There is some discussion about the extent to which business should concern itself with the political or social concerns of its community. For example, some criticise BHP for its stance on climate change. I own shares in BHP and I firmly support its position. If it matters, so I think do analysts and the market. The criticism tends to come from people with two things in common. First, they have no idea about running a business. Secondly, they have no idea about climate change. The IPA is a good example. They also go on about freedom of speech. Except what they disagree with.
BHP fired someone for conduct involving, but not limited to, a bad joke that I will not repeat. The tribunal said the joke was not enough to warrant dismissal, but that other conduct was sufficient. The CEO of BHP says he disagrees. He wants the world to know that BHP will not put up with this sort of conduct. Good on him. That in my view is a sound business judgment on his part.
On the other hand, Channel Nine is being castigated for showing the cricket final last night on its second channel. This is said to have involved some kind of insult or lack of respect to those interested in women in cricket.
The directors of Channel Nine are there to conduct the business of the company for the benefit of the shareholders. If in doing that they fail to support the social dreams or political aspirations of others, and that has adverse consequences for shareholders or other stakeholders, so be it. Otherwise, the critics should mind their own business.
The High Court’s decision in February that Australians should be treated differently in the Constitution because of their racial identity was the most radical judgment in Australian history. It destroyed the idea that Australians have about multiculturalism that there was one law in Australia and that everyone was subject to the law in the same way….
The decision distorted the common law to import a new and incomprehensible legal principle that has fundamentally reshaped the relationship Australians have with each other and with the Australian Constitution…..
The cultural left has (in Australia) or had (in the U S) an uncontested stranglehold on the legal establishment, and is eager to retain that control…..
The Australian, 9 March, 2020. (Morgan Begg, IPA)
The IPA rarely misses an opportunity to show how fine is the line between ignorance and arrogance on the one hand, and madness on the other. I may shout them a copy of Dreams of a Spirit-Seer by Immanuel Kant. Or, perhaps, his Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime.