Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Michael E. Tigar: Adam, I don't know. It's certainly worth fighting for. We need to pretend that it's possible; how about that? You know, I'm a lawyer and I work with lawyers; lawyers whose job it is to enforce corporate social responsibility; lawyers who sue corporations to make them accountable for putting toxic substances into our drinking water and into the environment; lawyers who sue companies who make cigarettes and other socially irresponsible products; lawyers who sue companies who manufacture things that blow up and hurt people or don't work as they should. Now, the odd thing is, that this plaintiff's lawyer group has been stigmatized and in your own state of California, people, people who show up for jury service actually show up with the idea that there are too many lawsuits and too many frivolous lawsuits and too many people asserting their rights and that something needs to be done about it. And not only is that happening, but in state legislatures about across the country powerful corporate interests are shutting down interest to access to lawyers and access to the courts. The same thing is going on in the Congress of the United States. The corporate kleptocrats that are stealing from you and from me, from shareholders and from workers, are benefiting from congressional legislation that makes it harder to sue them and harder for lawyers to get a decent paycheck out of the fact that they spend years involving themselves in this kind of litigation. The attacks on labor unions, the attacks on the pensions of workers through these rigged bankruptcies that we're seeing particularly in the airline industry, all that, all of that, is a fruitful field or fruitful fields, within which to conduct important kinds of social struggle, to join with workers and consumers and victims of faulty products and victims of pollution and to wage the campaign against corporate greed and its consequences. Corporate social responsibility is not possible through the sort of enlightened self interest of allegedly beneficent corporate management. Corporate social responsibility is possible because people are going to organize and insist upon it. So, welcome to the fight, Adam.

by Michael E. Tigar

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Michael Laitman: Only if humanity will see that its state is fatal, that by our nature we are connected into one social formation, unification; only if we will see that we are obligated to consolidate among us into one collective with one responsibility—then the world will really be firm and good, and every person will also merit a secure life for the future. From our research it becomes clear that altruists, those who love to give and donate, comprise 10% of humanity. If we will rely on them and develop the altruistic gene, which is inherently placed into the nature of 10% of people, then we will see that nature has prepared a wonderful level for us, a wonderful trampoline to development. Our entire development, the entire education of the young generation, is nevertheless based on how we teach the generation to be altruists. We say to a child, "Don't be bad, give, yield to others." Why? Because we know that then it will be safer for the child and people will not use him. If he will yield to others, then his life will be good. This is why in essence our entire culture, our entire education, all of our religions, all science and all economics must be based on this condition. After all, even within, in the subconscious, we discover that this is the only thing that gives us security about the following day. This is why from the inside, altruism is, in a certain sense, natural for people, and we must only reveal it. There emerges only a psychological problem: to go from the egoistic realization to the altruistic one. In the end, we want to live—to live well and with confidence about the future. And so, we need to understand that confidence about the future means to contribute to society as a whole—in essence, this guarantees the following day. Besides this, in our life we are discovering that our social mechanisms are also ready for us to begin building the altruistic society. No one speaks against altruism publicly.

by Michael Laitman

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Michael P. Totten: This is a long standing problem. I worked in the US Congress for Congresswoman Claudine Schneider from Rhode Island who brought an extraordinary set of values to that Congress that I found in very few of the male members. She was among just a handful of women in an overwhelmingly male bastion. This is changing, we are seeing, at least in the United States, more legislative leaders certainly at the city and state level, and slowly at the national level. We are also seeing very slowly, too slowly, a number of corporate leaders that are women. But the question is an absolute one that there are such values that women bring to their analysis and assessment of problems. They are looking at solutions very different from men that are sorely needed in deliberative processes everywhere. This turns on a whole range of reasons why it doesn’t happen from the citizenry that doesn’t demand it, to the multiple roles that women play, of course rearing children, and it requires a reshaping not only our communities and cities to make it more accessible for women, and families and husbands to play more engaged roles rather than having the separation of work from home, or schools from home, or neighborhood to home. We need to be able to have a more seamless process and spatial lay out of our cities so that women can be more participative, and by that process be engaged in more of the social decision-making. I think with the emergence of the collapse in the cost of computers and the connectivity, there is really no reason that there can’t be more participation occurring in local communities that have national prominence. The idea of virtual conversations going on, because you have wall sized videos that look as if you ran into another person’s room, or two people--[Audio Ends].

by Michael P. Totten

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Mohammed Arkoun: I'ts possible but you have to consider many conditions hard to meet. There is a necessity to introduce a company culture. I consider as company culture the knowledge of the culture of all these workers inside the company who have different cultures because of their different cultural roots. All these workers have to understand the way to organise their participation in the company to develop a corporate responsability inside the company but also a responsability of an insertion of the company in the general structure of the society and the other sectors of society as the educative sector, the sector of scientific research and the political sector. All this has to be considered by an association of members of the company to sensitise them to the connection of the company to all sectors in the society within the company exists, but also to sensitise them to the relation of the products of the company with the society, to develop a commerce of exchange affected by a responsability vis-à-vis the other countries who are not able to compete with the big companys which are better equipped and better developped which are the countries of the occident, which, on their part, do not admit their responsibility to develop such a company culture which is receptive enough to all these problems which raises the construction of a new citizenship in the societes. today

by Mohammed Arkoun

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Mohau Pheko: Look, I think that the sort of corporate responsibility that we are looking at today is minimal. It's not enough, it's still full of patronage and it is not the sort of responsibility that matches the sort of wealth that is being created by corporations. I think in the world today, it has become essential that to me if you create an enormous amount of wealth, there is much more responsibility upon you to give away or to assist others in the world. So, I find that the way that corporate responsibility is being done today is done in a very welfarist sort of structure that does not really engage the communities and does not encourage innovation and really does not encourage new ways of doing things. So, for me, corporate responsibility is beyond just giving just the dollar or matching the dollar grant. It is really about making sure that the wealth and the corporations that we run are part of communities, they are not exploitative of communities and that's for me is responsibility. They are not monopolistic in the sense that they control every single industry in the marketplace, and that they do not kill off innovation and shatter competition that in fact find very instrumental ways of supporting initiatives and communities that can help communities bloom, that can help communities liberate those living on the margins to become much more than people who are being handed out a welfare grant, so to speak. So, I think that corporate responsibility has to be deconstructed and that wealth, that enormous wealth has to be shared in a much more distributive and a higher percentage of what is being currently given.

by Mohau Pheko

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Monira Rahman: Well, when the question is about the profit, it’s important to incorporate the social responsibility and making profits; the profits for the society, the profits for social development. It's not just a profit for the group of people or the company and in that way it's possible to have this corporate social responsibility, but in [] structure. So obviously it's difficult when capitalism is only promoting making profits, not working for the social cause for social development, then it is not possible. It's not a piecemeal that the corporate sectors are actually taking isolated incident or ad hoc incident initiatives for corporate social responsibility. It's the question about planned and structured initiatives for the corporate to take social responsibility and use their resources for social development causes. Therefore, it is important to have a system and structure and policy from the state's party to control the corporate profit making. So if it is like the [status] possible for establishing this accountability of the corporate, for their social responsibility, then it is possible.

by Monira Rahman

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Nadja Halilbegovich: I think corporate social responsibility is not only possible, it is absolutely necessary because we cannot keep depleting our natural resources just for the sake of growing. In fact, it is ridiculous because on one hand we are gaining and one hand we are losing something that cannot be gained back if destroyed completely. So, I think that corporate accountability and responsibility is absolutely necessary for sustainability of our planet. Also, apart from the environmental accountability, we need to hold corporations responsible for the way they treat their workers and treat people. People need to be respected. They need to work in environment that is humane and fair and they need to be fairly paid. So, I think that we cannot keep going like this; depleting our resources and violating basic human rights of workers in order to grow. So absolutely, corporate responsibility, social responsibility is not only possible, it is absolutely necessary.

by Nadja Halilbegovich

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Neela Marikkar: Yes. It is increasingly important, and actually it's a very vital part of what needs to be done. I think corporations have to start looking beyond their own profits and their bottom lines. I think corporations have to give back to the communities that they have been nurtured by, and who they have profited from. I think not only in terms of corporate social responsibility, I think corporations have to look at the role of peace-building in countries where there is conflict. I think corporations have a great deal of influence with governments, and policy-makers, international communities. So, I think, corporate sector can no longer be so insular, working within their own communities. I think they have to look at a much greater role, especially in countries, in developing countries, in countries that need their involvement and engagement in finding solutions, because the corporate sector is about results. And I think therefore there is great opportunity for corporate sector to play a much greater role in the lives of a community, in the lives of conflict-ridden countries as well. So, I think corporate social responsibility is a good beginning, but there is a much greater role for corporate sector to play.

by Neela Marikkar

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Oliviero Toscani: Of course social responsibility, there is a responsibility. Now they are responsible for what is going on in the world. Corporation are responsible for what is happening. Corporation are the working force of the world. They are responsible, but the problem is now they are responsible of a negative situation. The point is that they can’t put together profit and social responsibility. They cannot. I’ve been working for company, I’ve been trying hard, but at the end at corporation everything is allowed. You can – they can exploit, cheat the labor, it – nobody knows, nobody really care. And the major responsibility of a corporation is profit, still economic profit, it is not social profit. So, if social profit will produce economic profit then probably corporation will be – will do that. But the major point of a corporation is the economy. And until those managers, those unhuman, those sub-human. as I call them, the managers call them sub-human. You know, the world is divided into two category – the creative people and the non-creative, the human and the sub-human. Corporations are directed, are managed by sub-human people, those managers they don’t really care about social, they care about profit.

by Oliviero Toscani

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Oscar Olivera: I don’t understand the question. I imagine that if it means, if we can establish between all of us a social resposibility for [] a new world, i believe that you not only can. You have to establish a social responsibility between the peoples, between the northern, the southern communities. I believe that it is not only about a social responsability of isolated peoples, but a social responsability of the entire humanity altogether to save our planet, to save our lives, to preserve them for the future generations. It’s the supranational corporations, which are destroying the world, essentially those corporations, where you live, Adam, in California, in the United States, those corporations which are killing humanity, which are killing our planet. And i believe that it is our responsibility, your’s as well as that of your society and of the societies of the peoples in the south, to fight for stopping this crime against humanity.

by Oscar Olivera

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Paul Knight: I think to a large degree corporate responsibility is possible but it’s how that it’s manifested. The issue is with investments, what corporations in social programs partly for a lot of these organizations they’re looking at some return on that, whether it’s market profile, whether it’s an investment to grow their market. There is ultimately a return. The big issue I think as far as corporate social responsibility goes is what about the programs that may not be so sexy, if you like? What about programs where you’re dealing with drug addicts or adults rather than children? Why would corporations support that? They’d rather be supporting children’s programs or programs which support development within a country or a community. There is some issues with looking at corporate social responsibility as far as what it does. We need to have some sort of view about the way corporate social responsibility is enacted and what benefits come out of that. I think that it’s hard for organizations, or hard for corporations to really understand what’s going on at the grass roots a lot of the time for communities which can be a problem in how they invest to support communities. The other part of corporate social responsibility is you have issues of is there an agenda or is it genuinely looking at social advantage? So we really need to be focused on how we police this.

by Paul Knight

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Pauline Tangiora: If corporate means that everybody who becomes involved in a corporation becomes a partnership and that partnership looks at the responsibility they have to their employees, that probably is possible. But a corporate company, from my perspective, is there to make a profit, and if everybody does not share equally in the outcome, both the workers and the investors, then I don’t think it is possible to have a social responsibility.

by Pauline Tangiora

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Pico Iyer: Yes, possible, probable everywhere, but never in an unqualified form. And I think we can’t expect corporations certainly more than individuals to enjoy the luxury on unmixed [matters]. So, to some extent would be the PR, to some extent who will speak to vested interests, to some extent who will speak – come, emerge from the lowest motivations. And yet I think corporations are ever more aware in the 21st century of the importance of seeing cared and to that extent being cared. And I think, if we assume that corporations can’t be socially responsible, then we’ve given up before we begin. But, we have to give them the chance to win ourselves, and we have to give ourselves the chance to acknowledge that, as in any relationship, it’s going to be a vexed thing. We can see what corporations do around the world and question them to this rightly, but we must also honestly look at what they achieve. And sometimes corporations are in a greater position to help the mankind, obviously, than almost any large bodies.

by Pico Iyer

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Rachid ElDaif: That should be possible. What does responsibility mean? The word "responsible" is very vague. You can be responsible when you work for the success of a company. You can be responsible when you work for the profit, for the competitors and for the competition etcetera.

by Rachid ElDaif

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Raymond Federman: It would be nice if it were the case, if all the corporations were responsible, socially, economically. After all corporations, with their great resources, should help educate people even with basic knowledge. Some do, some try, there are a few, but most of them do it in a very hypocritical fashion. There is right now in America, a publicity that runs on television from Philip Morris, one of the big cigarette company, which is on a one end makes cigarettes and sells death, one might say, and yet advertise as how is helping education, is out, is helping us. On the one hand they pretend to be responsible, morally, socially, on the other hand, they are totally irresponsible. There are few places in the world; I think the Japanese have done a little more than most country for the corporations to be more responsible towards their worker, and towards their education, and I cannot speak for other countries but I know for instance, that in France, it is pathetic that the corporations have no interest. And in fact, there was this big scandal recently about the government that passed the law, which prevented certain of the educated people to get jobs, literally. That was a tragic moment, which was repelled, that was a stupid law of course.

by Raymond Federman

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Robbie Conal: Corporate responsibility is a fact. Corporations are responsible for everything they do just like people. And in fact, in my country, or I don’t want to be excessive about it, the country I live in, United States, corporations are people. So, there you go. Whatever they do, they are responsible for it. And holding a corporation accountable for its culture, for how it affects the environment, its workers, how it sells its product, how it advertises its product, seems only fair to me. That doesn't mean it's possible of course but, “Hey, why the hell not?” It’s very interesting that different corporations have different value systems and different cultures, and go about making their products and selling their products in different ways. I am not a big fan of corporate structure anyway. My government, not to be possessive about it -- United States government is interested in privatizing everything, they are [not going] to spend money on healthcare, education, welfare, prisons. Let’s privatize it, get corporations to run it. Let’s outsource it, have secret prisons somewhere else, and let second parties do the damage that we want them to.

by Robbie Conal

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Rodrigo Baggio: Corporate social responsibility is not only possible, but as it is very much desired, I see that each time, and this is very good, principally in the last decade, more organizations of the civil society appear, urban organizations that have as their objective to promote the corporate social responsability, to teach, to create cultivation in conjunction with the private sector about how much it is essential, how much it is fundamental that enterprises take part in the construction of a better world. And it is the most beautiful to see that the enterprises, and a lot of enterprises, not only perceive how the social responsability makes part of the corporate vision, makes part of business, and so there is an evolution inside of the practice of the social responsability, the question of social marketing. The responsable social marketing is very important. The social responsability attributes a value to the enterprise, it makes that the product of the enteprise, the image of the enterprise may be improved. And this is a situation of multiple profit. It means that the enterprise profits, the society profits and the comunities and the persons with a low income also profit. So it is very important that we can more each time develop this cultivation of corporate social responsability. This cultivation is changing our countries. In Brazil we have two organizations that have just finished an excellent work in this area: the “institute of social responsability”, ETHOS, and the “group of corporate studies and foundations”, GIFE. Organizations like these have to be disseminated for the development of our countries.

by Rodrigo Baggio

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Roland Berger: I think, that every corporation is not only an institution, which provides people with goods and services and which at the same time brings profit to its shareholders, but also, to my opinion, a social matter and so has social responsibility. Most of the corporations I know, actually almost all of them, take seriously their social responsibility. They take it seriously and perceive it by, firstly, trying to be successful, i.e. to be innovative, in order to bring forward the society, to be successful itself and to earn money, in order to invest it into the future. And the future of the corporation, if it’s growing, certainly means the possibility of creating more jobs for everyone. That was the first thing, the second thing is that their responsibility is seen through their responsibility for the quality of their products, for working conditions of their employees. Also their responsibility to provide vocational training at work so that it may be possible for an employee to find some further work outside the company later. And last but not least, their responsibility may be seen in their getting involved with the cultural aspects, social aspect, educational aspects of their company, giving money for these purposes, in the field of international understanding and to provide money also for that purpose. That is, the corporations take their social responsibility in an increasing degree very very seriously and this fact among the European companies in a market-economy system has its origins in a long tradition of centuries.

by Roland Berger

Sep 9, 2006 11:15:00 AM cite

Sanar Yurdatapan: Of course, it is possible. It is announced as something belonging to socialism, communism, only. No. Just remember Israel. The early years of Israel, there were kibbutz there and it was the center of the productional growth in that country. So, in every society it is possible and more than that it is a must, because we are not living alone in this world. We are social animals. So, this responsibility is a must for each society.

by Sanar Yurdatapan