The role of businesses in defending democratic values amidst rising authoritarianism is under scrutiny.
The business community plays an essential role in democratic societies, and it bears a shared responsibility for their protection. In recent times, aspiring autocrats have increasingly sought the cooperation of businesses, pressuring them to align corporate actions with their personal interests. This can manifest in demands for financial support that enriches the autocrat or in directing companies to terminate employees who express dissent. A notable instance of this occurred when ABC announced it would cease airing Jimmy Kimmel Live! indefinitely, following comments from the host related to a controversial event. This decision was influenced by public pressure from a Trump administration official overseeing ABC’s local stations. However, ABC later confirmed that the show would return on September 23.
Autocrats pose a threat to democratic frameworks by rejecting fundamental principles such as the rule of law, free and fair elections, and the protection of vulnerable groups. They jeopardize free-market principles by linking business success to political compliance rather than marketplace competence. This situation underscores the critical role businesses play in safeguarding democratic values. Reactions from the public can be divided when companies are perceived as capitulating to autocratic pressures. For example, when Paramount settled a lawsuit with Trump regarding editorial choices, some expressed outrage, arguing that companies have an obligation to resist such demands. Others counter that these decisions are rational, aimed at self-preservation.
This division reflects a longstanding debate regarding the moral responsibilities of businesses. While some business ethicists advocate for a range of moral duties that corporations should uphold, others view them solely as entities focused on profit maximization, devoid of moral obligations. Joel Bakan, a legal scholar, notably described corporations as ‘psychopaths’ in his 2004 work, arguing that society can shape corporate behavior through regulation. Yet, businesses can also assert that aligning with stakeholder interests can enhance their profitability.
The question of whether adhering to moral standards is financially beneficial remains complex and context-dependent. However, the moral imperative for businesses to resist autocratic demands is more clear-cut. In his book, Corporations and Persons: A Theory of the Firm in Democratic Society, the author argues that corporations are morally accountable for their actions, with responsibilities tied to the governance of society. In liberal democracies like Canada, there exists a collective commitment to uphold freedom and equality for all citizens, necessitating everyone’s involvement in this endeavor.
Even renowned economists like Milton Friedman have acknowledged that businesses have a role in protecting democratic values. Friedman criticized business leaders who, in his view, were inadvertently contributing to oppressive systems through misguided social responsibilities. He urged them to resist such trends, a sentiment that remains relevant as business leaders confront contemporary autocratic pressures. Capitulation to such demands not only consolidates autocratic power but also diminishes the ability of other institutions, like law firms and universities, to oppose tyranny.
While some may argue that businesses lack moral responsibilities, suggesting that their actions are driven by self-interest, this perspective can overlook the broader implications of corporate behavior. Businesses must navigate the risks of retaliation for resisting authoritarian demands against the potential reputational damage from capitulating. Despite the pressures they face, corporations remain accountable for their choices. The argument that market competition will self-regulate ethical behavior fails to recognize that moral standards apply across various contexts, including sports and warfare.
Businesses possess mechanisms to address risks while upholding their duty to oppose autocratic demands, such as forming coalitions and utilizing legal frameworks that support democratic values. The defense of liberal democracy against authoritarianism is not solely the responsibility of the business sector. However, the successful protection of these ideals necessitates a collective societal effort, which must include principled leadership from within the business community.
