The Social Responsibility of Business in "A Friedman Doctrine"

The Social Responsibility of Business in "A Friedman Doctrine"

Published: 2020-11-28

Tags: economics, ethics

Abstract

My thoughts on "A Friedman Doctrine".

Introduction

In 1970, the New York Times published a Milton Friedman op-ed by the name of A Friedman dotrine-- The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits [/favicon/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F1970%2F09%2F13%2Farchives%2Fa-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html.icoNYT article/favicon/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F1970%2F09%2F13%2Farchives%2Fa-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html.icohttps://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.htmlPlaceholder description for https://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html]. It begins with this paragraph.

When I hear businessmen speak eloquently about the "social responsibilities of business in a free‐enterprise system," I am reminded of the wonderful line about the Frenchman who discovered at, the age of 70 that he had been speaking prose all his life. The businessmen believe that they are defending free enterprise when they declaim that business is not concerned "merely" with profit but also with promoting desirable "social" ends; that business has a "social conscience" and takes seriously its responsibilities for providing employment, eliminating discrimination, avoiding pollution and whatever else may be the catchwords of the contemporary crop of reformers. In fact they are—or would be if they or any one else took them seriously— preaching pure and unadulterated socialism. Businessmen who talk this way are unwitting puppets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.

Friedman's motivating observations are:

Though the introduction draws on Friedman's view that socialism undermines the basis for a free society, he does not argue that in the article. His thesis has three components:

  1. For-profit businesses do not have a responsibility to do social good.
  2. For-profit businesses do have a responsibility to make profit i.e. "there is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception fraud."
  3. The endorsement of social responsibility for businesses amounts to socialism i.e. "the doctrine of 'social responsibility' involves the acceptance of the socialist view that political mechanisms, not market mechanisms, are the appropriate way to determine the allocation of scarce resources to alternative uses."

often ineffective, "approaching fraud", and undermining a free society.

Friedman focusses on the connection between businesses and social responsibility.

I am disposed to sympathize with many of Friedman's conclusions, however, there are many points in his arguments which I find confusing, difficult, and/or just wrong. Given my takes, and the context of A Friedman Doctrine's being a popular reference for describing "soulless capitalism," I write this article in order to:

A Friedman Doctrine

In this section I present an outline of Friedman's arguments, along with my own elaborations on his formalizations.

Social Responsibility

TODO

Corporate Responsibility

TODO

Socialism and "The Cloak of Social Responsibility"

TODO

Caveats

my own judgements, extensions

Judgements

No Collective Responsibility

A Special Social Responsibility?

Principles of Effectiveness

Extensions

Accounting for Non-Profits

TODO

"The Robe of Social Responsibility"

Resources

References