To wipe out hypocrisy and indifference

The hypocrisy and indifference of certain corporate leaders hurt; in 2008 they rewarded themselves as if they had not had a share of responsibility for having generated the crisis. Would we have done the same had we been in their place? Are mean-spiritedness and selfishness a mere question of opportunity and circumstances, and do they always prevail over responsibility and solidarity? We may need to embark on a profound individual introspection, to look also at our own behaviour, before and during the crisis; to assess how we react to adversity. Coming out of the crisis is a collective effort; and it is good to long for a new social course, a more effective, fairer way of functioning. But this is not achieved only through top down approaches; our actions and attitude also count. They count because of the impact they may have on the course of the social processes, and they count because from that interaction to forge the collective destiny, opportunities emerge to reorient our own individual becoming.
John Thain, former CEO of Merrill Lynch, Martin Sullivan, former CEO of AIG, Lloyd Blankfein, incumbent CEO of Goldman Sachs, Vikran Pandit, CEO of Citigroup, understand that they and their employees did a good job and, in spite of the crisis, in 2008 rewarded themselves with bonuses worth in total 18.4 billion dollars. The top executives in these firms lead lavish lifestyles based on those juicy bonuses: weekend mansions, apartments worth in excess of 20 million dollars in exclusive locations, outrageous decoration expenses, costly private jet flights. One year ago, Thain spent 1.2 million dollars to refurbish and redecorate his office. Last September, after AIG received a multimillion bailout from the government, 70 of its executives met at a California resort and spent 440,000 dollars.

The New York Times reported that New York’s Attorney General accused some of Merrill Lynch’s top executives of “executive irresponsibility” for having secretly collected bonuses worth 3.6 billion dollars right at the time when such entity was getting government aid. Four top executives are suspected of having received 121 million dollars and other 696 officers might have obtained perks worth more than one million dollars in 2008.

What about the crisis? What about their share of responsibility for having generated it? What type of impunity protects them to act, commit excesses and be indifferent to other people’s suffering? Is it again “behind me the deluge”? How do we put up with those conducts? Didn’t we see at the time that the king was naked, or did we see that but said nothing? Was it that those who spoke or who did not assent were gagged, socially and economically marginalized? Would we have done the same had we been in the place of those corporate leaders? Are mean-spiritedness and selfishness a mere question of opportunity and circumstances, and do they always prevail over responsibility and solidarity? Does this imply that the “other” does not matter, that there are disposable individuals whom we use and get rid of without much further ado?

Much remains to be explained about the causes that generated the crisis, and from Opinion Sur we join those who seek to do their part to understand what happened. It is not a question of assigning the blame or arrogating truths; we need to understand in order to be able to adjust the course and improve our way of functioning as we go along. Yet, even though it is critical that we develop strategic thinking, unveil what is unknown, explore new courses of action, it is also critical that we embark on a profound individual introspection and wipe ourselves from hypocrisy and indifference. We need to turn our eyes toward our own behaviour, before and during the crisis; assess how we react to adversity, and whether we have chosen to move ahead alone or extending our hand to those around us.

Coming out of the crisis is a collective effort; and it is good to long for a new social course, a more effective, fairer way of functioning. But this is not achieved only through top down approaches, from large social forces down to each individual; the actions, the attitude of each one of us also count. They count because of the impact they may have on the course of the social processes, and they count because from that interaction to forge the collective destiny, opportunities emerge to reorient our own individual becoming.

———————————————————————————————–

Notes:
(1)Los CEO no se ajustan el cinturón, a story by Natalia Fabeni published in La Nación, Argentina, on February, 23, 2009.
(2) Idem.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *