Freeman, R. Edward, Kirsten E. Martin, and Bidhan L. Parmar. 2020. The Power of and Responsible Business Without Trade-Offs. New York: Columbia University Press.

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 479 Frémeaux, Sandrine, and Grant Michelson. 2017. The Common Good of the Firm and Humanistic Management: Conscious Capitalism and Economy of Communion. Journal of Business Ethics 145: 701–719. Fuller, Paul. 2018. The Narratives of Ethnocentric Buddhist Identity. Journal of the British Association for the Study of Religions 20: 19–44. Fyke, Jeremy P., and Patrice M. Buzzanell. 2013. The Ethics of Conscious Capitalism: Wicked Problems in Leading Change and Changing Leaders. Human Relations 66 (12): 1619–1643. Gampopa. 2015. Ornament of Precious Liberation. A Wish-Fulfilling Gem of Sublime Dharma. In Stages of the Buddha’s Teachings (trans. Ulrike Roesler, Ken Holmes and David P. Jackson), The Library of Tibetan Classics, Vol. 10, 121–381. Somerville: Wisdom Publications. Gilbert, Paul, Jaskaran Basran, Michael MacArthur, and James N. Kirby. 2019. Differences in the Semantics of Prosocial Worlds: an Exploration of Compassion and Kindness. Mindfulness. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-­019-­01191-­x. Goram Sönam Sengé. 2006. A Key to the Profound Essential Points: A Meditation Guide to Parting from the Four Clingings. In Mind Training. The Great Collection (trans. Thupten Jinpa), The Library of Tibetan Classics, Vol. 1, 529–539. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Gould, Stephen J. 1995. The Buddhist Perspective on Business Ethics: Experiential Exercises for Exploration and Practice. Journal of Business Ethics 14: 63–70. Grant, K. 2008. Who Are the Lepers in Our Organizations?: A Case for Compassionate Leadership. The Business Renaissance Quarterly: Enhancing the Quality of Life at Work 3 (2): 75–91. Gross, Rita M. 2014. Historical Consciousness and Traditional Buddhist Narratives. International Journal of Dharma Studies 1: 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/2196-­8802-­1-­5. Guyer, Paul. 2012. Schopenhauer, Kant and Compassion. Kantian Review 17 (2): 403–429. Habermas, Jürgen. 2021. Une histoire de la philosophie. I- La constellation occidentale de la foi et du savoir. Paris: Gallimard. Haneef, Mohammad Aslam. 1995. Contemporary Islamic Economic Thought. A Selected Comparative Analysis. Ikraq: Kuala Lumpur. Henderson, Rebecca. 2020. Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire. New York: PublicAffairs. Hsün Tzu. 1963. Hsün Tzu. Basic Writings. New York: Columbia University Press. Hume, David. 1983. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company. ———. 1969. A Treatise of Human Nature. London: Penguin Books. Ibn Kathir. 2000. Tafsir Ibn Kathir. Riyadh/Houston/New York/Lahore: Darussalam Publishers. 10 volumes. Ip, Po Keung. 2009. Is Confucianism Good for Business Ethics in China? Journal of Business Ethics 88: 463–476. Jørgensen, P.E., and M. Isaksson. 2015. The Compassionate Organization. Contesting the Rhetoric of Goodwill in Public Sector Value Statements. International Journal of Public Sector Management 28 (1): 72–83. Kanagaretnam, K., G.J.  Lobo, and C.  Wang. 2015. Religiosity and Earnings Management: International Evidence from the Banking Industry. Journal of Business Ethics 132: 277–296. Kanov, J.M., S. Maitlis, M.C. Worline, J.E. Dutton, P.J. Frost, and J.M. Lilius. 2004. Compassion in Organizational Life. The American Behavioral Scientist 47 (6): 808–827. Kant, Immanuel. 1991. Metaphysical First Principles of the Doctrine of Virtue. In The Metaphysics of Morals, 179–279. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 2002. Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. New Haven/London: Yale University Press. Kassis, Hanna E. 1983. A Concordance of the Qur’an. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kernochan, R.A., D.W.  McCormick, and J.A.  White. 2007. Spirituality and the Management Teacher. Reflections of Three Buddhists on Compassion, Mindfulness, and Selflessness in the Classroom. Journal of Management Inquiry 16 (1): 61–75. Klaus, L., and M.  Fernando. 2016. Enacting Spiritual Leadership in Business Through Ego-­ Transcendence. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 37 (1): 71–92.

480

M. Dion

Knights, David and Majella O’Leary. 2006. Leadership, Ethics and Responsibility to the Other. Journal of Business Ethics 67: 125–137. Kriger, M., and Y.  Seng. 2005. Leadership with Inner Meaning: A Contingency Theory of Leadership Based on the Worldviews of Five Religions. The Leadership Quarterly 16: 771–806. Lam, Kit-Chun Joanna. 2003. Confucian Business Ethics and the Economy. Journal of Business Ethics 43: 153–162. Lama Zopa Rinpoche. 2019. Bodhicitta. Practice for a Meaningful Life. Somerville: Wisdom Publications. Lamm, E., J.  Tosti-Kharas, and E.G.  Williams. 2013. Read This Article, but Don’t Print It: Organizational Citizenship Behavior Toward the Environment. Group and Organization Management XX (X): 1–35. Levinas, Emmanuel. 1974. Autrement qu’être; ou, Au-delà de l’essence. La Haye: Martinus Nijhoff. ———. 1963. Difficile liberté. Paris: Albin Michel. ———. 2010. Entre nous. Essai sur le penser-à-l’autre. Paris: Le livre de poche. ———. 1996. Éthique et infini. Paris: Le livre de poche. ———. 1972. Humanisme de l’autre homme. Fata Morgana. ———. 2007. Le temps et l’autre. Paris: PUF/Quadrige. ———. 1968. Totalité et infini. Essai sur l’extériorité. La Haye: Martinus Nijhoff. Lewis, Malcolm, and John Farnsworth. 2007. Financialisation and the Ethical Moment: Levinas and the Encounter with Business Practice. Society and Business Review 2 (2): 179–192. Lin, Liang-Hung, Yu-Ling Ho, and Wei-Hsin Eugenia Lin. 2013. Confucian and Taoist Work Values: An Exploratory Study of the Chinese Transformational Leadership Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 113: 91–103. Lo Lotsāwa. 2006. Glorious Virvapa’s Mind Training. In Mind Training. The Great Collection (trans. Thupten Jinpa), The Library of Tibetan Classics, Vol. 1, 269–271. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Mackey, John, Steve McIntosh, and Carter Phipps. 2020. Conscious Leadership. Elevating Humanity Through Business. New York: Penguin Random House. Mackey, John, and Rajendra Sisodia. 2014. Conscious Capitalism. Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Mansell, Samuel. 2008. Proximity and Rationalisation: The Limits of a Levinasian Ethics in the Context of Corporate Governance and Regulation. Journal of Business Ethics 83: 565–577. Marques, Joan. 2012. Making Buddhism Work @ Work: The Transformation of a Religion into a Seasoned Ethical System. Journal of Management Development 31 (6): 537–549. Mayfield, C.O., and T.D.  Taber. 2010. A Prosocial Self-Concept Approach to Understanding Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Managerial Psychology 25 (7): 741–763. Mencius. 1970. The Works of Mencius. New York: Dover Publications. Moon, T.-W., W.-M. Hur, S.-H. Ko, J.-W. Kim, and S.-W. Yoon. 2014. Bridging Corporate Social Responsibility and Compassion at Work. Relations to Organizational Justice and Affective Organizational Commitment. Career Development International 19 (1): 49–72. Muethel, M., M. Hoegl, and K.P. Parboteeah. 2011. National Business Ideology and Employees’ Prosocial Values. Journal of International Business Studies 42: 183–201. Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1968. The Will to Power. New York: Vintage Books. O’Toole, James. 2019. The Enlightened Capitalists. Cautionary Tales of Business Pioneers Who Tried to Do Well by Doing Good. New York: HarperCollins. Petriglieri, Gianpero, Susan Ashford, and Amy Wrzesniewski. 2019. Thriving in the gig economy. Harvard Business Review 2019 (Fall Special Issue): 100–105. Pio, E. 2005. Eastern Karma. Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 19: 65–78. Popper, Karl. 2002. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London/New York: Routledge. Pryor, Frederic L. 1985. The Islamic Economic System. Journal of Comparative Economics 9: 197–223. Puig de la Bellacasa, María. 2012. ‘Nothing Comes Without Its World’: Thinking With Care. The Sociological Review 60 (2): 197–216.

23  The Philosophical and Spiritual/Religious Quest for an Encompassing Compassion… 481 Quinn, Robert E., and Anjan V.  Thakor. 2019. The Economics of Higher Purpose. Eight Counterintuitive Steps for Creating a Purpose-Driven Organization. Oakland: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Raworth, Kate. 2018. La théorie du donut. L’économie de demain en sept principes. Paris: J’ai lu. Romar, Edward J. 2013. Confucian Virtues and Business Ethics. In Handbook of the Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics, ed. C. Luetge, 983–1004. Dordrecht: Springer. Rumi. 2003. Odes mystiques. Paris, Coll. « Sagesses », no 180, Points. Schopenhauer, Arthur. 2009a. Le monde comme volonté et représentation. Tome 1, Paris, Coll. “Folio essais”, no 522, Gallimard. ———. 2009b. Mémoire sur le fondement de la morale. In Les deux problèmes fondamentaux de l’éthique (trad. C. Sommer), 197–426. Paris, Coll. “Folio essais”, no 521, Gallimard. Senge, Peter. 2006. The Fifth Discipline. The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Currency. Siddiqi, Mohammad Nejatullah. 1986. The Guarantee of a Minimum Level of Living in an Islamic State. In Distributive Justice and Need Fulfillment in an Islamic Economy, ed. Munawar Iqbal. Leicester: The Islamic Foundation. Sisodia, Rajendra, and Michael J.  Gelb. 2019. The HEALING Organization: Awakening the Conscience of Business to Help Save the World. New York: HarperCollins. Sisodia, Rajendra, Timothy Henry, and Thomas Eckschmidt. 2018. Conscious Capitalism Field Guide. Tools for Transforming Your Organization. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Smith, Adam. 1999. La théorie des sentiments moraux. Paris: Quadrige/PUF. Solomon, R.C. 2001. The Moral Psychology of Business: Care and Compassion in the Corporation. The Next Phase of Business Ethics 3: 417–438. The Qur’an (transl. Abdullah Yusuf Ali). Elmhurst: Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an Inc., 2001. Vallabh, Priyanka, and Manish Singhal. 2014. Buddhism and Decision Making at Individual, Group and Organizational Levels. Journal of Management Development 33 (8–9): 763–775. Volkmann Simpson, A., M.  Pina e Cunha, and A.  Rego. 2015. Compassion in the Context of Capitalistic Organizations: Evidence from the 2011 Brisbane Floods. Journal of Business Ethics 130: 683–703. Waddock, Sandra. 2004. Creating Corporate Accountability: Foundational Principles to Make Corporate Citizenship Real. Journal of Business Ethics 50 (4): 313–327. Wang, Xingyuan, Fuan Li, and Qin Sun. 2018. Confucian Ethics, Moral Foundations, and Shareholder Value Perspectives: An Exploratory Study. Business Ethics: A European Review 27: 260–271. Wong, David B. 2015. Early Confucian Philosophy and the Development of Compassion. Dao 14: 157–194. Michel Dion is Full Professor at the École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke (Québec, Canada). He is the Chairholder of the CIBC Research Chair on Financial Integrity. His main fields of research are the following ones: organizational ethics, ethical leadership, and corporate moral discourse; spirituality and management; corporate governance and financial crime; relevance of literary works for corporate culture and organizational life. Prof. Dion has numerous books including: Éthique économique et croyances religieuses en Islam (Fides, 2011); Confucianisme et leadership (Fides, 2013); Financial Crime and Existential Philosophy (Springer, 2014); Bouddhisme tibétain et philosophie de l’existence (L’Harmattan, 2018); Éthique de l’entreprise. Questionnement philosophique (Éditions Yvon Blais, 2019); Worldviews, Ethics, and Organizational Life (Springer, 2021). He was editor of La criminalité financière: Prévention, gouvernance et influences culturelles (De Boeck, 2011). He was co-editor of Financial Crimes. Psychological, Technological, and Ethical Issues (with David Weisstub and Jean-Loup Richet: Springer, 2016) and co-editor of Humanizing Business: What Humanities Can Say to Business (with R. Edward Freeman and Sergiy Dmytriyev: Springer, 2022). His scholarly works have been published in Business Ethics: A European Review, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, the International Journal of Organizational Analysis, and the International Journal of Social Economics.  

Chapter 24

A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business Moses Pava

If your understanding of the divine made you kinder, more empathic and impelled you to express sympathy in concrete acts of loving-kindness, this was good theology. But if your notion of God made you unkind, belligerent, cruel, or self-righteous, or if it led you to kill in God’s name, it was bad theology. Karen Armstrong (2005)

24.1 Introduction This volume of essays has provided several critical views on Conscious Capitalism from a broad range of traditional religious and spiritual perspectives. The preceding chapters speak for themselves and there is no attempt here in this concluding chapter to summarize or synthesize their findings. I do suggest, however, that nearly every chapter included here has alluded to kindness and/or compassion in one way or another as integral to faith and to spirituality. Kindness is a value that defines us as conscious beings. Therefore, I suggest in this final chapter a modest proposal for more kindness in business as a practical next step towards building a more conscious form of capitalism or what I prefer to call more generically as next stage capitalism. For next stage capitalists, today’s crisis in confidence is not a structural problem but a much deeper human one. What is it that, upon reflection and dialogue, that we truly value? Adam Phillips and Barbara Taylor (2009), among many others, have recently suggested that perhaps what we really value is kindness. The thesis of this chapter, as odd as it may sound to traditional capitalists, is that a fundamental cure

M. Pava (*) Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University, New York, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_24

483

484

M. Pava

for capitalism is more kindness in business, be it dutiful, strategic, or simply kindness for the sake of kindness. Such a thesis is not meant to be controversial in the least. Quite to the contrary, this modest thesis is designed to appeal to the broadest possible audience be it religious, spiritual, or secular.

24.2 Adam Smith and The Wealth of Nations Reading The Wealth of Nations in 1776, a scholarly book describing division of labor, free markets and open trade, must have been liberating for Adam Smith’s closest readers (Smith 2003). The book’s revolutionary claims provided a compelling argument for severing traditional economic constraints favored by mercantilism. To understand the unique theory supporting free and open markets, it is useful to summarize some of the main elements put forth directly or implied by Smith and his later followers. These elements are succinctly summarized with brief explanatory comments as follows: 1. Each person possesses unique impulses, needs, and desires. These desires, when appropriately considered, can be thought of as an individual’s self-interests. Further, self-interests are morally neutral. Comment: This claim that self-interests derived from one’s desires are morally neutral differed from most traditionalists who had been assuming for centuries, if not millennia, that a good life required one to either eliminate one’s desires completely or, at least, to radically constrain them within accepted tradition. 2. The result of satisfying one’s self-interests is called happiness and happiness is the ultimate human value. Comment: Human happiness, for sure, was always a value for many. But what must have been shocking at the time (and perhaps for many still is) is that in Smith’s theory happiness (sometimes more formally called utility) is the master value from which all other values derive their meaning. 3. On the social level, the greatest happiness for the greatest number is the best way to think about morality. Comment: This proposition, later known as utilitarianism is still the dominant way that economists think about morality.1

 Economic historians disagree about whether Adam Smith himself was technically a utilitarian or not (see, for example, Anspach 2008). 1

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

485

4. Most dramatically of all, Adam Smith demonstrated through a rigorous argument that an economic system based on free and open exchanges among purely self-interested individuals — without outside guidance or government intervention — guarantees the greatest happiness for the greatest number. In other words, if everyone rationally pursues his or her own interests, everyone is made better off. This is famously known as the invisible hand argument. Comment: The novelty of this insight is why many still consider The Wealth of Nations on a par with Isaac Newton’s scientific discoveries about one hundred years earlier. 5. The economic system described in 4 above is now called capitalism, although the term capitalism would not be widely used until the late nineteenth century.

24.2.1 An Academic Theory That Worked Beyond Anyone’s Wildest Dreams Around the time when Adam Smith first published his book, levels of wealth in the UK had been stagnant for generations. Just about everything that ordinary people used and consumed in their economic and private lives in the seventeenth century, was the same as what people living a thousand years before had been consuming. And then, seemingly by magic, during the eighteenth century, levels of wealth began to grow exponentially. In just a few generations time, national wealth and average income ballooned to levels never dreamed of before (Roser 2013). But it was not magic at all that lead to the unprecedented levels of wealth. The growth in wealth was due primarily to gradually implementing the strange new ideas and programs described by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations2. The single most important of these ideas, arguably, was the revolutionary insight that we should not fear our individual desires, nor are human desires, by nature, sinful, as many religions had taught. Desires are not be dismissed or conquered, but human desires reflect important and quite useful information about human well-being not available elsewhere. Desires, when systematically examined, ordered, and rationally acted upon, matter and they matter not only to the individual him or herself, but they matter to society. More than two centuries later we now know that society benefits in enormous and very tangible ways when everyone’s self-interests are revealed and given public expression through economic activities and exchanges.

 The claim is not that the book caused economic growth, but that Smith provided the best formulation for a set of increasingly common ideas that significantly contributed to economic growth, among other social and historical variables. 2

486

M. Pava

24.2.2 What Went Wrong with Capitalism? Despite all of this, in the past 30 years or so, capitalism has lost much of its credibility to the point where more Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 now view socialism more positively than they do capitalism (Newport 2018). So, what went wrong? Well, it turns out, a whole lot of things in a relatively short period of time: (1) Income and wealth inequalities have risen to unprecedented levels. (2) Climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels has disrupted human and animal environments in dangerous and threatening ways. (3) Private institutions like churches, synagogues, universities, museums, and even charities have begun to resemble for profit businesses more than values-based organizations. As the philosopher Michael Sandel has pointed out, it seems like everything is for sale today (2012). (4) Racism and sexism continue to haunt us despite efforts to reduce them. And, (5) government institutions and agencies have been corrupted by lobbyists, political donors, and other nefarious actors, making it almost impossible to promote wise public policies, even when it comes to a pandemic. Advocates for status quo capitalism are not blind to these problems. But they continue to remind us, despite everything, that capitalism remains the single best way to create wealth, and although wealth is not precisely the same thing as happiness, there is a close enough correlation to credibly argue that capitalism remains not just a historical and world-altering economic force, which it is, but it continues as a moral force, as well, at least in utilitarian terms. By the logic of status quo capitalists, the problems with capitalism can be remedied by universal income and healthcare, strengthening social security and other social safety nets, changing the tax code to make it more equitable for everyone, charging the worst corporate polluters a fee for doing so, and developing better campaign laws and more restrictions on corporate lobbyists. One can agree about the unintended consequences of capitalism and even about the magnitude of the damage it has already caused, but traditional capitalists continue to insist optimistically that with foresight and the judicious use of data analytics, we can get the incentives just right. Capitalism is the goose that lays the golden eggs, they continue to insist, we just need to make sure that its wealth is benefitting everyone, not just the wealthiest one percent (see: Krugman 2009; Reich 2020; Stiglitz 2020). There is no question that we need sound progressive policies based on our best economic theories and quality data. We know that thinking carefully about incentive schemes can help, especially as we learn how to use recent developments in psychology and technology more effectively (Thaler and Sunstein 2009). Nevertheless, many young people today sense that there is a much deeper human problem at the heart of society’s ills. And it is this human problem, not an economic one, that has been completely overlooked by traditional capitalists (Field 2017; Pirson 2017; Robison 2019). Even progressives rarely notice what is missing from our political and economic conversations. If one listens more carefully to the younger generation’s complaints about capitalism, the real criticism is not that it does not produce enough wealth, but as a result

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

487

of producing so much wealth so efficiently for so long, capitalism has driven other taken-for-granted human values underground. We have forgotten how to speak publicly and with conviction and decorum about the importance of values like community, enhanced human relationships, respect, wisdom, and a sense of the sacred, to name just a few (Gentile 2012). As capitalism has created more wealth, it has colonized and dominated rival spheres of influence and sources of values including the political, religious, scientific, and social domains in ways that Adam Smith could never have foreseen back in 1776 (Barber 2008; Buchholz and Rosenthal 2008; Gilens and Page 2014; Kennedy 2017; Kruse 2016). Thanks to capitalism we are wealthier than ever. But as wealth has increased, the need for other important values has gained in relative importance. But because of capitalism’s extravagant successes, the various institutional homes for these values have been dramatically weakened. And, unless business itself begins to identify and nurture these values, it is unclear where they might come from and how they will be sustained. Hence the need for a “next stage capitalism,” a new kind of capitalism that understands that it must continue to create wealth, but it must also explicitly generate and promote a broader set of human values (Banks 2016; Benioff 2019; Henderson 2020; Honeyman and Jana 2019; Mackey and Sisodia 2013; Martin et  al. 2009; Mayer 2018; Pirson 2017; Porritt 2007; Porter and Kramer 2011; Quinn and Thakor 2019; Senge 2006). Adam Smith was not wrong when he predicted that unleashing self-interests would lead to a vast increase in wealth. What he did not anticipate, however, was that as the amount of wealth increased exponentially, the economic domain would become so powerful that it would begin to drive out competing domains that were essential for protecting a broad swath of human values necessary for human flourishing. Justifying capitalism exclusively in utilitarian terms (wealth/happiness), as Smith did, made sense when nations were dirt poor, but over two centuries, as capitalism flourished in country after country, capitalism now needs a much thicker and more pragmatic understanding of what morality entails. The efficient production of wealth is a necessary condition but not a sufficient one for creating a just and meaningful capitalist society. For next stage capitalists the most important problem is a deficiency of imagination about how values work in business and how crucial they are becoming as a robust justification for capitalism that makes sense to a younger generation, in today’s increasingly fragile world. If capitalism is to continue being the best economic system, it will do so only because it produces great wealth in combination with a variety of other values. Adam Smith pushed for incorporating more self-interested behavior into economic life and to many traditionalists in 1776 this was a crazy idea. Next stage capitalists insist that now is the time to broaden Smith’s original insight and to consciously cultivate a diverse set of values in business including social justice, environmental sustainability, scientific knowledge, spirituality, love, care, and kindness  – values that take one well beyond Smith’s original formulation. Some of today’s traditional capitalists insist that invoking more humane values in business

488

M. Pava

will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.3 But many of today’s entrepreneurs are beginning to realize that it is in everyone’s interests  – assuming those interests include creating not just a wealthy society but a world where one can potentially create a sustainable and meaningful life  – to explicitly incorporate a carefully selected set of values into business. Or, at minimum, it is an experiment worth trying. Just as traditional capitalists discovered enormous amounts of hidden wealth by exploiting information reflected in our individual self-interests, today’s next stage capitalists are uncovering rich new meanings by bringing more of our shared human values into business in explicit ways.

24.3 Why Kindness Has Become So Vital for Next Stage Capitalists An act of kindness is a gift given to another person or group of people to promote their needs and their self-interests, a gift which can take on many forms (Hamrick 2002). It is one of the simplest and, at the same time, one of the most profound of all human activities. Even the poorest among us can offer the very wealthiest a gift of kindness with just a well-timed gentle smile. Kindness is not the only value of concern for next stage capitalists, but it is the most important one. This is true for several reasons. First, kindness can be enacted in unlimited ways: giving tangible gifts, befriending the lonely, introducing two acquaintances to one another, teaching, providing medical care, producing works of beauty, creating knowledge and new technologies, giving good advice, creating a positive and meaningful experience for another, taking on projects for the benefit of others, listening with care, showing appropriate gratitude, and, sometimes, just showing up and demonstrating just a hint of human interest (Grant 2013; Hamrick 2002). Kindness is an important value in its own right but it has the unique characteristic that it promotes many other non-market values, as well (Arieli et al. 2014). Thus, kindness is a potential antidote for the tendency of wealth to drive out other values. Second, an act of kindness can often encourage others to act kindly and this can potentially create a positive cycle of kindness (Haidt 2000). Third, giving and receiving kindness reduces fear and anxiety between people and within a family or an organization and increases trust and loyalty (Trew and Alden 2015). Fourth, kindness can be a form of joyful play (Koenig 2006). Fifth, kindness is a significant source of human identify and meaning (Shoemaker and Tobia Forthcoming). Sixth, kindness provides quantifiable health benefits (Galante et al. 2014). Seventh, the art of kindness can be cultivated and learned (Wuthnow 1995). Eighth, while the seeds for kindness may be one’s own self-interests, it is distinctive in that rather than pulling us deeper inside of our own heads, it is a value which pushes us outside of  For the classic statement on this, see: Friedman 1970.

3

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

489

ourselves, allowing us to share similar experiences with others through compassion and sympathy (Donovan 2018). Finally, and perhaps most important for the present discussion, kindness begins with contemplating and discovering what is good for one another (Hamrick 2002). Now, in a world of kindness, not only do I consider my self-interests, but now others are helping me to explore and identify them in a way that I could not do on my own. As discussed above, Adam Smith and his followers demonstrated that society benefits in enormous and very tangible ways when everyone’s self-interests are revealed and given public expression through economic activities and exchanges. But this benefit is limited in that it only reveals the preferences of the two parties engaged in a market transaction. Imagine how much more valuable social information about preferences will be extracted through a conscious effort to fulfill each other’s self-­ interests beyond market exchanges. And, to the extent that kindness is successfully directed at those less well-off members of society, their self-interests will be revealed and given public expression for the first time. Just as traditional capitalism led to an explosion of wealth creation, next stage capitalism is and will continue to unleash not just more wealth but will create opportunities for human fulfillment far beyond what traditional capitalism now allows. At least, that is the conceit. Traditional capitalists expect everyone to follow the law, avoid fraud, respect ethical customs, and to treat everyone with basic dignity and respect. All of this should go without saying. Next stage capitalists, like all experimenters and explorers, are attempting to push beyond these familiar frontiers. Theirs is the shared and ancient dream to learn to treat everyone with dignity plus – i.e. plus care, concern, and at the outer boundaries, love. It is what Joseph Badaracco has called “a creative moral act” (2013). It is an attempt to embrace the goal of human growth and development, and to do so within the rigorous and uncompromising limits of our own human nature and very real economic and environmental constraints (Pirson 2017; Quinn and Thakor 2019).

24.4 Varieties of Kindness in Business Kindness, even in business, once you start looking for it, is not hard to find. Let us consider examples of each of the following types of kindness: (1) Dutiful Kindness, (2) Strategic Kindness, and (3) Kindness for the Sake of Kindness.

24.4.1 Dutiful Kindness Apple has been one of the most successful businesses in the world for a long time now. This is not news, but what is news is that Apple has produced several innovative technologies that has allowed disabled people access to Apple’s products like the iPhone. Its accessibility features are considered the best in the industry and

490

M. Pava

Apple continues to improve them over time. According to Sarah Herrlinger, Senior Manager for Global Accessibility Policy, and Initiatives: We see accessibility as a basic human right…Building into the core of our products supports a vision of an inclusive world where opportunity and access to information are barrier-­ free, empowering individuals with disabilities to achieve their goals (as quoted in Aquino 2016).

CEO Tim Cook put it quite bluntly when an investor group NCPPR asked him to justify corporate expenditures that do not obviously lead to higher profits for Apple: “When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind,” he said, “I don’t consider the bloody ROI.” He continued that we do “a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive. We want to leave the world better than we found it” (as quoted at TechToch, 2014). While the Covid Pandemic has tested the financial stability of many US and global corporations, it has also brough out the best in many companies. Consider the following: Crocs: The company donated 10,000 pairs of shoes to health care workers in the US. Adobe: The software company offered free access to many of its desktop apps to help students and teachers enhance online education. Hormel Foods: The food service company donated $1 million to help alleviate hunger during the pandemic. Airbnb: The online platform provided free housing to more than 100,000 first responders and health care workers around the world (above examples taken from Caruso 2020). These examples could be easily multiplied but the point is the same in each of them. Business corporations actively explore ways to help those in need, and this is the very definition of kindness offered above. In these cases, companies justify the additional corporate expenditures, not in strategic terms, but in moral terms. This means that these companies are motivated not only by profits, but they act out of a general sense of corporate social responsibility, or a sense of duty. These companies are exemplars in that they are actively broadening the circle of concern – seeking out valuable information about the needs and desires of those often left behind by strictly competitive markets and attempting to meet those needs – well beyond what more traditional social responsibilities call for. Dutiful kindness is important in that it forcefully underscores that business is about more than the efficient production of wealth. Business is opening itself up to a broad range of important values beyond market considerations, including kindness. But dutiful kindness is narrow in its scope by the limited underlying wealth of the busines enterprise, which is being generated by other activities, perhaps less kind in nature. Dutiful kindness may get us part way to building a more just and meaningful capitalist society, but by itself, without other forms of kindness in business, it is not enough.

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

491

24.4.2 Strategic Kindness Strategic kindness is the sincere intention to benefit customers, employees, suppliers, and others while simultaneously strengthening the business, in the long run. This is a much larger category than dutiful kindness and much more important to my claim that kindness is revitalizing capitalism by discovering and meeting the untapped needs of millions. Unlike dutiful kindness, strategic kindness creates its own wealth and can potentially grow indefinitely. Examples of strategic kindness abound and include:4 John Deere: The tractor company was having difficulty retaining and engaging new employees in Asia. To solve this problem John Deere developed “The First Day Experience.” Among the highlights, new employees are personally greeted at 9:00 AM in the lobby by a friendly co-worker, and while in the lobby, a giant flat screen TV with the headline “welcome” and the name of the new employee is flashed across the screen. The first email of the day is from the CEO and contains a short welcome video explaining the corporate mission. In the early afternoon, new employees are treated to an off-site lunch with a small group of co-workers and later they are invited to lunch for the following week with the department manager. Employees leave for the day with a special gift, a steel replica of John Deere’s original plow created in 1837, and an explanation of why it was beloved by nineteenth century farmers. Since the program was initiated John Deere has solved its retention and engagement problems to a significant degree. Southwest Airlines: How much is the gift of humor worth? This airline is known for its low fares and friendly service. Flight attendants are allowed and encouraged to have fun and joke with airline passengers (within reason). These exchanges are usually well-received by passengers, presumably anxious about their upcoming flight. And the flight attendants appreciate the opportunity to break up what can be a relatively routine job. After several years of collecting data on these interactions the company, with the help of outside consultants, sought to put a monetary value on the jokes and wisecracks. Shockingly to everyone involved in the internal study, “the analytics group calculated that if Southwest could double the number of customers hearing a funny flight safety announcement, the result would be more than $140 million in revenue” (Heath and Heath 2017). Magic Castle: One of the top three ranked hotels in Los Angeles does not have much of an infrastructure; the pool is not much bigger than a typical backyard pool, the rooms are old, and the furniture is at best adequate. To compete effectively, the company explores ways in which they can surprise and charm their guests. My favorite is the cherry-red phone mounted by the pool. Guests pick up the phone and can place an order for their favorite flavor of Popsicle. A few minutes later, a white-gloved staff member delivers a tray of Popsicles to the guests still sitting by the pool. All of this is free.

 The next four examples are all described in detail in Heath and Heath 2017.

4

492

M. Pava

General Electric: Doug Dietz is an industrial designer who worked for the company for several years, designing a new MRI machine. Dietz was disappointed to say the least when he learned that 80% of children needed to be sedated to get through the MRI procedure on his new machine. The sedation increased the medical risks of the procedure to the children and costs to the hospital increased significantly as a result of delays associated with the sedation. Dietz, in consultation with day care teachers, health care staff, and leading design thinkers, completely re-imagined the original task and set out to turn the medical procedure into a Jungle Adventure, using bright stickers, beautifully painted jungle scenes, and even a pond. He lowered the MRI table to accommodate the small size of the children and re-designed it to look like a canoe. The result of these and several other re-design innovations lowered the need for sedation to 27% among the children, and for the shorter CT scans, only 3% of children required sedation, thus constituting both a significant reduction in medical risks and increased revenue for the hospital because of the time savings on each procedure. These examples are like traditional market exchanges in that both parties to a transaction expect to benefit from doing business with one another, but they resemble non-market exchanges as well  – creatively demonstrating genuine hospitality, humor, surprise, and real compassion towards children – thus constituting a kind of hybrid-exchange. As in more traditional and familiar examples of kindness, strategic kindness works because there is a real attempt to learn about the genuine needs of the recipients of kindness, needs that the recipients may not even be aware of. Further, effort is given not only to identifying the needs of others but to creatively construct innovative ways to satisfy those needs, and this is often done in ways that the recipients would never have dreamed up. Crucially, identifying and satisfying the needs of others requires the ability to imagine how the world looks and feels from the other’s perspective. And this requires focused attention, humor, care and compassion, abilities hard to fake, and rarely taught in traditional business schools. With strategic kindness there is no quid pro quo as in conventional market exchanges, rather exchanges are based on trust and loyalty that in the long run things will even out. It is fair to say that strategic kindness demands a type of faith where one believes that if they put good things out into the world for others, good things will come back to them over time from others, even in the absence of well-­ specified contracts. Organizations built upon such a faith have been dubbed “covenantal organizations” (Pava 2003). Critics of business and capitalism are quick to point out many of the negative effects to society associated with rampant consumerism and they are correct to do so. What these critics fail to see, however, is the growing kindness evolution in business, and it is precisely this kindness, and a related family of values, that is slowly beginning to provide a new and broader justification for capitalism.

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

493

24.4.3 Kindness for the Sake of Kindness With strategic kindness, as discussed above, there is no quid pro quo and the kindness offered does reflect a genuine attempt to help satisfy the needs of others. Could Doug Dietz, for example, have invented GE’s Jungle Adventure MRI machines without real compassion towards children? Ultimately, however, in cases of strategic kindness, the corporate rhetoric used to justify the kindness remains grounded in the organization’s overarching goal of profit maximization, and for some critics, this taints the purity of the kindness on offer. Some companies, however, are jettisoning the rhetoric of profit maximization all together. The companies are explicitly pursuing kindness not as a means towards the ends of profit but as an end-in-itself. For these companies, profits are reconceptualized as the necessary means towards a socially relevant mission, a mission purposely designed to help others, especially those in need. These companies are on the forefront of a next stage capitalism, a capitalism that is a direct challenge to both neo-liberal and democratic socialist orthodoxies (Henderson 2020; Mayer 2018; O’Toole 2019). Consider the case of Muhammad Yunus and his invention of micro-financing i.e. making financial services available to poor and low income individuals (most often women) to help them jump start their tiny businesses and to improve their lives and the lives of their family members. Yunus was born in the village of Bathua (which is today part of modern Bangladesh) in 1940. A precocious and brilliant student from a young age, Yunus won a Fulbright Scholarship to study in the United States. In 1971, he received his PhD from Vanderbilt University in Economic Development and for three years (1969–1972) he was an Assistant Professor at Middle Tennessee State University. Following the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971, Yunus left Nashville and returned to Bangladesh. He was soon appointed to chair the Economics Department at Chittagong University. His academic career, however, was to be short-lived. The years following the Liberation War were difficult ones for the young country. Military destruction followed by floods, droughts, and monsoons, created a desperate situation for millions of people, culminating in a terrible famine. Yunus’s defining moment came when he decided to leave his relatively stable and well-paid job in academia and to join with the people of the neighboring village of Jobra and to offer his help to the suffering people. Muhammad Yunus describes his situation as follows: I found it increasingly difficult to teach elegant theories of economics in the classroom while a terrible famine was raging outside. Suddenly I felt the emptiness of traditional economic concepts in the face of crushing hunger and poverty. I realized that I had to be with the distressed people of Jobra…All that I hoped to do was make myself useful to as least one person per day (2010, viii).

He soon discovered one of the causes of the abject poverty he saw around him was the pervasive and unfair money-lending practices in the village.

494

M. Pava

I was shocked to meet a woman who had borrowed just 5 taka (the equivalent of around 7 cents in U.S. currency) from a moneylender and trader. She needed this small amount of money to buy bamboo, from which she crafted stools to sell. The interest rate on such loans was very high—as much as 10 percent per week. But still worse was the special condition imposed on the loan: She would have to sell all her products to the moneylender at a price he would determine (2010, x).

After making a list of the 42 people in the village who had borrowed money from the lenders, Yunus calculated that they had borrowed a grand total of 856 taka or about $27. Given the terms of the lending agreements, these borrowers were effectively indentured servants. Yunus decided to pay off the loans using his own money, thus liberating the village, at least temporarily, from the clutches of the money lenders. Sensing the excitement among the villagers, he wondered to himself, “If this little action makes so many people so happy, why shouldn’t I do more of this?” Over time, Yunus began playing with the idea that he could best help these villagers and the rest of his country, not by paying off the loans of every borrower by himself, but by lending small amounts of money to them at reasonable rates of interest. The established banks had already decided that these villagers were not credit-­ worthy, but Yunus questioned whether this was true. Rather than accept the received wisdom of the existing bankers, Yunus carefully tested his intuition and soon learned that nearly everyone paid back their loans in full and on time. “I came up with simple rules, such as having people repay their loans in small weekly amounts and having the bank officer visit the villagers rather than making the villagers visit the bank. The ideas worked” (2010, ix), Yunus modesty recalls. Today, the Grameen Bank is a self-sustaining business, serving 8 million villagers across Bangladesh, and most of its borrowers are women. Further, the bank serves as a model to scores of would-be social entrepreneurs. There is much more to this story, but for my purposes, it illustrates how profits can be reconceptualized as the means towards a socially relevant mission, a mission purposely and compassionately designed to help others, especially those in dire need. Grameen Bank is an exemplar of a mission-based company where kindness for the sake of kindness has already become a powerful force in business. While Grameen Bank may be the best example of a company designed to do good for others, there are many other examples, and they are not hard to find. These companies include The Container Store, Lego, Market Basket, Panera Bread, Patagonia, Saleforce, Starbucks, Unilever, and Zappos, to name just a few.5 Kindness for the sake of kindness in business is a hard idea to keep in focus, given the single model of profit maximization taught in business schools and reinforced in almost all business disciplines. Yet, the very idea of profit as a single variable that can be maximized is now under mortal attack. Baruch Lev, one of the leading accounting professors in the world, in on record as stating that the idea that “a single indicator presumably telling you all you need to know about the condition

 For a recent and exhaustive survey of enlightened capitalism, see O’Toole (2019).

5

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

495

and performance of a complex business organization…is obviously absurd.” He continues, “there is no single magic number, no ‘bottom line,’ or even triple bottom line.” In Lev’s view, measuring corporate performance “requires a comprehensive system of well-integrated indicators and contextual information. It’s a mosaic; no shortcuts” (Lev and Gu 2016, 117). Lev believes that his findings require an entirely new way of doing accounting. And, of course, he is right about this, even if the accounting profession has been slow to catch on. But what is even more important, implied but not stated directly by Lev, is that if corporate performance really is more like a mosaic than a single variable, we also need an entirely new way of conceptualizing business. Maximizing a mosaic makes no sense. It is in this context, that the idea that some companies really do pursue a compassionate mission as an end-in-itself, as a part of a larger mosaic, becomes easier to imagine. Mainstream business thinking is not here yet, we still prefer dutiful and strategic kindness to kindness for its own sake. But as the recent change in philosophy at the Business Roundtable clearly suggests,6 the culture is slowly moving away from its obsession with profits towards incorporating a much broader set of values, and perhaps is even nearing a turning point. Justifying capitalism merely in term of the efficient creation of wealth is fast becoming an anachronism and many smart capitalists, as identified above, have already seen this and are doing something about it.

24.4.4 Limitations of a Kindness Agenda in Business Promoting kindness in business, as this final chapter has done, is not meant to be a panacea. Kindness alone will not melt away what Max Weber famously called the iron cage of contemporary capitalism. It is important then to carefully identify several of the limitations of a kindness agenda in business. 1. The call for more kindness in business goes against the mainstream cultural assumption that kindness is a private virtue best practiced at home and with one’s friends. More kindness demands a different kind of business education and calls for alternative research agendas among business school scholars. While there are some positive signs here, consider the Aspen Institute’s long-time Undergraduate Education Consortium on how best to integrate liberal arts into the business curriculum, the preponderance of evidence suggests business as usual, especially in finance and accounting departments. In fact, in some instances, business schools are dropping literature requirements in favor of more limited business communications courses and focusing less on the liberal arts and not more.

 According to the Business Roundtable, companies should serve not only their shareholders but also deliver value to all stakeholders (see businessroundtable.org). 6

496

M. Pava

2. There is no app for kindness. It is not the kind of activity that lends itself to algorithms. In an age where more and more routine activities have been taken over by computers in the name of efficiency and scale, it requires a great deal of imagination to promote kindness which is not readily converted into manageable numbers. To the extent that a kindness agenda is out of sync with the contemporary cultural winds, it will no doubt face opposition from many different directions. 3. Kindness is not a substitute for other values like creativity, hard work, strategy, and justice. Kindness in a society that lacks basic justice, for example, will produce, no doubt, a good amount of a distorted and odd kind of kindness. 4. Focusing attention and energy on more kindness in business means less efficiency and less wealth. This is true despite the overly optimistic promises by the defenders of Conscious Capitalism that there need be no more tradeoffs among stakeholders and that companies operating under the principles of Conscious Capitalism will outperform other companies in terms of traditional financial performance. Such promises, in fact, ought to suggest that even the founders of the Conscious Capitalism movement have their lingering doubts about the real-­ world appeal and desirability of kindness for its own sake. 5. Unconstrained power beats kindness every time, at least in the short run. There will always be those for whom kindness is simply another weapon used against those who are less-well-off. When it comes to kindness, the adage, “buyer beware,” is more apt than ever. 6. Kindness is completely dependent on our faith in the efficacy of kindness. This is true in the same way that William James understood that a belief that life is worth living is a necessary pre-condition to make it so. Kindness, to succeed on a social plane, requires a community of like-minded and hopeful seekers. It is fair to ask, are there enough of them at the present time to sustain the kindness project? 7. Even a genuine desire for kindness can be co-opted by broader structural forces. It’s worth wondering if Facebook could have really produced sustainable and meaningful online communities if Mark Zuckerberg had been fully committed to his stated mission, as I believe he might very well have been, at least initially. Is it possible that the problem with Facebook is a structural problem associated with the demands of the capital markets that goes beyond even the best intentions of any one person? 8. A overcommitment to the significance and kindness of one’s own purpose can be used to justify unethical behavior. The stories of Theranos and WeWorks provide sad and cautionary tales for the advocates of a more conscious capitalism. In the case of Theranos, Elizabeth Holmes mission was nothing short of democratizing the healthcare industry. In the case of WeWorks, Adam Neumann boasted that the mission of his company was to “elevate the world’s consciousness.” It is fair to wonder if the lofty aspirations justified some of the lowly means in each of these cases.

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

497

So why focus on kindness at all and give it the pride of place here? The conceit is that despite all the above limitations, a morality founded upon a universal human desire for kindness, a value recognized by virtually all religions and spiritualities, appropriately designed, will prove more appealing, and less onerous, than existing moralities based on obedience to a set of ever-growing rules and regulations of dubious authority. At least, in the long run. This paper does not provide proof for this belief. It has attempted to provide some good examples of kindness in business and to articulate a particular vision, one based on empathy, compassion, and kindness as the foundational values for a new kind of  economics and a more compassionate society. The power of the vision depends completely upon its appeal to the next generation of business leaders. It is an appeal to our better angels to begin to experiment with turning our inherited practices and assumptions upside down. It comes with no guarantees. And, it requires a kind of faith, not in a supernatural being, but a faith in one another. Kindness alone will not melt the iron cage in which we find ourselves perennially trapped. But the existence of dutiful kindness and kindness for its own sake do begin to hint at the existence of another human possibility. Even strategic kindness, as argued above, which is fast becoming mainstream requires something beyond mere self-interest and demands a curiosity into the real needs of one another and how to best satisfy them. The key insight here was perhaps best expressed in a 2010 ABC interview with the psychoanalyst Adam Phillips. He noted, “it’s about allowing ourselves to be kinder, not trying to be kinder, that it might actually be our desire to be kind, not merely our duty” (as quoted in Adam Phillips: On Kindness  – Saturday Extra – ABC Radio National).

24.5 Conclusion Traditional capitalism, grounded in the founding insights of Adam Smith, is based on the idea that great wealth is created when we allow individuals to efficiently pursue their own self-interests. In 1776, this was a necessary and revolutionary idea. However, what traditional capitalists failed to understand in time is that pursuing our own self-interests without constraint long enough cannibalizes the shared values and the institutions upon which the economy crucially depends. One necessary solution is better and more nuanced government intervention in the marketplace. Next stage capitalists, however, are weary of a government often already unduly influenced by business. For next stage capitalists, today’s crisis in confidence is not a structural problem but a much deeper human one. The thesis of this concluding chapter has been the modest one that a fundamental cure for capitalism, from most religious and spiritual traditions, is more kindness in business, be it dutiful, strategic, or simply kindness for the sake of kindness.

498

M. Pava

References Anspach, Mark R. 2008. Sympathy Pleasure: The Theory of Moral Sentiments and Adam Smith’s Anti-Utilitarianism. Reveue U MAUSS 31 (1): 67–79. Aquino, Steven, 2016. When It Comes to Accessibility, Apple Continues to Lead in Awareness and Innovation. Downloaded at TechCrunch.com. Arieli, S., A.M.  Grant, and L.  Sagiv. 2014. Convincing Yourself to Care About Others: An Intervention for Enhancing Benevolence Values. Journal of Personality 82 (1): 15–24. Armstrong, Karen. 2005. The Spiral Staircase: My Climb Out of Darkness. New  York: Anchor Books. Badaracco, Joseph. 2013. The Good Struggle: Responsible Leadership in an Unforgiving World. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Banks, Ken. 2016. Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation: International Case Studies. London: Kogan Page Ltd. Barber, Benjamin. 2008. Consumed: How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize Adults and Swallow Citizens Whole. New York: W. W. Norton and Company. Benioff, Mark. 2019. The Trailblazer: The Power of Business as the Greatest Platform for Change. New York: Random House. Buchholz, Rogene, and Sandra Rosenthal. 2008. The Unholy Alliance of Business and Acience. Journal of Business Ethics 78: 199–206. Caruso, Catherine. 2020. Nine Companies Stepping Up to Do Good Amid the Coronavirus Pandemic. Downloaded from globalcitizen.org. Donovan, Jill. 2018. The Kindness Effect: Experience the Power of Irrational Giving. Lake Mary: Charisma House. Field, Anne. 2017. Millenials Want Companies Mixing Mission and Money. Forbes. Downloaded at forbes.com. Friedman, Milton. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits. New York Times Magazine. Galante, J., Galante, I., Bekkers, M.-J., and Gallacher, J. 2014. Effect of Kindness-Based Meditation on Health and Well-Being: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. Advance online publication. Downloaded at https://doi. org/10.1037/a0037249. Gentile, Mary C. 2012. Giving Voice to Values: How to Speak Your Mind When You Know What’s Right. New Haven: Yale University Press. Gilens, Martin, and Benjamin I. Page. 2014. Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. Perspectives on Politics 12 (3): 564–581. Grant, Adam. 2013. Give and Take: A Revolutionary Approach to Success. London: Penguin Press. Haidt, Jonathan. 2000. The Positive Emotion of Elevation. Prevention and Treatment. 31, No. 1. Hamrick, William. 2002. Kindness and the Good Society. Albany: State University of New York. Heath, Chip, and Dan Heath. 2017. The Power of Moments: Why Certain Experiences Have Extraordinary Impact. New York: Simon and Schuster. Henderson, Rebecca. 2020. Reimagining Capitalism: In a World on Fire. New York: Public Affairs. Honeyman, Ryan, and Tiffany Jana. 2019. The B Corp Handbook. 2nd ed. Oakland: Berrett-­ Koehler Publishers, Inc. Kennedy, Liz. 2017. Corporate Capture Threatens Democratic Government. Downloaded from americanprogress.com. Koenig, Harold G. 2006. Kindness and Joy. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press. Krugman, Paul. 2009. The Conscience of a Liberal. New York: W. W. Norton and Company. Kruse, Kevin M. 2016. One Nation Under god: How Corporate America Invented Christian America. New York: Basic Books. Lev, Baruch, and Feng Gu. 2016. The End of Accounting: and the Path Forward for Investors and Managers. New York: Wiley.

24  A Modest Proposal for More Kindness in Business

499

Mackey, John, and Raj Sisodia. 2013. Conscious Capitalism. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Martin, John D., J. William Petty, and James S. Wallace. 2009. Value Based Management with Corporate Social Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mayer, Colin. 2018. Prosperity: Better Business Makes the Greater Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Newport, Frank. 2018. Democrats More Positive About Socialism Than Capitalism. Downloaded from https://news.gallup.com/poll/240725. O’Toole, James. 2019. The Enlightened Capitalists: Cautionary Tales of Business Pioneers Who Tried to Do Well by Doing Good. New York: Harper Business. Pava, Moses L. 2003. Leading with Meaning: Using Covenantal Leadership to Build a Better Organization. New York: Palgrave. Phillips, Adam, and Barbara Taylor. 2009. On Kindness. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Pirson, Michael. 2017. Humanistic Management: Protecting Dignity and Promoting Well-Being. In Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. New York: Taylor and Francis Group. Porritt, Jonathan. 2007. Capitalism as If the World Matters. Organization & Environment 20 (2): 266–268. Porter, Michael and Kramer, Mark R. Jan.-Feb. 2011. Creating Shared Values. Harvard Business Review. Downloaded from hbr.org. Quinn, Robert and Thakor, Anjan. 2019. The Economics of Higher Purpose. Oakland: Berrett-­ Koehler Publishers, Inc. Reich, Robert B. 2020. The System: Who Rigged It: How We Fix It. New York: Knopf. Robison, Jennifer. 2019. What Millennials Want is Good for Your Business. Downloaded from gallup.com. Roser, Max. 2013. Economic Growth. Our World in Data. Downloaded from ourworldindata.org/ economic-­growth. Sandel, Michael. 2012. What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Senge, Peter. 2006. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Random House. Shoemaker, David and Tobia, Kevin P. Forthcoming. Personal Identity. Oxford Handbook of Moral Psychology. Downloaded from papers.ssrn.com. Smith, Adam. 2003. The Wealth of Nations. New York: Bantam Classics. Stiglitz, Joseph E. 2020. People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent. New York: W.W. Norton and Company. Thaler, Richard H., and Cass R.  Sunstein. 2009. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New York: Penguin Books. Trew, Jennifer, and Lynn E. Alden. 2015. Kindness Reduces Avoidance Goals in Socially Anxious Individuals. Motivation and Emotion. 39: 892–907. Wuthnow, Robert. 1995. Learning to Care: Elementary Kindness in an Age of Indifference. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Yunus, M. 2010. Building Social Business. New York: Public Affairs. Moses Pava is the former Dean of the Sy Syms School of Business, the Alvin Einbender University Professor of Business Ethics, and Professor of Accounting, at Yeshiva University (USA). He has numerous books including: Business Ethics: A Jewish Perspective (Ktav, 1997); The Search for Meaning in Organizations (Praeger, 1999); Leading With Meaning (St. Martin’s Press, 2003); Jewish Ethics as Dialogue (Palgrave, 2009); Jewish Ethics in a Post-Madoff World (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). He serves on the editorial board of Journal of Business Ethics and the Journal of Jewish Ethics.  

Correction to: Unpacking Conscious Capitalism: An Islamic Perspective Sofiane Baba and Shoeb Mohammad

Correction to: Chapter 16 in: M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­031-­10204-­2_16 The book was inadvertently published with incorrect first name and last name of the chapter author Shoeb Mohammad. The correct name of the author has been updated in the chapter.

The updated original version of this chapter can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­031-­10204-­2_16

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2_25

C1

Index

A Abdu’l-Bahá, 313, 316, 331 Abdullah Yusuf Ali, 455 Abu-Lughod, J., 401 Abundance, 135, 136, 139, 154, 204, 246, 388, 391 Aburdene, P., 453 Accumulation, 34, 134, 136, 140, 145, 175, 178, 180, 181, 187, 260, 274, 278, 285, 314, 327, 355, 356, 382, 400, 403, 414 Adam, Chayei, 109 Adam, Chochmat, 109 Aggada, 133, 137 Agle, B.R., 6, 7, 167–187 Agnon, S.Y., 102, 103 Ahmad, A.U.F., 8, 253–270 Akerlof, G., 66, 221 Akerlof, G.A., 384, 385 Al-Ghazzālī, 472 Allen, G., 110 Allinson, R.E., 9, 339–358 Al Tariqui, 281 Altruism, 86, 144, 145, 147, 157, 160, 163, 265, 341, 365, 404, 463, 465, 476 Amichai Lau-Lavi, 142 Anālayo, 469 Anti-concentration, 265–267 Aquinas, T., 89 Aristotle, 89, 104 Arkoun, M., 470 Aslaksen, J., 412 Astor-Aguilera, M., 399–416 Atiśa Dīpaṃkara, 470 Atkinson, A., 363, 364 Atmatzides, C., 244

Augustine, 466 Awareness, 17, 20, 21, 24, 26, 28, 36, 38, 40, 46, 49, 54, 60, 116–118, 231, 257, 263, 266, 277, 289, 316, 362, 427, 428, 433, 441, 456, 458, 466, 477 Ayers, 408 B Baba, S., 9, 293–309 Badaracco, J., 52, 61, 489 Baháʼí Faith, 313, 314, 316, 318, 324, 325, 330, 334 Bahá’u’lláh, 313, 316, 321, 322, 324, 329, 330 Banks, K., 61 Baron, S.W., 96 Begzos, W., 243 Bein Hazemanim, 120 Bekos, I., 242 Benbaji, Y., 98 Beng, S.C., 354 Benioff, M., 61 Benjamin, W., 23, 24, 31, 32, 35 Ben-Sasson, M., 95 Benstein, J., 6, 133–142 Berkovits, E., 97, 101 Berman, J.A., 90, 96 Berman, N.S., 85–105 Bohm, D., 436 Bolz, N., 35, 36 Bonhoeffer, D., 5, 45, 46, 49, 50, 54 Bourdage, J.S., 246 Bower, J., 254 Boyarin, D., 92

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 M. Dion, M. Pava (eds.), The Spirit of Conscious Capitalism, Ethical Economy 63, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10204-2

501

502 Bradbury, R., 119 Brezis, D., 97, 99, 100 Brown, C., 9, 10, 361–375 Bruni, L., 232 Buddhism, 223, 340–342, 349–357, 454, 455, 460, 463, 465–467, 469, 472, 473, 475, 476 Buddhist economics, 9, 339–358, 361–375 Buddhist economy, 10, 362, 369, 370, 372, 375 Bunten, A., 405, 414 Business ethics, v, vi, 5, 59–82, 87, 94, 168, 172, 173, 232 Buzzanell, P.M., 151 C Calderon, R., 103 Calo, Z.R., 90 Camosy, C.C., 93 Campbell, J., 424 Capitalism, v, vi, 1–5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 17–28, 31–42, 45–47, 59–61, 63–65, 67–69, 73, 75, 77, 85, 88, 91, 94, 99, 104, 105, 131, 136, 143–149, 160–162, 169, 170, 176, 184, 187, 193, 206, 217–220, 222, 227–232, 239–240, 243, 247, 250, 253–257, 260–262, 264, 266, 268, 269, 274, 275, 284, 285, 288, 289, 293, 298, 304, 308, 309, 314–319, 327, 328, 333, 339, 342, 345, 347, 357, 358, 361, 365, 379, 380, 391, 399, 400, 402–412, 414, 415, 424, 443, 458, 460, 477, 483–489, 491–493, 495, 497 Capra, F., 431, 440 Carnegie, A., 408 Carroll, A.B., 170 Casanova, J., 90 Causse-Broquet, 281 Chesterton, G.K., 90 Chewning, R.C., 143–145 Christensen, C.M., 48 Christian faiths, 175, 223–225, 231, 241, 250 Christian principles, 7, 153, 194–201, 204, 206, 207, 244 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6, 7, 167, 177, 183 Clark, C.M.A., 209, 210 Cochran, R.F. Jr., 90 Cohen, E., 119

Index Compassion, 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 19, 86, 98, 128, 140, 141, 159, 208, 243, 245–247, 249, 250, 258, 342, 343, 345, 347–351, 357, 358, 369, 375, 427, 429, 430, 434, 436, 440, 441, 443, 453–477, 483, 489, 492, 493, 497 Competition, 4, 41, 63, 65, 66, 78, 98, 154, 160, 258, 264, 265, 315, 323, 330, 351, 373, 383, 474 Confucianism, 454, 455, 460, 466–468, 472, 473, 475, 476 Conscious capitalism, v, vi, 2–12, 18–21, 24, 25, 28, 32, 35–41, 45, 46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 61–63, 65–68, 70, 74, 77, 81, 97, 103–104, 110, 131, 140, 143–163, 167–173, 184–186, 193–213, 217–232, 239–250, 253–270, 273–289, 293–309, 313–334, 339–342, 347, 348, 350, 352–357, 361, 362, 370, 371, 375, 379–393, 399–416, 423–426, 438, 443, 453–477, 483, 496 Conscious leadership, 5, 8, 10, 39, 48–51, 54, 170, 245, 246, 250, 260, 274, 293, 300–302, 380, 411, 423–426, 431–443 Consciousness, 2, 4–6, 12, 18–24, 26–28, 36, 37, 39, 60, 67, 72, 77–79, 109–131, 183, 193, 194, 204, 218, 223, 230–232, 255, 256, 277, 316, 317, 319–322, 326, 328, 330, 332–334, 339, 362, 363, 380, 407, 414, 425, 427–429, 431, 435, 437, 453, 471, 496 Constructivism, 80 Cooperation, 12, 19, 32, 63, 65, 66, 96, 149, 152, 169, 248, 258, 264, 265, 282, 283, 317, 323, 326, 329, 351, 380, 383, 470, 474 Corporate social responsibility (CSR), 76, 169, 170, 172, 211, 228, 245, 256, 296, 317, 458, 477, 490 Cultural values, 10, 41, 148, 382, 386 Culture, 2, 6, 8, 18, 19, 36, 37, 39, 40, 87, 94, 97, 101–103, 119, 121, 124, 142, 145, 149–152, 155, 158, 160, 170, 179, 193, 194, 204–206, 208, 209, 212, 220, 223, 226, 245, 246, 249, 250, 256, 260, 274, 285, 293, 302, 303, 309, 320, 323–327, 329, 333, 340, 368, 380, 381, 384, 385, 403, 405, 411, 415, 441, 443, 456–458, 465, 474, 476, 477, 495 Cycles, 118, 133–136, 138, 139, 155, 156, 160, 168, 175, 177–179, 187, 323, 442, 488

Index D Danz, C., 4, 31–42 Danzing, A. Rabbi, 109 D’Arcy, M.C., 90 Davis, E.F., 141 Davis, J.H., 177 Deiter, C., 408 Deleuze, G., 18 Dell, K.M., 10, 379–393 Demiurges, 26–28 Descartes, 87 Deutschmann, C., 38 Dewey, J., 62, 96 Dia-Eddine, K., 8, 273–289 Dierken, J., 32 Dion, M., 1–12, 340, 341, 358, 453–477 Disinterestedness (DI), 85–105, 465 Donald, S., 340 Dunnington, K., 240 Durie, M.H., 381 Dutiful kindness, 489–491, 497 Dyllick, T., 171 E Easterlin, R.A., 221 Economic activities, 7, 39, 40, 68, 70, 167–169, 173, 175, 179, 182, 184, 187, 221, 226, 277, 319, 327, 341, 344, 345, 350, 353, 358, 382, 385, 485, 489 Economic freedom, 281, 283, 284, 332 Economic systems, 4, 8, 38, 39, 41, 42, 69, 155, 160, 176, 220, 227, 239, 240, 253, 254, 260, 267, 269, 279, 281, 284, 289, 319, 320, 332, 333, 345, 367, 372, 382, 387, 392, 393, 401, 485, 487 Economic theories, 209, 220, 228, 279, 486 Economy, 2, 4–8, 10, 20, 31–35, 37–42, 45–47, 54, 61, 64, 65, 69, 89, 95, 101, 102, 104, 131, 134, 138, 142, 152, 154, 161, 179, 209, 210, 218, 219, 223, 225, 226, 228–232, 239, 240, 244, 255, 256, 258, 260–262, 265, 266, 268, 269, 274, 275, 280–285, 288, 289, 306, 308, 316, 317, 328, 331, 346–348, 361–375, 381, 382, 384, 387, 388, 391, 392, 399, 400, 402, 405, 406, 408–412, 414, 415, 460, 497 Edgeworth, F., 209 The Eight-fold Path, 344 Elazar, D., 74, 77 Elias, P., 412

503 Emmons, R.A., 427 Engels, F., 97, 240, 409 Entrepreneurship, 61, 255, 294, 296, 319, 332 Environmental destruction, 459 Environment, social, governance (ESG), 369, 370 Equality, 9, 74, 144, 146, 148, 168, 181, 241, 258, 274, 282, 300, 313, 324, 350, 353, 357 Ethically conscious capitalism, 342, 344, 352–358 Ethical principles, 156, 173, 227, 229, 295, 332, 355 Ethics, 4, 5, 8, 32–35, 39–41, 45–47, 50, 52–54, 63, 66, 86, 87, 93, 94, 97, 104, 109–131, 140, 142, 144, 170, 177, 205, 209, 213, 225–228, 230, 243, 258, 277, 285, 288, 289, 295, 327, 357, 361, 365, 456, 465, 474 Eusebio, M.A., 6, 7, 193–213 F Fairchild, M., 242 Fairness, 221, 249, 258, 261, 262, 283, 296, 298, 441 Falk, A., 221 Famine, 135, 136, 493 Farooq, M.O., 8, 253–270 Ferreira, C., 440 Ferrer, J.N., 435 Feuerstein, A., 76, 77 Fischbacher, U., 221 Fisch, M., 98 Floyd, G., 50 Forsythe, D., 411 Foster, T., 389 Fotiou, S., 239, 241, 247 The Four Noble Truths, 344 Francis, Pope, 209 Frankfurt, H., 98 Frank, R., 221 Freeman, R.E., 61, 66, 169, 170, 176, 474 Frey, B., 221 Friedman, B., 1–3 Friedman, H., 68 Friedman, J., 408 Friedman, M., 59, 70, 147, 184, 379, 488 Fromm, E., 87 Frost, P., 246 Fuller, P., 467 Fyke, J.P., 151

504 G Gampopa, 469 Gandhi, M., 442 Gardner, H., 426, 427 Gelb, M., 411 Gilbert, P., 465 Global responsibility, 350 Gnosticism, 17–28 Godbey, G., 125 Goodman, D.R., 6, 109–131 Goram Sönam Sengé, 467 Gordon, A.D., 92 Gorski, P., 90 Graeber, D., 94 Graf, F., 38, 41 Graham, L., 414 Greenberg, I., 112–114, 121, 123, 127, 129, 130 Greenleaf, R.K., 262 Grusky, D.B., 355 Guattari, F., 18 Guņabhadra, 341 Gyatso, T., 340, 342, 343, 353 H Habermas, J., 90, 460 Haidt, J., 96 Halacha, 68, 133, 137 Halbertal, M., 87 Hartelius, G., 426 Hartman, D., 78 Hayyim Luzzatto, R.M., 101 Hazony, Y., 96 Heaven, 137, 155, 157, 167–187, 199, 201, 212, 247, 248, 267, 282, 297, 468 Hebrew, 98 Hegel, G.W.F., 92 Heimann, E., 38 Heine, H., 141 Hell, 17, 18, 167, 305, 341, 467 Hellinger, M., 95, 102 Hemissi, O., 8, 273–289 Hēnare, M., 391, 392 Henderson, R., 474 Heschel, A.J., 78, 79, 112, 113, 116, 117, 120, 124, 127, 131 Heskett, J., 339 Hierarchy, 60, 174, 323, 330, 407 Higher purposes, vi, 2–4, 7–9, 12, 18, 19, 39, 61, 63, 65, 66, 68, 69, 74, 75, 79, 149, 152, 162, 170, 193, 194, 202, 204, 241, 243, 245, 248, 250, 256, 260, 267–269,

Index 274, 293, 297, 298, 301, 302, 307, 308, 322, 339–341, 379, 380, 392, 399, 409–410, 426, 443, 454, 473–476 Hill, C.W., 169 Hipwell, W., 409 Hobbes, 456 Hockerts, K., 171 Hoevel, C., 6, 7, 217–232 Hoffman, D., 21, 24 Holidays, 49, 139, 140 Holmes, L., 246 Houkamau, C.A., 10, 379–393 Huineng, 341 Hume, D., 454, 460, 461, 465 Hunnicutt, B.K., 109 Huxley, A., 119 I Ibrahim, M., 258 Indigenous, 4, 10, 148, 380, 391, 393, 399–416 Inequality, 10, 20, 63, 65, 67, 68, 144, 148, 155, 227, 239, 240, 244, 253, 254, 266, 331, 339, 347, 348, 356, 361, 363–367, 370, 372, 374, 379, 486 Interest, 2, 3, 8, 10, 18, 19, 26, 27, 41, 53, 66, 69, 77, 85–104, 134, 141, 145, 148, 149, 152, 161, 179, 193, 194, 202, 205, 209–213, 225–228, 243, 245, 246, 256, 258, 259, 261, 265, 268, 269, 276–280, 282, 285, 289, 296, 298, 302, 317, 318, 324, 331, 339, 349, 354, 371, 380, 384, 393, 443, 456, 458, 460, 461, 474, 476, 485, 488, 494 Islam, 8, 9, 224, 253–270, 273–289, 294–309, 455, 460, 466, 468, 470, 472, 473, 475, 476 Israel, 74, 75, 96, 103, 136–138, 141, 153, 364 Iyall Smith, K., 412 J Jackson, A., 413 Jackson, T.P., 90 Jameson, F., 20, 23 James, W., 86, 96, 104, 426 Jewish ethics, 69, 102, 110–111, 123–128, 131, 140, 225 Jonas, H., 24, 94 Jones, E.P., 115 Jones, P.T., 61 Jones, T.M., 169

Index Judaism, 5, 6, 31, 70, 71, 82, 90, 94, 95, 97, 99, 123, 130, 133, 224, 296, 455, 475 Justice, 8, 63, 88, 90, 98, 100, 104, 140, 147, 181, 221, 227, 228, 242, 249, 257, 258, 261, 262, 265, 281, 282, 289, 295, 297, 299, 300, 321–323, 328–330, 363, 374, 375, 458, 459, 463, 464, 473, 496 K Kagan, S., 93, 94 Kahane, A., 439 Kahneman, D., 220 Kamenka, E., 92 Kanov, J.M., 458 Kant, I., 87, 454, 460, 462, 463 Kaplan, R.S., 61 Kathir, I., 470, 472 Kegan, R., 61 Keith, G., 89 Keller, T., 47, 48, 52, 53 Keynes, J.M., 333 Khashoggi, J., 50 Khurshid, A., 282 Kidder, R., 440 Kindness, 3–5, 11, 12, 63, 65, 69, 71, 72, 76–77, 79, 243, 247, 258, 261, 296, 465, 467, 469–470, 475, 483–497 King, D.B., 428 King, M.L., 442 Kocka, J., 46 König, R., 32 Kook, A.I. Rabbi, 128 Korten, D.A., 317 Kotsko, A., 90 Kounnoushis, G., 239 Krambia-Kapardis, M., 6–8, 239–250 Kramer, M., 61, 171 Kranton, K.E., 384, 385 Kriger, M., 475 Kuhn, T., 424 Kumārajiva, 342 Kuokkanen, R., 408 L Labors, 6, 59, 63, 115, 121, 126, 127, 130, 138, 141, 142, 144, 147, 148, 153, 255, 269, 281, 314–316, 330, 346, 356, 371, 372, 400, 401, 403, 405, 407, 409, 415, 484 LaDuke, W., 404 Lakoff, G., 73, 76

505 Larsen, D.J., 178 Layard, R., 221 Leadership, 3, 8, 45–54, 135, 148, 150, 153, 155, 156, 158, 159, 175, 178, 179, 181, 183, 185, 212, 231, 245, 254, 256, 260, 262, 263, 268, 270, 296, 301, 308, 319, 323, 325, 333, 386, 399, 411–413, 423–426, 431–433, 435, 436, 438–443, 456, 458, 459, 465 Leadership education, 424, 425, 432, 442 Lefin, M.M., 111 Legault, M., 340 Leisure, 6, 109–131, 138 Lev, B., 61, 494, 495 Levenson, J.D., 129 Levinas, E., 454, 460, 463–465 Levine, A., 68, 95 Liedl, J., 160 Lin, C.-H., 407, 409 Lips-Wiersma, M., 432, 433 Logsdon, J.M., 170, 171 Lopez, Jr., 340 Loy, D.R., 354, 355 Luhmann, N., 31, 40 Luisi, P.L., 431 Lukianoff, G., 96 Luzzatto, M.C. Rabbi, 116 M MacIntyre, A., 91 Mackey, J., 1–12, 18–21, 28, 32, 38, 39, 41, 48–54, 61, 65, 149, 157, 160, 169, 170, 193, 243, 245, 255, 264–266, 268, 300, 309, 314, 317, 322, 333, 334, 339, 340, 361, 362, 370, 371, 379, 380, 392, 393, 409, 411, 415, 423–426, 431, 436, 440, 443, 455, 473, 476 Malkawi, M., 269 Mandela, N., 442 Mandeville, B., 350 Manirav, J., 100 Manna, 137–141 Mantzaridis, G., 243 Māori, 10, 379–395 Map of meaning, 431 Market activities, 220–232, 266 Marques, J., 442 Marshall, I., 48, 430–432 Martin, J., 126 Martin, J.D., 61 Martin, K., 170

506 Marx, K., 33, 36, 87, 91–94, 96, 97, 99, 136, 240, 409 Maya, 10, 399–416 Mbousa X.M., 247 McCobin, A., 424 McCormick, J., 9, 313–334 McGilchrist, I., 430 McIntosh, S., 1–12 Meir, R., 100 Mele, D., 147 Mencius, 468 Merrier-Webster, 196 Mesoamerica, 400–402 Mika, J., 10, 379–393 Miller, D.W., 5, 45–54 Mill, J.S., 68 Mittleman, A.L., 95, 98 Modern societies, 4, 31–42 Monopoly, 72, 136, 142, 219, 280, 315, 400 Moral Economic Vision, 85–104 Moral leadership, 168, 332 More, H., 24 Morris, L., 432, 433 Muller, J., 92, 96 Mullin, M., 413 N Naqvi, S.N.H., 261 Nationalization, 136, 328 Navon, Ch., 95, 96 Nee, W., 198 Neher, A., 82 Nelson, E., 87 New Testament, 156, 171, 198, 224, 225, 241, 247–250, 348 Newth, J., 10, 379–393 Newton, I., 485 Next stage capitalism, 2, 3, 12, 59–82, 483, 487, 489, 493 Ng, E.C.H., 354 Nirenberg, D., 88, 97 Normative and narrative, 133–134 Novak, M., 145 O Oates, B., 6, 7, 167–187 Odenheimer, M., 134 Ogunfowara, B., 246 Old Testament, 199, 242, 248–250

Index Organizational life, 3, 7, 71, 203, 204, 453–477 Orthodoxy, 6–8, 65, 146, 221, 239–250, 493 Ostrom, E., 318 O’Toole, J., 150, 268, 494 P Padilla, A., 246 Palmer, D.A., 9, 313–334 Papathanasiou, T., 242, 247 Parmar, B., 170 Pascal, 87 Pava, M.L., 1–12, 59–82, 85, 94, 120, 483–497 Payutto, Venerable Paryudh, 349–352, 354 Peirce, 96 Penny, L., 414 Perroux, F., 228 Petriglieri, G., 474 Phillips, A., 483, 497 Phipps, C., 1–12 Piketty, T., 266 Pincus, S.D., 120 Pirson, M., 61 Plato, 89 Porat, B., 102 Porter, M., 61, 171 Poverty, 7, 38, 69, 75, 140, 142, 147, 149, 154, 162, 163, 168, 175, 178, 179, 186, 217, 219, 227, 230, 243, 250, 255, 280, 300, 306, 313, 317, 341, 343, 350, 353–356, 366, 367, 374, 493 Pre-capitalism, 400–402 Profits, 2, 6, 8, 9, 12, 37–39, 47, 48, 53, 62, 64, 66, 69, 70, 75, 77, 87, 123, 127, 128, 131, 142, 144, 146, 147, 149–152, 160, 162, 163, 177, 178, 183–187, 194, 209, 227, 228, 231, 232, 239, 243, 255, 256, 260, 266–269, 274, 280, 281, 297, 298, 305, 316, 321, 322, 324–326, 331, 341, 344–351, 353–358, 362, 365, 367, 369–371, 373, 379, 380, 382, 383, 385, 387, 392, 393, 406, 409, 410, 465, 471, 473, 474, 486, 490, 493–495 Puntasen, A., 351, 355 Putnam, H., 103 Q Quinn, R.E., 474

Index R Ramon, E., 92 Ratzinger, J., 224 Raworth, K., 474 Religions, v, 1–9, 12, 22–27, 31–42, 51, 54, 60, 72, 79, 82, 90, 102, 124, 129, 160, 172, 174, 206, 207, 209, 221–224, 226, 228, 229, 231, 240, 243, 244, 254, 257, 269, 273, 274, 293, 294, 296, 303, 307, 309, 313, 321, 322, 324, 369, 400, 402, 423, 455, 474, 475, 477, 485, 497 Responsibilities, 5, 7, 12, 28, 39, 45, 46, 48–50, 52–54, 59, 62, 63, 66, 73, 76, 101–103, 126, 141, 158, 168–172, 174, 176, 181, 182, 222, 231, 232, 244, 245, 256, 261, 276, 283, 302, 304, 315, 317, 333, 340, 355, 379, 408, 425, 441, 460, 463–465, 468, 471, 472, 490 Roberts, G., 6, 143–163 Robins, N., 315, 327 Robinson, J.P., 124, 125 Roesler, U., 349 Röpke, W., 228 Rorty, R., 89 Rosmini, A., 228 Rothausen, T.J., 213 Royal, C., 383 Rubinstein, A., 442 Rude, D., 408 Rumi, 471 Rushdie, S., 120, 122 Russell, B., 110, 123, 124 Ruster, T., 32 S Sabbath, 5, 6, 12, 68, 72, 77–79, 110, 112–115, 117, 120, 121, 124, 126–128, 130, 131, 133, 138, 148, 153 Sabbatical, 6, 12, 98, 99, 109–131, 133–142 Sacks, J., 68, 69, 95, 101, 128–130 Sagi, A., 102 Sagiv, Y., 102 Salanter, Rabbi, 111 Sandel, M., 104 Sanhedrin, T., 100 Sarna, N.M., 129, 135 Scarcity, 136, 137 Scharmer, C.O., 438 Scharmer, O., 437, 438 Schiller, R., 66 Schluchter, W., 33

507 Schmitt, C., 90 Schnall, S., 68 Schneider, J., 400 Schopenhauer, A., 454, 460, 463, 465 Schremer, A., 102 Schulze, S., 440 Schumacher, E.F., 349, 351, 352 Schweid, E., 90 Scitovsky, T., 221 Search for meaning, 63, 69, 80, 129 Sen, A.D., 345 Senge, P., 61, 437, 440, 466 Seng, P., 475 Servant leadership, 51, 148–150, 152, 156, 157, 159, 181, 203, 208, 256, 262, 263, 268, 301, 302, 441 Shabbat, 110, 113, 114, 120, 121, 126–128, 130, 131, 133, 137–140, 142 Sharansky, N., 115 Shifman, P., 99 Shmita, 134, 135, 137–142 Shoeb, M., 9, 293–309 Shulevitz, J., 113, 114, 126, 127, 131 Shweka, R., 120 Sibley, C.G., 385 Silko, L., 404, 409, 410 Simmel, G., 40 Singer, P., 87, 91, 93, 94 Sisk, D., 432, 440 Sisodia, R., 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 18–21, 28, 32, 38, 39, 41, 48, 50–53, 61, 157, 170, 193, 243, 245, 255, 264–266, 268, 300, 309, 339, 340, 361, 379, 380, 392, 393, 409, 411, 415, 423–426, 431, 436, 440, 443, 455, 473, 476 Slavery, 110, 111, 114–119, 121, 127, 130, 133, 136, 137, 139, 140, 179, 181 Slowey, G., 408 Smith, A., 1, 59, 86, 87, 144, 160, 255, 315, 327, 454–456, 459–461, 465, 484, 485, 487, 489, 497 Smith, J., 403 Smith, V., 220 Smuts, J., 439 Social capitalism, 8, 21, 65 Social justice, 3, 6, 54, 143, 146–148, 151, 152, 154, 155, 162, 163, 210, 227, 232, 242, 279, 281, 282, 307, 379, 468, 487 Solidarity, 7, 8, 96, 134, 141, 147, 227, 229, 243, 244, 258, 280, 281, 283, 289

508 Soloveitchik, J.B., 36, 112 Solzhenitsyn, A., 115 Sombart, W., 94 Sperber, D., 101 Spiller, C., 385 Spiritual intelligence, 48, 51, 411, 423, 428, 438 Spirituality, v, 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 24, 25, 49, 60, 82, 103, 124, 144, 149, 157, 159, 183, 201, 204, 213, 229–231, 296, 309, 313, 317, 320, 327, 369, 380, 383, 393, 399, 404, 410, 411, 423, 424, 427, 428, 430, 440, 442, 454, 455, 460, 475–477, 483, 487, 497 Stakeholders, 2, 3, 6, 8, 18, 19, 39, 41, 45, 48, 54, 61–63, 65, 66, 68, 146–152, 156, 157, 159, 162, 169–172, 174, 176, 193, 194, 201–213, 230, 232, 245, 246, 249, 250, 256, 257, 260–265, 274, 280, 285, 293, 297–303, 305, 306, 316, 322, 323, 333, 339, 340, 354, 361, 362, 365, 370, 379, 380, 386, 393, 438, 443, 455, 456, 458, 466–468, 471, 474, 476, 477, 495, 496 Stanley, J., 121 Stav, D., 120 Stiglitz, J., 266, 363 Strategic Kindness, 491–493, 495, 497 Stuhr, J.J., 103 T Takor, A.V., 474 Tallbear, K., 404 Tamari, M., 68, 70 Tanner, K., 42 Taparelli D’Azeglio, L., 228 Tarfon, R., 77 Tarnas, R., 425 Taylor, B., 483 Taylor, M., 405 Teale, T., 410 Technologies of Persuasion, 22, 23, 28 Teixeira, S., 412 Tendulkar, D.G., 352 Thate, M.J., 4, 5, 17–28, 31, 45–54 Thich Nhat Hanh, 375 Thompson, D., 126 Tillich, P., 4, 32, 35–38, 40, 41, 90, 129 Tolley, H.D., 179 Torrance, E.P., 440 Tripp, C., 269 Tyson, N.D., 122

Index U Universal compassion, 348, 358 Universal ethical principles, 225–228 V Vakkayil, J., 413, 415 van Bever, D., 48 Van Buren, H., 172 Vasileios, Bishop, 244 Veblen, T., 366 Vilna Gaon, 109 Vincent Cronin, 121 Vogel, D., 150, 268 Volkmann Simpson, A.M., 458 von Heugal, B., 389, 390 Von Ketteler, W. Bishop, 230 Voskou, M., 242 W Wagner, F., 32 Wagner, H.-G., 349, 350 Wallace, D.F., 17–19, 24 Wallerstein, I., 400, 401, 403, 411 Wealth, 2, 7, 18, 40, 59, 60, 62–70, 72, 73, 79, 87, 127, 134, 136, 137, 140–142, 144–146, 154, 167–187, 194, 205, 208, 217, 219, 239, 240, 243–244, 247, 248, 250, 253, 255, 258, 266, 274, 279, 282, 283, 285, 296, 313–315, 321, 327, 328, 331, 350, 353–356, 370, 375, 381–387, 392, 393, 408, 414, 460, 475, 484–491, 495–497 Weaver, G.R., 172 Weber, M., 1–3, 32–35, 37, 39–41, 67, 90, 94, 96, 104, 327, 495 Weber, T., 351 Wilberforce, W., 160 Wilber, K., 61 Wilfand Ben-Shalom, W., 102 Williams, J., 17–28 Willis, C., 353 Winchester, S., 46 Witesman, E., 6, 7, 167–187 Wolterstorff, N., 90 Wood, D.J., 169–171 World system, 400–403, 408, 411, 414, 415 Wurzburger, W. Rabbi, 68, 69 Y Yates, 389 Yunus, M., 266, 493, 494

Index Z Zappalà, G., 10, 423–443 Zohar, D., 429–432, 437 Zorah, D., 48

509 Zsolnai, L., 350, 352–355 Zuboff, S., 21, 22 Zuckerberg, M., 496 Zundel, Y. Rabbi, 117