Knowledge Area Module 1: Theories of Social Change: Marxism versus Capitalism

Student: Allen Carn acarn@waldenu.edu Student ID # A00133310

Program: PhD in Applied Management and Decision Sciences Specialization: Leadership and Organizational Change

KAM Assessor: Dr. Duane Tway dtway@waldenu.edu Faculty Mentor: Dr. Duane Tway dtway@waldenu.edu

Walden University August 02, 2009

ABSTRACT

Breadth

In theories of social change, the breadth portion of the Knowledge Area Module (KAM) 1 will

examine the theories and actions of Bradford, Marx & Engels, and Weber. The examination will

review the authors in relation to three questions. The first question will look at individual

responsibility and promoting a free society. The second question will analyze the process by

which the individual becomes a productive member of a social economic system. The last

question will compare the strengths and limitations of each system while it promotes social

change. That analysis will incorporate input from other authors to build an established academic

claim in regards to the primary theories of Marxism and capitalism.

ABSTRACT

Depth

The depth portion of this KAM will consist of an annotated bibliography of 15 articles followed

by a literature review of at least 25 to 30 pages. The process of selecting these articles will be

focused on peer-reviewed journals, which are related to the concepts of socialism, the free

market, and potential impacts. The annotated bibliography will offer a summary, critique, and

evaluation of each article. The literature review will assess the relevance of the theories noted in

the breadth portion of this KAM. In doing so, the paper will evaluate the concepts of democratic

centralism and the modernizing of Weber’s central themes.

ABSTRACT

Application

In the application portion of this KAM, a comparative review will be conducted using the

theories of Weber, Marx, and will include some of the anecdotal evidence of socialism and free

market concepts as described by Bradford. Together they will form the foundation, while the

studies noted in the depth will serve as the modern interpretations of the foundation. In the

discussion portion of this section, I will use a comparative review to assess the current political

environment and policies President Barack Obama and his administration are launching.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BREADTH .......................................................................................................................................1

Marxism versus Capitalism .......................................................................................................1 The Individual’s Role...........................................................................................................1 Strengths and Weaknesses .................................................................................................22

DEPTH ...........................................................................................................................................33

Annotated Bibliography ...........................................................................................................33

Literature Review Essay ..........................................................................................................57

Democratic Centralism ......................................................................................................58 Modernizing Weber ...........................................................................................................68

APPLICATION ..............................................................................................................................76

Comparative Review ................................................................................................................76

Foundation .........................................................................................................................77

Theoretical Updates ...........................................................................................................89 Discussion ........................................................................................................................101

References ..............................................................................................................................114

BREADTH

SBSF 8110: THEORIES OF SOCIAL CHANGE

Marxism versus Capitalism

Often in the study of social economic systems, the conducted analysis is on a theoretical

level with historical notes to suggest success or failure of each system. The goal of this paper is

to analyze the social economic (or socio-economic) system of Marxism and its various iterations

in relation to capitalism and the free market. Socio-economics, in the context of this paper,

defines the human interaction in an economic environment. I will use the Plymouth Plantation

and the writings of William Bradford as evidence of the successes and failures of socialism and

the free market. I will use the recorded events of the Plymouth Plantation because the theoretical

concepts attempted during the life and death struggle played a major role in the development of

the plantation and what would become the United States of America (US). Specifically, I will

focus this analysis on the plantation starting out as a communal effort. Eventually, its leaders had

to incorporate free market concepts to maximize an individual’s potential so that everyone would

survive. In this paper, I also analyze the writings of Bradford, Marx & Engels, and Weber as a

basis to determine the role of the individual to effect change. In addition, I will use these analyses

to determine how the individual fits within an established social economic system, and the

strengths and weaknesses of the two primary socio-economic systems, Capitalism and Marxism.

The Individual’s Role

In this portion of the breadth, I will examine the individual’s role in the context of the

writings of Marx & Engels, Weber, and the practical situation that occurred at the Plymouth

Plantation in the early 1620’s. William Bradford and others at Plymouth made life or death

2

decisions in the hope of increasing their chances of survival. I intend to use specific details and

inferences do to invoke positive social change by an individual. At the Plymouth Plantation,

there was neither a right nor a wrong way to accomplish this task. There was only what did

happen and what the people intended.

To determine the relationship between individual responsibility and the promotion of a

free society, according to Marx and Engels, requires an understanding of the Marxist designated

classes assigned to individuals. To begin with, Marx and Engels described the proletariat as

intellectual revolutionaries with a religious belief in the revolution. For example, the proletariat

were “Puritan, smitten with guilt if he partakes of fleshy pleasures and corrupts the purity of his

consecration” (1959, p. xii). That passage implied that those who partake in the class struggle to

impose Marxism or Communism on the bourgeois as a religious duty. This religious concept

becomes implicit when Lewis Feuer notes in the introduction to the Basic Writings on Politics

and Philosophy by Marx and Engels, that Marxism was “the first secular world religion. Its

dialect was akin to Calvinist predestination; like other creeds, it had its sacred text, its saying, its

heretics, its elect, its holy city. If Marx was its messiah, Lenin was its St. Paul” (1959, p. x). For

those who were in the party and promoting the revolution, offered them reverence and praise

with religious fervor. The religious hierarchal class coordinates and directs every movement of

the proletariat.

3

Those individuals found in the general proletariat, were true source of the revolution’s

power. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie exploited the proletariat as they would a piece of

machinery. This exploitation was the source of the angst and radical desire to avenge wrongs

made against them. (Giddens, 1971, p. 8) This desire to right the historical wrongs included open

combat of various forms to overthrow those deemed enemies of the party. (Marx & Engels,

1959) Those in the proletariat required to make the ultimate sacrifice became martyrs and thereby

sources of inspiration for future generations.

If the individual was determined to be in the bourgeois class, the elite upper class, or

somewhere in between, promoting something other than the edicts of the party, they were targets

of the revolution since they had wronged and exploited the proletariat. Interestingly, some non-

union individuals, who believed they were a part of the proletariat or working class, found

themselves targets of the revolution since the grass roots organization of the revolution was

typically the (trade) unions. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 16) Another unique quirk of the Marxist

ideology was that those individuals who were in “the ‘dangerous class’, the social scum, that

passively rotting mass prepared for the bribed tool of reactionary intrigue” (Marx & Engels,

1959, p 18). Marx does not state the target of bribed tool. However, the obvious choices include

the bourgeois and then the proletariat. The bourgeois since it was they who provided the reason

for the revolution. In addition, since the bribed tool will become an unofficial arm of

government, they can serve a purpose in controlling the proletariat as well.

The theoretical process in which the individual can affect social change actually goes

through several iterations before a group of worker’s issues consolidates and eventually becomes

a national movement. From there, a national movement has the potential to spread to other

4

nations. However, the starting point begins with laborers who want some measure of control and

equality in regards to their daily lives. Eventually, this building anguish leads to the formation of

a local union. The unions start out by operating independently of one another and at times can be

at odds with another union. During these times, the bourgeois can use proletariat labor to gain

market share over or destroy another competing bourgeois company and union. Over time, the

number of unionized proletariat swells as industry increases and large numbers of people will

consolidate around metropolitan production centers. It is then that unions become regional as

they amalgamate into larger ones according to the workforce’s proficiency. As soon as

communication and transportation networks become available, a national movement can

materialize based on the escalation of local issues. Once nationalized, the infighting ceases and

the revolution focuses its attention on the true enemies of the proletariat. As a result, the

bourgeoisie have to make a decision, join or die. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 15-17)

During this process, individuals morph into a community of equals. The concept of

individuality must be “despised and cast out” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 23). In addition to

individuality, private property becomes property of the community and the state. (Marx &

Engels, 1959, p 21) Since Marxism is a secular religion, there remains no need for any known

type of state religion. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 28) Furthermore, the concept of marriage and

family is disposed of since it exploits the labor of women and children. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p

24 & 26) Finally, Marxism deemed the family unit concept as unnecessary. The community or

regional social organization controlled the education of children. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 25)

What every individual must realize is that for the revolution to be successful in the liberation of

oppressed peoples it requires the abolishment of the concepts previously noted. The individual

5

does not exist; they are merely a cog of a much larger organization. The local party organization

maximizes and controls the efforts of the individual. In doing so, the party has the best intentions

of the overall good for everyone, because the revolutionary leaders and intellectuals serve the

proletariat.

Weber had a different tack for the individual to become arbiter of social change. Unlike

Marxism, Weber focuses solely on the acts of the individual and their relationship with their

God. Weber answers the question of what is the relationship between individual responsibility

and the promotion of a free society. He does this first by noting the historical religious utilitarian

nature of life and then described the need to maximize an individual’s time spent in the pursuit of

a ‘calling’. (Weber, 1958, p. 180) Weber captured this religious foundation combined with the

concept of a calling in the title of his book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

These concepts eventually lead individuals to believe that it is sinful to waste time.(Weber, 1958,

p. 157) From this grew the time was money concept in religion, where “it was infinitely valuable

because every hour lost was lost to labour for the glory of God” (Weber, 1958, p. 157).

The method in which the individual serves God and society in general, which Weber laid

out, was from the writings of Benjamin Franklin. As noted by Weber, the condensed list of

Franklin’s quotes is as follows:

� “Remember, that time is money…” (as cited in Weber, 1958, p. 48).

� “Remember, that credit is money…” (as cited in Weber, 1958, p. 48).

� “Remember, that money is of the prolific, generating nature” (as cited in Weber, 1958, p.

49).

6

� “Remember this saying, ‘The good paymaster is lord of another man’s purse’” (as cited in

Weber, 1958, p. 49).

� “The most trifling actions that affect a man’s credit are to be regarded” (as cited in

Weber, 1958, p. 49). Even the slightest actions can have negative consequences.

� “Beware of thinking all your own that you possess, and of live accordingly” (as cited in

Weber, 1958, p. 50) credit has been an illusion of ownership.

This list spoke to several different things; however, the key items included responsibility,

maintaining good work habits, having a positive attitude, and living within an individual’s

means. Most importantly, only through responsibility did an individual increase his or her

freedom. (Weber, 1958, p. 50) Weber went on to say that, Franklin preached utilitarianism, in

which the individual does the greatest possible good by maximizing his or her resources. (Weber,

1958, p. 52) This utilitarianism not only provides direction in action, but it also allows each

individual to assume responsibility to take leadership and control of his or her own actions. As

the individual develops the ability to act responsible within society, then their leadership skills

develop proportionally as they act with “clarity of vision”. (Weber, 1958, p. 69) Furthermore, if

the individual is virtuous and ethical, then they can “free oneself from common tradition, a sort

of liberal enlightenment” (Weber, 1958, p. 70) to a higher plane of awareness.

Irrespective of where an individual was on the path of self-awareness, one key concept

comes into play, and that was the concept of a calling. That idea was something brought forward

from the age of the Reformation (Giddens, 1971, p. 127). Weber considered a calling, one of the

most critical parts of the “spirit of capitalism”. (Weber, 1958, p. 180) A calling was something

that an individual was extremely adept at doing as he or she lives in moral confines of their

7

religion. Others defined it as a life’s passion that brought the individual great joy in doing. King

(1998) would define a calling as something as simple as going to work and performing one’s

duties to the best of their ability. The calling is a mental state where the individual performs at

higher level. It is at this higher level where a selfless commitment to duty provided the highest

potential for spiritual and monetary reward. (Weber, 1958, p.62) In addition, as a person pursued

a calling it was supposed to be spiritually cleansing as it warded off the negative temptations of

life. (Weber, 1958, p.158) As Giddens pointed out, “Thus labour in the material world becomes

attributed with the highest positive ethical evaluation. The possession of riches does not provide

a man with any sort of exemption from the divine command to labour devoutly in his calling”

(1971, p. 129). In this concept, if an individual acquires a certain amount of wealth as the fruit of

their labor while not doing anything unethical or immoral, then that is seen as healthy. Ending up

poor or failing in the pursuit of a calling was unhealthy. (Weber, 1958, p. 163) The only time

acquiring wealth was terrible was when it allowed an individual to become unproductive with an

exorbitant amount of free time. As the individual becomes unproductive in life, they also become

unproductive in the eyes of the Lord. (Weber, 1958, p. 157) Throughout this entire process as

laid out by Franklin and the pursuit of a calling, Weber alerts the reader to the dichotomy that

existed between working towards a calling and practicing true religion. (1958, p. 183) This

dichotomy will be a subject of discussion in the other sections in this paper.

While Marx, Engels, and Weber used historical references to support their theories about

social change, William Bradford and the rest of the individuals involved in the Plymouth

Plantation lived it. Even though they sought religious freedom, they were unwittingly involved in

a social change experiment that would have lasting repercussions and provide evidence that

8

supports theorists--Marx, Engels, and Weber--in various ways. In answering the question what is

the relationship between individual responsibility and the promotion of a free society, William

Bradford and the others had a taste of both the pooled communal sharing of resources and the

unbridled freedom of the free market. In answering the question, it required a brief analysis of

their religious beliefs, the communal contract used to start them out, and a letter of advice that

understood the arduous task that the Plymouth group signed to complete.

The starting point for the metamorphous was the same starting point for the other authors

noted in this paper, religion. Unlike the secular religion of Marx, the Puritans of Plymouth

Plantation were more in line with the Protestants as noted by Weber. The key similarities were

the concept of individual freedom and responsibility. Capitalism or the free market ideas would

come later after they arrived in the New World. The Puritans sought freedom of religion, but they

also found freedom from the Gospel as Weber suggested. Through hard work and acting

responsible, the Puritans would persevere against religious persecution in search of a calling. In

paragraphs 61 through 63, an example of the trials and tribulations was noted where some of

Puritans were betrayed and arrested. (Bradford, 1908) Through religious persecution, the

Puritans’ perception of freedom was honed. With this in mind, the Puritans started out as a

community of like-minded religious individuals in search of a new life as they fled from England

to the Netherlands. With their belief in the Lord, they would endure more trials and tribulations.

They also developed an unbreakable bond that would link them together going forward, for better

or for worse. Their lives were in each other’s hands. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 42) Unfortunately, the

Puritans were not alone in their voyage to the new world. They would have other adventurers in

their numbers that had different belief systems. This difference in personal responsibility and

9

societal performance expectations led to confusion and inefficiency that the agreed upon

communal system would exacerbate.

Before departing, the planters and adventurers penned a contract with the financiers in

July of 1620. This contract would serve as the conceptual basis in which a communal

organization was to be set up in the New World. The first two clauses of the contract describe

how individuals in noted contract were proportioned shares; moreover, it grouped the adventurers

and planters as equals. (Bradford, 1908) The third clause in the contract was critical; as it

proportioned all remaining items in ‘common stock’ at the end of seven years as laid out in the

first two clauses. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 75) The next clause instructed all able-bodied people to take

up specific duties once the community was established. Interestingly, confusion would creep into

the contractual agreement with this clause, because it implied that an individual was restricted to

do one function or specific functions within the community. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 76) The fifth

clause divided all profits and capital equally while absolving debt. This clause limited the extra

incentive needed to survive in extreme situations. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 77) Clauses six through

nine divided profits and assets in regards to individuals settling at Plymouth between the maiden

voyage and the closing of the contract. More specifically, the clauses took into consideration the

children that come of age during the life of the contract, the children that do not come of age

during the contract, and it accounted for the death of individuals. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 78 - 81) The

final clause of the contract defined what was to go into common stock. In addition, it allowed all

individuals to have equal access to “meate, drink, apparell, and all provissions" (Bradford, 1908,

¶ 82). This contract had a majority of the components that Marx would have defined as

communism. The contract did not contain anything about religion; all work had equal value; the

10

contract provided equal access to resources to wives, children, and servants; all provisions came

from a communal store with equal access; and it implied that all individuals involved in the

endeavor were societal equals.

Finally, the last piece of evidence was a letter of advice found in a compilation of letters

and journal entries compiled by Bradford and Winslow. Both were participants in the Plymouth

Plantation. The letter’s relevance to this topic and question was simple. It made suggestions

about the survival of the expedition, and it ultimately suggested that a leader might have to do

what is right for the group in spite of its wishes or in this case, a previously penned contract.

Furthermore, the letter also instilled some democratic reasoning not covered in the contract.

Finally, Nathanial Morton was the only person that knew who the original author was because

the author signed it only with the initials I.R. The fact that this letter survived many cold and

arduous days reinforces its importance. It often referenced God as being a guiding force in the

decisions of individuals.

The letter offers five points of advice. The first point required individuals to repent daily

for sins known and trespasses committed unknowingly. (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B2) The

author of the letter (IR) knew that the voyage would be difficult and dangerous, so it would be

imperative that everyone maintained a civil attitude and focus inward for self-improvement.

(Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B2) In the next point, IR talked about group interactions and the

importance of patience, not being easily offended, and not wanting to offend others. Despite the

religious overtones, this point implied that the group would fail if there were bickering and

resentment in the group. (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B2) Point three was interesting since it

focused on “… how unperfected and lame is the work of grace in that person, who wants charity

11

a to cover a multitude of offenses” (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B3). The central point to this

theme warned about an individual that continually focused on complaining about all of the minor

offenses has lost sight of the group’s needs to survive. In addition, the continual search for

charity wasted the energy and time of the individual and lessened his or her utilitarian

responsibility to the group. To compound the inefficiency of one person complaining, the

individual’s complaining begins to break down the bonds that hold the group together and the

overall group efficiency deteriorates. In the fourth point, IR warned about avoiding the “deadly

plague”. This plague had the potential abuses of complacency and a lackadaisical attitude in

seeking comfort. These plagues may affect an individual or a group by decreasing their

efficiency; thereby, hindering the overall effectiveness of the total group (Bradford & Winslow,

1966, p. B4). IR does not note any specifics on the potential abuses, but he or she asked the

leaders of Plymouth to pay special attention to prevent the disastrous consequences. Moreover,

this became a key and important issue during the second year of the plantation and eventually

caused the elected leaders to change Plymouth’s overall socio-economic structure. The final

point concentrated on civil government and the responsibility of leadership. IR thought that since

there was not anyone of “special eminence” making the trip it would be wise to form a civil

government (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B5). People selected for government positions

should have characteristics of selflessness, be an arbiter of good, be good and legally responsible

in the administration of laws, and as important, were not swayed by the “foolish multitude”

(Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B5). This last point was important, because it required leaders to

make potentially unpopular decisions for the good of the community.

12

Overall, at the outset of the voyage, there was a combination of factors and beliefs

imposed upon the leaders of the voyage. As noted, the religion of the Puritans was at odds with

itself when it asked its flock to work towards a calling and the potential escalation in capital.

Then there was the contract; it required the planters and adventurers to form the community that

had strong communist qualities; and then there was the letter of advice, which opened the door

for leaders and individuals to do what is necessary in the eyes of God for the community to

survive. From an individual’s standpoint, Marx and Engels’ comments were in line with what

was in the Puritan contract. On the other hand, the overall religious nature of the pilgrims and the

ultimate responsibility of what one individual does was theirs, not the groups’. This opened the

door to social change that would take the group from the concepts of Marx and Engels to the

capitalism-free market beliefs of Weber.

The Individual and the System

This section builds upon the analysis of the socio-economic systems in relation to

individual responsibility and the promotion of a free society; it will take things a step farther and

answer how an individual is to become a productive member of each socio-economic system.

The focus in this section is more on the system versus the individual; however, it does not

remove the individual from the equation. Ultimately, the intent is to answer the previously noted

question in the context of what it means to the individual to be a productive member of each

socio-economic system. This country’s current trend of moving away from Weber’s concept of

capitalism towards Marx’s concepts that were inherent in the type of socialism found in Europe

provide the question’s relevance.

13

Marx and Engels answered the question of how the individual was to become a

productive member of a socio-economic system in two parts. Once a society reaches a point

where it was ready to accept Marxism, Socialism, or Communism, there were two roles that

individuals will play to become a productive member. The first role occurs during the revolution

phase; the role played by most individuals requires them to be submissive revolutionaries

fighting for the party’s supremacy. The submissive revolutionary was a strange contradiction in

terms; however, it captured the expectations imposed by leadership upon its followers thereby

making them the predecessor to the tortured bi-polar souls described by those that survived

communist regimes (Kets de Vries, 2001). After crushing the enemies of the revolution, the

second phase began. It required the same individual to evolve in becoming a true Marxist and

remain continuously obedient to the party. In regards to the second phase, social change at this

point was complete and the party leadership will communicate any other necessary changes.

Even before the first or revolutionary stage began, Marx and Engels noted that the

“capitalist stage [was a] necessary prerequisite to the establishment of communism in every

modern society” (Giddens, 1971, p. 23). There has to be an enemy on which the revolutionaries

can focus their energy; in addition, a capitalist society provides a good socio-economic

framework to evolve from and eventually take over. As Feuer stated:

“Marxism, on the contrary, satisfied the impulses towards hatred and aggression. A religion of pure love has to make some men the bearers of evil. To do the Lord's work against his enemies, to fight the good fight, to “struggle,” as Marx once said, ‘it's man's reality.’” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p xii)

With an enemy in mind, the proletariat led by the party initiates the societal revolution. This

revolution initially converts private property and bourgeois power to public property and power.

14

The goal is to separate capital from production, freeing the individual that makes up the modern

proletariat. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 111) The primary focus in regards to Marx’s revolution is

the elimination of capital. Capital serves as the foundation of the capitalist economy and it is

essential for the revolution to eliminate it for the bourgeois economy to collapse. (Giddens, 1971,

p. 34) Since capital is necessary in material and intellectual production, it makes the two

dependent upon capital. Thereby, they are also targets of the revolution. (Giddens, 1971, p. 41)

In addition to capital, religion becomes another primary target of the revolution. The goal

here is to remove the false and misleading religious concept of happiness; this in turn will

provide the proletariat an opportunity of real happiness. (Giddens, 1971, p. 7) The ultimate goal,

according to Giddens, is to replace religion with humanism, “whereby the love formerly directed

towards God will become focused upon man, leading to a recovery of the unity of mankind, man

for himself” (Giddens, 1971, p. 4). The elimination of religion forces the proletariat to realize the

lie that they are living, while destroying the moral character of their enemies.

In addition to the two primary targets of capital and religion, there are other targets once

the first two have begun disintegrating. Some of the other targets include: the refusal to adhere to

laws created using a capitalistic ethos, the elimination of loyalty oaths, the destruction of

competing political parties, gaining control of all media sources, elimination of home schooling,

disdain for and resistance to anything that prevented the individual from growing intellectually

with Marxist ideology, to name but a few. The revolution would become a holistic social change

event; furthermore, “modern socialism is nothing but the reflex in thought of this conflict in fact;

its ideal reflection in the minds, first, of the last directly suffering under it, the working class”

15

(Marx & Engels, 1959, p 91). The revolution is the beginning of all that the individual would

ever need to know.

The second phase in an individual’s metamorphous comes after socialism’s victory over

the bourgeoisie. As the metamorphosis unfolds, the individual becomes a part of society. The

metamorphosis becomes complete when the individual loses his or her identity. Communism,

Socialism, and Marxism will liberate all people to enjoy the fruits of society as long as the

individual “does not subjugate the labor of others” in the process. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 23) A

period of enlightenment envelops the people since Marx “assumed that the proletariat would be

liberal, friendly to learning, and truly the inheritors of science and art. The middle classes had

produced a renaissance in thought and feeling, and Marx was confident that the working class

would do likewise” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p.xiv). Since all work is equal, then all personal

choice in life is immaterial only as long as they serve the party. To be an individual in a Marxist,

Socialist, and Communist system runs contrary to the party's wishes. Before any bureaucrats

acknowledge a single voice, the individual must navigate through various regional party levels.

The individual’s primary and foremost duty is to serve the party. The party information outlets

dictate the ingrained morality, sacrifices are necessary in order to preserve the revolution, the

state, and more importantly, the party. “…To all these socialism is the expression of absolute

truth, reason, and justice, and had only to be discovered to conquer all the world, by virtue of its

own power” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 81). Marx’s previous passage appeared was built upon the

antiquated philosophies of imperialism, where the absolute truth is actually the stagnation of

thought and the expression of freeing the worker is an excuse for world domination.

16

These two phases, the revolutionary and the obedient worker, define the process of how

the individual becomes a productive member of the Marxist social economic system that all other

central planning systems mimic to one degree or another. To be free and create social change in a

Marxist-like system, the main ingredient of capitalism must be present. From that point, class

envy and misinformation sow the seeds of revolution. Eventually, it takes the oppressed worker

in the capitalist system and turns him or her into a revolutionary partisan. Once the revolution is

complete, the revolutionary icon of the struggle goes home to be a worker where they must not

be able to take advantage of the labor’s of others while working for either the state or the party.

Weber answered how the individual was to become a productive member of a capitalist

social economic system with religious and responsible leadership beliefs. Weber and many other

authors were curious about the unique dichotomy in which Western Judeo-Christian religions

spawned a work ethic - that if carried out in the correct manner and became profitable - could be

viewed as encouraging sinfulness. (Weber, 1958, p. 63) It was at this point Weber injected

concepts into his text that guided the businessperson into becoming a responsible leader.

“Nevertheless, we provisionally use the expression spirit of (modern) capitalism to describe that

attitude which seeks profit rationally and systematically in the manner” (Weber, 1958, p. 64). A

good leader that gathers capital through spiritual guidance formed the much-hated bourgeoisie as

defined by Marx. In turn, this made them the primary targets of the Marxist revolution.

The spiritual guidance came in many forms according to Weber; working hard was

equivalent to cold showers and a healthy diet in order to avoid sins of the flesh. (1958, p. 158)

Weber continued this line of reasoning, which has evolved primarily through the Protestant

religious ranks, when he stated that not working hard in your calling was sinful and the penalty

17

for this sin was not eating. (1958, p. 159) Even more so, to be a devout follower of the faith, an

individual must try to take advantage of the opportunities presented to him or her by the divine

will of God. If they choose not to then they deny the will of God. (Weber, 1958, p. 162) Giddens

noted that Protestants developed a much more rigorous brand of discipline than the Catholics,

after the onset of capitalism. (1971, p. 125) Despite the reality, that “Protestantism broke with the

monastic ideal of Catholicism”, this monastic idea was a concept that Protestants did not accept

(Giddens, 1971, p. 131). In some regards, capitalism was an unintended consequence of those

trying to be productive in the eyes of God. Furthermore, if an individual was able to gain more

capital than the next, this outcome was “Divine Providence”. (Weber, 1958, p. 177) The religious

acceptance of working towards a calling allowed individuals the opportunity to excel due to a

God given skill, knowledge, system, etc. The assumed expectation was that if they did not

succeed they were not trying. Rightly or wrongly, this allowed the individual to tap into their

inner passion and expertise in order to gather capital.

If it is permissible to gather as much capital as possible, where does the individual draw

the line at in order to remain pure in the eyes of God? To start with, the individual must have a

calling since “A man without a calling thus lacks the systematic, methodical character which is,

as we seen, demanded by worldly asceticism” (Weber, 1958, p. 161). Using a calling as a

professional goal, the individual must work in order to maximize his or her professional

efficiency, because it has the potential to “serve the common good, which was identical with the

good of the greatest possible number” of people (Weber, 1958, p. 161). Maximizing resources is

a necessary leadership trait of capitalism that makes it self-sustaining and thereby a key

mannerism of capitalism. The selection process of leaders was a system that “educates and

18

selects the economic subjects which it needs through a process of economic survival of the

fittest” (Weber, 1958, p. 55). The controlling mechanism to curb the leader from being predatory

is the leader’s belief in God. The Judeo-Christian moral and ethical ethos guides the leader

through the pitfalls of all the deadly sins in a manner that God would approve (Weber, 1958, p.

176 & 177). If a leader or businessperson treats others unethically, then they were shunned and

casted out. The consequences of continued unethical behavior, defined as “acting in a manner

society disapproved, unlawful, not dutiful to the church and the community, or unprofitable”,

was that nations and societies would de-evolve and “continually crying out for government aid”

(Weber, 1958, p. 65 & 66).

In summation, a person in Weber’s capitalist system was “characterized by a unique

combination of devotion to the earning of wealth through legitimate economic activity, together

with the avoidance of the use of this income for personal enjoyment” (Giddens, 1971, p. 126).

God endorsed and condoned this activity, since inactivity was determined to be the deadliest of

sins. Consequently, this had been “rooted in a belief in the value of efficient performance in a

chosen vocation as a duty and a virtue” (Giddens, 1971, p. 126). The result was a self-sufficient

individual that acted in accordance of a God fearing responsible leader no matter what their

vocation may be, especially since the individual was supposed to be a leader in his or her own

personal and family life. Self-leadership has been an essential ingredient of survival in a

capitalistic system.

The individuals involved with Plymouth Plantation had a unique take on the theories and

historical perspectives of Marx, Engels, and Weber. By contract, the people of Plymouth started

out with Marxist-like shared labor outputs. However, this communal environment caused

19

confusion, low productivity, and varying work expectations. The inability to be efficient in a

hostile environment was counterproductive to the group’s survival. That reality required the

leaders of Plymouth to take action and create a free market atmosphere in order for the

community to survive. This next section will take examples as documented by William Bradford

and apply them to the question how did the people of Plymouth become productive members of

each social economic system. It will note the incidents that lead up to the changes incorporated

by the leadership at Plymouth during the leanest of times.

It was the winter of 1622 and 1623. Mr. Weston and another group of pilgrims and

adventurers had landed in Cape Cod area during the summer 1622. Mr. Weston’s group started

out with enough provisions to last through the winter. Unfortunately, they squandered the

provisions making them dependent upon the Plymouth colony, passing ships, and any friendly

Native Americans. (Goodwin, 1920, p. 208) In the dead of winter, Weston made several forays to

acquire provisions from the Plymouth colony. The Plymouth colony, having gone through a very

light harvest, offered what provisions they could afford. Prior to June of that year, the Plymouth

colony was already living on half-rations due to a poor harvest the previous year. (Goodwin,

1920, p. 205) The individuals at Plymouth offered Weston and his group beaver pelts to trade

despite their need to use the beaver pelts for much the same reason and there was an actual

concern that other individuals at Plymouth might mutiny if they found out what had happened.

(Bradford, 1908, ¶ 215) Ultimately, Weston became bitter for having to beg for provisions that

he thought were communal property. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 215) After the second year in row of low

harvest yields, the struggling Plymouth colony was not prepared to help any other colonists.

Despite this, they offered what they could.

20

Another misunderstanding in regards to expectations occurred after the arrival of new

Plymouth colony settlers. The new settlers, not having gone through the trials and tribulations of

the first year, had a different set of work priorities and became dependent upon the common

stores. For example, on Christmas day a group of new settlers refused to work due to religious

reasons, the rest of the colony went out to work in the fields. Upon returning, the majority of the

group that stayed back due to religious reasons were frolicking and playing games in the street.

This angered those that worked causing Bradford to castigate those that remained behind.

(Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. 10) Even though this specific issue never occurred again, the

colonists could not overcome a growing systematic problem. Individuals who had survived the

previous winters at the Plymouth colony realized they could no longer honor the contract and

maintain a communal organization. Their lives depended on changing the socio-economic

structure if they were going to survive.

Up until 1623, the contract restricted individual potential and it did not efficiently utilize

the population to address seasonal realities that came with collecting resources. Since the colony

struggled the first two years, there were several discussions and meetings about improving corn

harvests and better crop yields in general. Circumstances forced the individuals of Plymouth to

make a critical decision. Instead of waiting until the end of the seven years, Bradford

proportioned out the communal land to individuals for the use of farming as stated in the original

contract. The newly proportioned land altered the inheritance clause. The need to survive

overrode any potential inheritance a sibling may get after the contract expired. This made

everyone farmers, since farming was the primary way in which the colony was going to survive.

Farming made everyone very industrious and maximized the potential output of the colony by

21

allowing families and groups of individuals to control and maximize their own efforts Women

and children were working in the fields after this decision, because much of their survival was in

their own hands and not dependent upon the labor of less efficient or unproductive hands.

(Bradford, 1908, ¶ 216) This fundamental change from a communal concept to a free market

concept was very successful “for it made all hands very industrious” (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 216).

The success of going from a communal effort to a free market endeavor had Bradford

wondering about the thought process of the ancients. This communal idea, he wrote, “applauded

by some of later times; -that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a

commone wealth, would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser then God”

(Bradford, 1908, ¶ 217). This was not the case at Plymouth, “For this comunitie (so far as it was)

was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much imployment that would have

been to their benefite and comforte” (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 217). To define labor by sex, age, or any

other means was very disconcerting, because some individuals had talents to do much more than

the specific tasks they were restricted to perform. They often felt offended, as if they were a slave

to the system, disrespected, dependent on the work ethic of others or others less qualified, and it

had the unintended consequence of breaking the will of the community. If conditions were

different, for instance their belief in God and their leadership was less than it was; chances were

the colony would not have survived. (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 217)

The social change that occurred when the pilgrims eventually settled at Plymouth

required a multi-talented industrious individual to fit within the confines of a communal

organization often discussed by Marx and his followers. Due to the struggles with weather, one

of the surrounding Indian tribes, low crop yields, the confusion of work duties and loads, and a

22

host of other issues, the colony was slightly improving from year to year. With new arrivals, the

colony went from surviving, to the verge of collapse. The individuals at Plymouth scrapped the

communal concept that required each individual to adhere to a centralized plan; free market

capitalistic concepts espoused by Weber replaced it. The issuing out private property to families

and small groups generated positive social change because it was the critical step in changing a

colony barely surviving into a thriving colony. In order for an individual to become a productive

member in the new Weber like socio-economic system at Plymouth, the individual had to rely on

their God given potential and ability to maximize their labor.

Strengths and Weaknesses

In reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the previously described Marxist and

Capitalist socio-economic systems, as it related to the individual, any assertions will be supported

or refute by the experiences of Bradford and the individuals of Plymouth Plantation. For

example, at Plymouth, the roles were interchangeable because landowners and laborers needed to

perform the labor to survive. However, the labor and the laborer to Marx were tools to

manipulate in order to unite the laborers and push a revolutionary social agenda. In order to

consolidate and build power, trade unions gathered the labor force in the hope to maximize

effectiveness. As for Weber, the laborer was an individual that could be treated as nothing more

than a piece of machinery to perform labor; however, with opportunity, skill, and hard work the

individual could change his status and serve an integral role in society. As with Plymouth, status

was interchangeable. The irony here was that both socio-economic systems offered its own brand

of redemption while at Plymouth, redemption was a luxury of the dead. Nevertheless, this section

23

will examine the strengths, the weaknesses, and then apply them to the events at Plymouth. The

focus of this analysis was not to favor one system over another; it is to note any inconsistencies

in the comparison of the purported systems to a real-life situation.

The best socio-economic axiom that described Marx’s vision was found in his Critique of

the Gothe Programme, the slogan was “From each according to his abilities, to each according to

his needs” (Marx, 1970, Part 1, p 5). However, to get to Marx’s axiom, there has to be

progression socio-economic evolution that required “radical or revolutionary political changes

alter the structures (necessary conditions), by virtue of which the mechanisms exist, in this case

by expropriating property capital and nationalizing land” (Sayer, 1992, p.112). Sayer’s comment

emphasizes the requirement that capitalism needs to exist before Marxism, Socialism, or

Communism can take over. The theory was that as the more capitalism increased, the more the

separation between the working class and the business owners grew. (Giddens, 1971, p. 11) The

ground in which the revolution was to be grown from was made fertile from this diverse

perspective of class and labor. In quoting Marx, Giddens noted, “‘the worker becomes an ever

cheaper commodity the more goods he creates. The devaluation of the human world increases in

direct relation with the increase in value of the world of things’” (1971, p. 11). With the defeat of

Capitalism, Marxism would return the individual to a naturally creative state while working to

improve the newly formed society. (Giddens, 1971, p. 15) It is here that Sayer notes, “anti-

Marxists are particularly fond of giving enormous prominence to the handful of predictions made

by Marx and Engels. Yet compared to their commitment explanation, Marx and Engels took little

interest in prediction” (Sayer, 1992, p. 130). To Marx and Engels, the eventual role that

24

Marxism, Socialism, and Communism would play in future events was the natural order of things

in human development.

With deliverance via revolution, it frees the conscience of the worker from the burden of

religion. The focus of this new society would be on humanistic interaction of all people to bring

forth a heaven on earth. “As a secular world religion, Marxism furthermore offered its rewards

on this earth. Other religions had postponed happiness as he get in another realm, but Marxism

could claim to speak for the foreseeable future” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. xi). As previously

noted, Feuer made the claim that Marxism is the world’s first secular religion with its hierarchy,

religious sites, saints, and sinners, but to the worker it offered a path of human enlightenment

while working for the party that had its rewards on earth. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. x)

With the defeat of religion, the ethics and morality that allowed the development of

capitalism would collapse as well since it would be unfounded without its religious framework.

It was ironic that the followers of Marx, a man that ridiculed ethics in politics, was propped up as

a religious ethical icon of their socio-economic system. “Nevertheless, despite his contemptuous

rejection of ethical terms, Marx stands out as among the imposing ethical personalities of modern

times” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. x). Humanistic need and laws based on a Marxist society

handed down from the core of the party would fill the void created by the absence of ethics. To

stop the exploitation and parasitism of the class system required the elimination of anything

created by or corrupted by a capitalist system, which was the goal of Marxism as it related to the

individual.

The weaknesses of Marxism were many and most emanate from some of its core beliefs.

Marxism was an aggressive, socio-economic philosophy that is committed to the never-ending

25

class struggle and the consolidation of power. It is a belief that always searches for the Demon

within us all while claiming and demanding love and adoration. The consolidation of power lies

within the iron fist grasp of the ever-knowing, ever-caring intellectual. “Marxism, which declared

itself the harbinger of a new international order has, in partial fulfillment of its prophecy,

polarized the nations into power blocs” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. ix). Some may say it also

brought the death of millions of human beings as well. Despite being the first secular religion,

the truth of Marxism according to Marx is that “it also offered the pains and sorrows of

asceticism” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. xi). In reality, what Marx offered the individual was a

struggle to replace one taskmaster with another one that was kinder, gentler, smarter, and more

understanding of the struggle. The irony to this, in a free society, the individual was his own

taskmaster.

One of the key objectives in the Marxist class struggle would be the elimination of

classes. According to Sayer (1992), classes as they were before the revolution would not

immediately disappear and when they did, they would actually reform in response to the edicts of

the state and the party. The classes would reappear in a different manner because of regulations

and controlling entities. Instead of capital, information will be the common commodity. In

regards to ethics and the controlling of information, as previously noted, Marx despised ethics

and required the elimination of all the ethical notions of the previous system in lieu of historical

necessity. However, as Feuer noted in the introduction to Basic Writings on Politics and

Philosophy, Marx’s “Soviet adherents have used his doctrine of historical necessity to justify an

era of repression and denial of human rights” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. ix). In a system where

information becomes critical, necessity will determine the use of factual references to the past.

26

The distortion of history becomes another casualty of the revolution, since as Giddens suggested

(1971), that socialism was about forgetting the past and looking towards the future. Conversely,

Hayek (2007) would argue against ignoring the past since disastrous consequences for

humankind would await those that followed the path of Marxism, Socialism, and Communism. If

Capitalism precedes Socialism, then Socialism precedes Totalitarianism (Hayek, 2007, p.67).

One final note, at one point Marx tried to calculate the capital transformation process in volume

3 of Capital. His intention was to explain the process using mathematics; unfortunately, Marx

reached a roadblock and his mathematical expressions were meaningless since they were dealing

“with a hypothetical close systems at a high level of abstraction…” (Sayer, 1992, p. 190). The

great irony, with Marx’s failure to use mathematical logic to explain a critical aspect of his

theories, he had to fall back on what the other religions had to use to promote his interpretation

of history and a never-ending class struggle looking for world domination, blind faith.

In comparing, Marx’s theories to what occurred at the Plymouth Plantation there were

two issues that required the leaders of the plantation to incorporate social change. This social

change took the plantation from a Marxist-like society to a more open free market society. One

thing to note before going into detail about the issues, in defense of Marx, a majority of the

planters were self-sufficient industrious individuals who were accustomed to multi-tasking,

which was essential to survival. This could have lead to some of the confusion. Even though a

form of labor exploitation, it would have been unwise to take a group of individuals use to multi-

tasking, change their expectations, and then drop them into a life or death situation.

In adding to the confusion, one of the main issues was the prearranged divisions within

labor that limited efficiency and potential. The fourth clause of the contract required individuals

27

to take up specific duties in the community, as noted by William Bradford, the clause limited the

individual’s potential and the group’s efficiency. When the individual had completed their

required tasks for the day or week, they were not required to perform other tasks despite having

the ability or the potential to do more. According to Bradford, there was attrition due to death and

sickness. Due contractual constraints, it forced those that were capable to do more to ignore the

loss of production caused by illness or death since the new task would lie outside of their

division of labor. The idea of equal pay for equal work was counter productive to the plantation’s

survival since it emphasized equal inefficiency. When being paid the same, why should one

individual work more than another? The next issue builds upon Marx’s premise that Marxism

required a capitalistic or a wealth creation structure before implementation. However, due to

bureaucratic control that strangled productivity and potential, Marxism was never to be more

than a low or no growth society. This became more evident when Marx stated that one individual

“does not subjugate the labor of others”. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p 23) What the planters and

adventurers eventually realized, “life is a gift not a given” (author unknown). Everyday the

people of Plymouth had to get up and survive; it was simple to write in the contract that all of an

individual’s needs would be in a common store. However, maintaining inventory in the common

store proved to be difficult for various reasons based on inefficiency and confusion. When

another plantation assumed they would have availability of Plymouth’s common store, the

inventory problem was exacerbated. The concept of all of Plymouth’s needs being available in a

common store was erroneous to the people of Plymouth.

When reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of Weber’s capitalist theories, a sense of

cautious optimism overcame the reader. The optimism came from Weber’s use of the word spirit

28

in the title of the book, the spirit was as much about working and performing in society with a

self-driven purpose as it did with the religious connotations. On the other hand, caution comes

from Weber’s concern about the increase in capitalism and its potential negative side effects. The

next paragraphs will review these strengths and weaknesses; in addition, it will compare them

with the actual results that occurred at Plymouth.

While Marx endorsed a system that placed the individual second while proclaiming its

strength was in the communal effort, Weber believed the strength of the system was with a group

of individuals united in a common cause. Weber described the Protestants as people “who had

grown up in the hard school of life, calculating and daring at the same time, above all temperate

and reliable, shrewd and completely devoted to their business, with strictly bourgeois opinions

and principles” (Weber, 1958, p. 69). When an individual dedicated him or herself to their

calling, their current lower class was a temporary condition. With an inalienable right to pursue

the calling, the only boundaries imposed upon the individual were those bestowed by the church

and the society in which they lived. This unbridled pursuit that had “the highest ethical

appreciation of the sober, middle-class, self-made [person]” unleashed a vastly superior potential

in everyone while in the pursuit of efficiency (Weber, 1958, p. 163). Even though low wages was

permissible by the church as efficiency increased, the reality was such that a capitalist system

discouraged low wages because skilled labor could find work elsewhere. (Weber, 1958, p. 61) A

society created through the efficient use capital allows individuals to maximize their potential.

(Weber, 1958, p. 53) “What was condemned as covetousness [by the church], was the pursuit of

riches for their own sake” (Weber, 1958, p. 172). This ascetic belief engrained by the church into

its followers had two affects that were utilitarian in nature to promote a more efficient societal

29

growth. The first affect of this ascetic belief required individuals not to squander resources on

luxury items. However, the use of wealth to promote efficiency or well-being within the town or

society was highly encouraged. (Weber, 1958, p. 170-171) As a matter of their perception,

“Labour in the service of rational organization for the provision of humanity with material goods

has without doubt always appeared to representatives of the capitalistic spirit as one of the most

important purposes of their lifework” (Weber, 1958, p. 75-76). The potential energy unleashed

on society took a majority of the individuals from the decrepit conditions of the feudal system to

productive members and thereby increasing the standard of living for all individuals, not just the

bourgeois.

Like Marxism, free market and capitalism does have its weaknesses. The focus in this

section will be on the role of religion and how without its morality, capitalism can reduce

individuals to nothing more than a machine. One of the main points brought out by Weber was

the role of religion in curbing what Marx’s would call the predatory nature of capitalism. Weber

himself laments that the moral and ethical barriers would erode as capitalism became more

successful. (1958, p. 175) As evidence to this fact, Weber noted, “the people filled with the spirit

of capitalism to-day tend to be indifferent, if not hostile to the church” (Weber, 1958, p. 70). The

reason for this hostility was that the church had become as intrusive, rightly or wrongly, in the

economic affairs of business people just as government had been doing. (Weber, 1958, p. 72)

The responses ranged anywhere from indifference to open hostility. This, in theory, opened the

door for individual business people to take advantage of situations for the sake of profit only and

allowing them to purchase luxurious items once forbidden. The balanced dichotomy tilted

towards sinful acts against the church and society as working in the duty of God became an

30

outdated concept. “The pursuit of wealth, stripped of its religious and ethical meaning, tends to

become associated with purely mundane passions, which often actually give it the character of

sport” (Weber, 1958, p. 72). Weber used the US as an example where the calling was reduce to

nothing but a sport.

As noted, the individual working to aspire to be more, if not treated well was treated with

the indifference or, worse, as a piece of machinery (Weber, 1958, p. 51). When coupled with

potential of “absolute and conscious ruthlessness in acquisition, [this] has often stood in the

closet connection with the strictest conformity to tradition” (Weber, 1958, p. 58). This applied to

both religious and non-religious business situations where the freedom offered was nothing more

than illusion because the worker could not generate enough wealth to improve their station in

life. (Giddens, 1971, p. 123) Regardless of what the individual worker tried to do while working

for low wages, the individual would never be more than an indentured servant on a tether. When

new markets opened up, the available resources could become a battleground for the

unscrupulous leaving the local inhabitants on the outside looking in as others plundered their

resources. These were the concerns of Weber as capitalism and an increase in wealth potential

became reality in some situations throughout humankind’s recent growth.

Comparing the strength’s and weaknesses of Weber’s system to the reality of the events

that transpired at Plymouth, the allure of freedom that brought most of the immigrants to

Plymouth had slowly changed to a life and death struggle. The dire situation required

fundamental and dramatic change since the contracted socialist system collapsed because it could

not sustain any substantial growth over time. Plymouth adapted a free market system that would

be more in line with Weber’s vision. “The spirit of capitalism, in the sense in which we are using

31

the term, had to fight its way to supremacy against the whole world of hostile forces” (Weber,

1958, p. 56). Capitalism as a system unleashed the potential of all individuals in a society,

thereby increasing Plymouth’s chances of survival. “A society can be created when the potential

of individuals was harnessed thereby creating capital and or an increased efficiency” (Weber,

1958, p. 53). Did an American Indian tribe play a role in the survival of Plymouth as portrayed

in modern history books? Yes, they did, however, their support was limited because they had to

survive themselves while fighting off other aggressive tribes. At times, the friendly Indian tribes

were dependent upon the Plantation for protection. The real socio-economic change that allowed

the Pilgrims to survive was one that took Plymouth from Marx’s point of view to Weber’s while

turning the plantation into a thriving endeavor for all involved.

In conclusion, the individual’s role in either Marx’s or Weber’s socio-economic system

had systematic risk and reward potential. With Marx, the risk was a systematic approach and the

expectation for the individual required them to make sacrifices for the greater good of the

revolution that would then launch a system of theoretical equality. The reward was a utopian

theory of societal equality. Unfortunately, a political intellectual class at the party level that

determines the direction of the masses dramatically distorts Marx’s vision of equality. The

ultimate failure in the system became evident when Marx was unable to demonstrate

mathematically the capital conversion from a Capitalist society to a Communist, Marxist, and

Socialist society. In addition, Marx knew that socialism was not a capital creation process since

his theory of socio-economic evolution had Socialism following Capitalism. This also became

evident at the Plymouth Plantation where a socialistic concept sowed inefficiencies in labor that

almost reaped destruction for the plantation if not for a bold change. Weber had a different take;

32

he based his system on individual risk and responsibility. Laws, social moral norms, religious

beliefs, and work ethic controlled the system he envisioned. The individual had the responsibility

to make his or her life productive while in search of a calling. The reward was not riches; it was

serving a purpose and working to achieve a higher state of understanding while pursuing a

calling. The capital gathered during the pursuit was a tool to achieve further understanding and

pursue even larger dreams. Like Marxism, it had its drawbacks, one of which was Weber’s fear

of a capitalist society turning into a godless predatory society where the restraints imposed by

social moral norms and religion were lifted under the guise that laws could be created to replace

them. If left unattended from a moral and ethical standpoint, it would breed as many tails of

sorrow as there were success stories. Despite the negatives, the potential for growth would be

unmatched by any other socio-economic system as the Plymouth planters and adventures

discovered.

For many, the variants of Marxism provided the illusion of a salvation on earth; however,

history has proven it has provided nothing but hell on earth. Despite what history has proven

there are still many enamored with the socio-economic philosophy of Karl Marx. The next

section will provide a modern twist on the knowledge previously gleaned from Bradford, Weber,

Marx, and Engels. It is yet to be determined if the theorists noted in the depth will solve the

answers that have escaped many for decades. Furthermore, will the theorists in the depth answer

the question; is there anything about Marxism that makes it a philosophy of positive social

change? From what Bradford has written about concerning his experiences at Plymouth, his

answer would be no.

DEPTH

SBSF 8320: CURRENT RESEARCH IN ORGANIZATIONAL AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS

Annotated Bibliography

Ambrose, D. (2002). Socioeconomic stratification and its influences on talent development:

Some interdisciplinary perspectives. Gifted Child Quarterly; 46; 170-180.

The qualitative article reviewed the affects of socio-economic stratification on education

availability to low income families that have gifted children. Ambrose compared diverse socio-

economic theories of Milton Friedman and John Galbraith to specify why social stratification

occurs and why there should be more government intervention in bridging the economic gaps.

Ambrose noted another issue, how does an agency define who was or was not eligible; this was

intended to include “Giftedness, Intelligence, Talent, and Merit” (Ambrose, 2002, p. 176).

Ambrose wrote the article to promote awareness and activism to helping gifted

disadvantaged children. However, Ambrose did not look into existing systems, such as a voucher

system that allowed disadvantage children to go to better schools that helped encourage

intellectual growth. Ironically, Ambrose’s solution required more government involvement when

it has been the government that shut the door on the successful voucher and charter school

systems forcing disadvantaged children back to their typically decrepit, inner city school where

the emphasis has not been on schoolwork, but survival.

The value this article offered was insight into the dichotomy that has been pervasive in

the educational system for sometime. Activists want more intervention by the government, when

it has been the government knocking down bridges built to span the socio-economic gaps. The

article appeared to want a Marxist-style governmental intervention by requiring all children to

34

attend state ran education system. However, it did include some individualistic concepts similar

to the theories of Weber. If an underprivileged student did qualify, they could receive

opportunities to better schools that are more suited to their ability and potential. Unfortunately,

this will end up making those disadvantaged children a hotly debated political issue for

generations if an alternative does not come from the private sector. From a social systems

standpoint, the premise of this research article does little for the societal advancement.

Andolšek, D. & Štebe, J. (2004) Multinational perspectives on work values and commitment.

International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4(2), 181–209.

This interesting quantitative article looked at values and the level of commitment of

workers from the countries of East Germany, Japan, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, the US, and

West Germany. The paper first defined commitment in the context of an unbiased international

perspective. Commitment was determined to be a dependent variable and types of commitment

were used, “affective (AC) and continuance (CC)” commitment (Andolšek & Štebe, 2004, p.

182). The conclusion was that the USA ranked the highest in AC while Japan ranked the highest

in CC, while all of the countries noted developed predictors that explained their relative AC and

CC scores.

The study was interesting since the cross sections of countries sampled included both

individualistic and collectivist countries. In some regards, the study mentioned that struggling

economies or economies in transition often left people insecure and less committed to their

employment (Andolšek & Štebe, 2004, p. 203). In addition, the authors noted that efficiency or

best work was something in which collectivist countries scored higher. This result was very

35

surprising in many ways since communist countries were never known for their efficiency, while

Japan and the USA, who were known for efficiency, were rated lowest. Two things that were not

in the study, but which should have: 1) upward mobility and 2) unemployment rate of the

sampled areas. Both of these could have skewed the results one way or another.

Since the exploitation of labor was a primary part of Marx’s theories, the value of this

article suggested that in order for the transition to socialism to begin a division between

management and the workforce needed to occur. According to the authors, lowering the AC

scores in individualistic countries created this necessary division. In lessoning the commitment

and increasing the insecurity, the result would be the increased possibility of a class warfare

struggle. This approach would distort the Marxist reasoning for a revolution. However, if the

end justifies the means, would this really stop anyone from taking advantage of the system?

Angle, S. (2005). Decent democratic centralism. Political Theory, 33; 518-546.

In this qualitative study, the author examined the potential of democratic socialism that

appears to have germinated in China. The study examines the Chinese version of democratic

socialism by asking whether it is legitimate and sustainable. The author’s approach to answering

the two questions used John Rawls’ concept the “Law of the Peoples” as quoted on page 520.

“The ‘Law of the Peoples’ is an international perspective on social justice in which it is

acceptable to have international laws overruling any national or state laws. This

eventually led Angle to incorporate a ‘global philosophy’ in his conclusion whereby a

decent democratic centralism can be the prerequisite to liberal democracy.” (2005, p.539)

36

In the end, China would be more politically correct than the hard line they typically take with

their people and other countries.

The author does concede that the Chinese regime has been brutal over the years.

Consequently, change would require support from the international community and any change

would be slow in coming. Based exclusively on theory, Angle’s article disregarded evidence that

decent democratic centralism was equivalent to a benevolent dictator giving away token

freedoms to appease the people. In addition, the concept of being decent has subjective

connotations allowing questionable interpretations. There would be the presumed arrogance in

claiming that one country was decent without some type of empirical criteria. Rawls’ foreign

policy concepts do not free anyone if they require “well-ordered people” as he suggested. (Angle,

2005, p. 540)

The value that this piece offers was that a class struggle or revolution was just an illusion

because in the end Angle and Rawls want to create a system made up with “decent hierarchical

people” (Angle, 2005, p. 520). This hierarchy supports Sayer’s claim that class systems never go

away, they just reshape themselves in to the needs of the present. Angle made an eye--opening

point when he linked China’s constitution to Lenin and then subsequently linking it to Marx and

Engels. (2005, p. 525) Whether Angle realized this or not, he used Russia and China as an

example of countries that were built upon the socio-economic belief of democratic centralism,

the same two countries which have been the most brutal towards their own people. What the

author does not address sufficiently was the balance of power between the people and the

government. If balance is not achieved, then the decent society is nothing but an illusion

controlled by an iron fist of the government.

37

Ardichvili, A. (2005). The meaning of working and professional development needs of

employees in a post-communist country. International Journal of Cross Cultural

Management, 5; 105-119.

This qualitative study looked at the transitional affects of going from a centrally planned

economy to a free market economy on 260 engineers from four large Russian corporations. The

basis of the study was on the Meaning of Work (MOW) questionnaire that had “six valued work

outcome dimensions” (Ardichvili, 2005, p.105). The author also looked at the potential

differences between respondents from Moscow and Vladimir. The author concluded that the

family came first with work being second. Family was the only category in which Vladimir’s

respondents finished higher than Moscow’s. In every other category, Moscow’s respondent

scored higher. With regard to work, the reason some of the engineers enjoyed work was the

ability to network, while others thought work was satisfying and interesting. There was little

difference between the respondents from the national capital (Moscow) and a rural city

(Vladimir) located a 179 kilometers from Moscow.

The article was a condensed version of the actual study; additionally, the study admittedly

focused on one professional trade. With a limited cross-section of the workforce, the potential

that the study’s results were skewed increase. For example, engineers used in the study may have

had a degree of freedom not found in the common workforce. One other critical point to note, the

focus of the study was to be on the transitional affects of switching from communism to a free

market system. It appeared to be more concerned with current mindset of Russian engineers.

Furthermore, three of six hypotheses (H3, H5, & H6) assumed too much without some type of

38

study to indicate the engineer’s prior work-related beliefs during the years of communism. The

previous point could have been a victim of the condensation of the article.

Interestingly, the author highlighted some of the differences between the classical Marxist

and the communist society that dominated the Russian people for decades. The respondents

scored family and social relationships the highest. After capital and religion, the breakdown of

the family unit was a Marxist objective. Social relationships may have been the result of pent up

energy released after years of oppression. Another interesting fact was that the community and

religion scored the lowest in that order. Much like social relationship, the negativity toward

religion that emanated from the Russian government through the community to the individual

was apparent. More specifically, religion was one of the primary targets of the Marxist secular

revolution so it was not surprising that respondents scored it the lowest in both cities.

Ardichvili, A. & Gasparishvili, A. (2003). Russian and Georgian entrepreneurs and non-

entrepreneurs: A study of value differences. Organization Studies; 24; 29-46.

The authors of this quantitative study used “Hofstede’s work-related cultural values

framework” to evaluate the similarities and differences between studies conducted on Russia and

Georgia over a span of approximately 10 plus years (Ardichvili & Gasparishvili, 2003, p. 30).

Since earlier studies used the Hofstede method in comparing the two countries, it was again in

this study as well to compare the results over time. The Hofstede method looks at Power

Distance Indicators (PDI), Individualism (IND), Masculinity (MAS), Uncertainty Avoidance

(UAI), and Long-Term Orientation (LTO). The study had three hypotheses that looked at all five

Hofstede cultural values in different ways: the first tested to see if there were differences between

39

the two countries. The second tested to see if entrepreneurs were different from managers and

employees in both countries. The third tested was to see if entrepreneurs were higher than non-

entrepreneurs were on four of the five indicators with a UAI expectation being lower. (Ardichvili

& Gasparishvili, 2003, p. 34-35) The study produced mixed results with some being

“counterintuitive” in two of the five cultural values while some of the results actually

contradicted earlier studies (Ardichvili & Gasparishvili, 2003, p. 39).

With the mixed results of the study, the first question that comes to mind concerns the

validity of the Hofstede method being used to track cultural differences over a prolong time span.

The authors of the article actually questioned several different things about the outcome. Two

concerns included the events within the time span of the study and sample bias. Both could

suggest that the Hofstede method has an emotion-based element that could skew the results

within the current study as well as over time. Another issue that the study did not address was the

impact of technology on strong secular societies, a blurring of societal norms could be occurring

over time because of the Internet. Consequently, the results of the five work-related cultural

values were mimicking populous trends not depicting the individual’s personal value system.

Unfortunately, the article has limited value despite the potential it offered to the

discussion in comparing Marxism and Capitalism. It is regrettable that the study did not dig

deeper into the fundamental core beliefs of the tested individuals since this would have increased

the probability of evaluating generational belief systems while excluding populous bias. One

final note, there appears to be bias in some articles about “Western [socio-economic] theories

[being] grounded in Protestant work ethic” (Ardichvili & Gasparishvili, 2003, p. 30). This final

note was prevalent in other articles; the literary review will address this reoccurring theme.

40

Cavalcanti, T., Parente, S., & Zhao, R. (2007). Religion in macroeconomics: a quantitative

analysis of Weber’s thesis. Economic Theory 32, 105-123.

The authors of this quantitative study attempted to answer a question posed by Weber

himself, what are the quantitative results of the Calvinistic work ethic on societies and the world?

(Cavalcanti et al, 2007, p. 106) The authors of this paper took Weber’s implied question one-step

farther and compared the differences between Protestants and Catholics. Despite having similar

religious roots, the main difference between the two religions was an understanding of a calling

and using a utilitarian systematic approach while working towards a calling. The paper

establishes several mathematical theories that attempt to quantify religious beliefs, technological

adaptation, demographics, profit and utility maximization, and competiveness in it various forms.

The results of the study were inconclusive since it could only explain differences between

northern and southern Europe, but it could not explain differences between Europe and Latin

America. (Cavalcanti et al, 2007, p. 106 & 121-122)

The study was too restrictive in that it only examined the impact of religion regarding the

spread of Capitalism. Religion was only one factor in allowing an individual to reach his or her

God-given potential. The current socio-economic governmental policies and corruption play a

large role in how well the individual can maximize his or her potential. For example, Hayek

(2007) would note that evolution of European-style socialism played a significant role in

England’s decreasing and then stagnating economic growth rate in the output per capita during

the mid to late 1900’s. In addition, totalitarianism, fascism and socialism crept into countries like

Greece, Italy, and Spain slowing their progress. Finally, most countries in Latin American suffer

41

from corruption, socialist and totalitarian revolutions, or oppressive regimes. In those socio-

economic environments, there is little chance of an individual having enough freedom to pursue a

calling efficiently.

The article explained why a capitalist system does not automatically transcend systematic

understanding of its fundamentals to other religion and cultures. The value that this article

offered was in the reality that one religious belief alone does not spread capitalism more

effectively than another does. Granted, Catholics were slow in adapting free market concepts as

the study did indicate; however, the type of government played a significant role on how well an

individual could maximize their talents. For example, at the outset of the Plymouth colony, the

contract prevented the Protestants from maximizing their opportunity and hindered their

incentive to do more than they were required to do. It was only after numerous hardships did the

leadership of the Plymouth colony provided the free market atmosphere for an individual to truly

bloom.

Jackson, K. T. (2006). Breaking down the barriers: Bringing initiatives and reality into business

ethics education. Journal of Management Education, 30, 65-89.

The qualitative study recommended the incorporation of ethics into day-to-day business

activities. The study suggested that the business people of tomorrow “must follow social

mandates”, be sensitive towards legalized ethical standards that come as a result of corruption

cases, “integrating ethics into all facets of business”, and balance the cultural ethical

inconsistencies that come about due to globalism (Jackson, 2006, p. 66). Jackson concluded that

business educational courses should take a four-step approach that elevated the importance of

42

reputational capital, have course tools that develop ethical theory and critical thinking, encourage

inter-business disciplinary ethics courses, and elevate the abilities of the teacher in order to teach

ethics correctly.

A business or culture mirrors the ethics and morality of its leaders and more specifically

its political leaders. The study was trying to address a symptom of a much larger issue that occurs

with the policy makers in Washington D.C. and other international governmental organizations.

One of the first things the article mentioned was that an individual or business must follow social

mandates; however, what if the social mandates were wrong? For example, the United States

Congress, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac forced mortgage companies to give out subprime loans

in order to offer low-income families an opportunity to own a home. The faltering economy

forced banks to foreclose on loans; however, the banks bore all of the blame for corrupt business

practices such as predatory lending. This article demanded that the businessperson be ethical;

however, to be ethical would require them not to give out the loan in the first place. This would

have put them at odds with their social mandate.

One of Weber’s main concerns as Capitalism progressed was that religion and its moral

and ethical ethos would decrease. The intent of this paper was to reinstall ethics into a majority

of the business community that had long ago given up religious ethics and morality. Despite the

criticisms offered in the previous paragraph, the primary goal of the paper was to eliminate or

reduce the “distant, even contradictory, relationship [that] exists between economics and ethics”

(Jackson, 2006, p. 66). The pursuit of this goal needs elevated to a position that it can have a

positive impact on society as a whole. This pursuit requires a search for the true root cause that

focuses on systematic corruption and then cascaded down to businesses and other schools of

43

thought. The first spot for the development of ethics should start with public administration and

political science degrees in addition to business degrees.

Kets de Vries, M. (2001). The anarchist within: Clinical reflections on Russian character and

leadership style. Human Relations, 54; 585-627.

This qualitative study reviewed the affects of central planning on the Russian psyche

since the days when czars were in control. The author’s descriptions of the Russian character

give the reader an impression that the people of Russia suffer from a split personality disorder.

For instance, the author quoted Nikolai Nekrasov when he wrote, “Wretched and abundant,

Oppressed and powerful, Weak and mighty, Mother Russia” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 586)! This

quote accurately captured how the author described the Russian people. Most of the article

evaluated the Russian character based on three clinical psychoanalytic paradigms. The paradigms

were 1) “A rationale lies behind every form of irrationality”, 2) “much of the people’s motivation

is unconscious”, and 3) “our behavior is very much a product of previously learned behavior

patterns” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 587). The article paints the Russian people as individuals that

suffered from systematic abuse.

The article was informative and brought to light numerous quirks within the Russian

people, whom for the most part, were both oppressed and creative individuals. Overall, the article

tried to complement the Russian people on what they have endured and how they have adapted to

horrid conditions that existed from the days of Czars. Unfortunately, for the Russian people, the

conditions were worse under Stalin and his great purges, which ultimately led them to their

current purgatory of democratic centralism. One thing that made this article unique was its

44

dependence on Russian literature to help build a case in regards to the three psychoanalytic

paradigms. In addition to literature, open-ended “explanatory interviews were conducted in a

semi-structured fashion” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 588). The authors did arrange this kaleidoscope

of thought in a concise manner.

This article was valuable, because it provided proof that corruption and abuse did creep

into the utopian ideology of Marx that formed the communist dogma, which in turn dominated

the Russian people for decades. It brought out the reoccurring Marxist concept of “suffering is a

virtue” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 594). In addition, it noted the role of socialized education system

that supplanted the parent’s role of being the moral arbiter and teacher. Another item of

importance was democratic centralism, “For many party officials, however, democratic

centralism was nothing more than a slogan used to suppress disagreement and genuinely free

discussion” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 618). Finally, ever since the Russian people had to adapt to a

secular religion, they have been without a moral compass. As a result, this has hindered the

development of the Russian economy into a market economy.

Novak, M. (2005). Max Weber goes global. First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion &

Public Life, 152, 26-29. EBSCOhost database.

The focus of this article was not to criticize Weber, but it offered an expanded view of

Weber’s theories to include other religions that provided momentum to the global capitalist

movement. Novak quoted a former Marxist, Jagdish Bhagwati, using his statistics to prove his

point concerning the power of capitalism, “poverty rates in China, which were 28% in 1978 that

dropped to 9% in 1998”; in addition, “in India poverty rates were 51% in 1977-78 and the fell to

45

26 percent in 1999-2000” (Novak, 2005, ¶ 22). According to Novak, Weber was right on one

very important and critical point. Success was a conscious choice. Success was dependent upon

the individual’s level of desire to improve his or her current condition while practicing sound

economic principles. Furthermore, poverty and the inability to better oneself was a choice as

well.

The article noted the contributions of other religions but focused most of its energy on

Catholicism providing examples of contributions by the Cistercians, Dominicans, and the

Franciscans. Novak mentioned that Weber missed the point about Catholicism since he only

focused on the Benedictine interpretation Catholic asceticism. Furthermore, a certain religious

belief system was not a prerequisite for Capitalism to spread. Successful countries similar to

Japan prove Novak’s main point. Consequently, there must be something natural about

capitalism that it can transcend various religions except for the secular religions. In the secular

religions, the power of the individual has been either suppressed forcing them to conform to a

national or an international concept of fairness.

The importance of this article was that it did highlight Weber’s main concern about

Capitalism gaining momentum to the point where it became a soulless entity devouring the weak.

However, Novak offered a different alternate ending to Weber’s soulless quagmire. (1958)

Novak quoted Abraham Lincoln in offering a prediction as to what will happen if capitalism

where to continue to grow, “most favorable – almost necessary – to the emancipation of thought,

and the consequent advancement of civilization” (2005, ¶ 21). The problem with Lincoln’s vision

was that those that ultimately benefited from the socio-economic prosperity would openly

undermine and discard prosperous socio-economic principles for a historically suspect system.

46

Unfortunately, Bradford was correct when he wrote about individuals foolishly thinking they

were smarter than God was, as they desire to socialize and control everything in a community.

Peterson, M. and Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. (2003). Cultural socialization as a source of intrinsic work

motivation. Group & Organization Management, 28; 188-216.

In this quantitative study, the authors tested four hypotheses that looked at cultural

socialization and its impact on level of job related involvement in the US, Japan, and Hungry.

The first hypothesis tested worker empowerment programs to improve quality, operational

effectiveness, and satisfaction against highly repetitive, low-input operations to see the effects on

positive or negative predictors. In all three countries, worker empowerment programs scored the

highest. The second hypothesis compared worker empowerment programs against worker

entitlement value systems (trade unions). Again, all the countries score positively. One of the

survey questions captured this result, “Every person in our society should be entitled to

interesting and meaningful work” (Petersen & Ruiz-Quintanilla, 2003, p. 209). The third

hypothesis tested whether the worker empowerment programs would be “stronger in the US

than in Japan or Hungry” (Petersen & Ruiz-Quintanilla, 2003, p. 196). There results were

inconclusive for this hypothesis, with the US scoring lower in some of the predictors than Japan

and Hungary. Finally, the fourth hypothesis reviewed the results of the second hypothesis. Due to

the reduction in worker entitlement value systems, the expected result was the other two

countries ranking higher than the US. This hypothesis had mixed results as well.

The study did a poor job of laying out the hypotheses in relation to the results generated

from the questionnaire. Some of this was the result of the authors using Measure of Worker

47

(MOW) predictors and criteria that incorporated cognitive evaluation theory (CET) and job

characteristics theory (JCT) to determine intrinsic work motivation. The authors noted several

limitations in the conclusion portion of the study. Most notably the authors wrote about skewed

results because their “…measure was originally designed from a different theoretical

perspective” (Petersen & Ruiz-Quintanilla, 2003, p. 211). Another important issue occurred

when misunderstandings or false expectations arose between the actual designed intent of some

of the study’s questions and the local cultural interpretations of those same questions.

The unfortunate part about this study, if anyone walked up to an individual working

anywhere in the US and asked them if they were under paid, there would be a high probability

that the answer would be yes. In regards to worker empowerment programs, they have been a

part of the business lexicon for some time since the quality revolution in the mid-1980s.

However, how well companies implement those programs has varied. The Toyota Production

System was one of the best programs implemented and it came from Japan. Through these

programs, an individual could discover what Weber would describe as a calling. The most

disturbing part from this study had to do with worker entitlement value systems. It implied that

unions lead to higher intrinsic work motivation. Typically, productivity flattens out in unionized

plants that do not incorporate technology to increase it.

48

Realo, A., Allik, J. and Greenfield, B. (2008). Radius of trust: Social capital in relation to

familism and institutional collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology; 39; 447-

462.

In this quantitative study, the authors decided to test whether strong family ties generated

low levels of social capital; in addition, they investigated whether the family unit had any type of

relationship to social capital. The definition of social capital was an individual’s local or regional

affiliation to “social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness” (Realo et al,

2008, p. 448). In regards to trust and collectivism, countries with strong family ties or extended

family had low levels of regional social capital. Meanwhile, countries with institutional

collectivism had a high level of regional social capital. Furthermore, those societies that had a

strong family ties often had “a negative predictor of participating in the protection and promotion

of human rights, social welfare services, and labor unions” (Realo et al, 2008, p. 458).

One of the main points the study tried to make was regional collectivism and social

capital correlate positively with high gross domestic product (GDP) of a country. The study used

Latin American, African, and some Asian countries as examples of countries with an extended or

strong family unit with low GDP to support its point. As evidence to support this point, the

author used the GDP of the US. However, during the 1930’s and other periods of extreme

hardship, the US family unit included multiple generations or what has been termed as the

extended family. This was done out of utilitarian need, the prerequisites of social capital were an

expensive luxury. Furthermore, the countries noted had little infrastructure available to allow

individuals in rural areas to network efficiently via the Internet. A limited infrastructure forces

49

individuals to survive using the only resources available to them or by pooling them in manner

that occurs in a family unit.

Like institutional collectivism, the article notes that the family unit was a subset of

collectivism. The family unit was equivalent to being a local form of collectivism. However, the

study seemed to suggest that a strong family unit was a bad thing for society. Marx would

appreciate this study, because he would use it to support his claims about the evils of the family

unit and the need to destroy it. Unfortunately, the authors should have looked at the generational

impacts of poor GDP and the need for families to become more generational dependent. For

example, government instability could cause an individual to invest less in social capital and

more in the family unit. Consequently, the family unit may be the only stable collective unit that

any individual might ever know. Large family units are a symptom not the cause of societal

degradation.

Schluchter, W. (2004). The approach of Max Weber’s sociology of religion as exemplified in his

study of ancient Judaism. Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions 127, (juillet-

septembre 2004) 33-56.

This qualitative study focused on Weber’s work after he published The Protestant Ethic

and the Spirit of Capitalism in 1904 and any other of his literary works that defended those

assumptions from 1904 to 1909. This study reviewed Weber’s works from 1910 onward that

focused on ancient Judaism as well as other religions. In addition, it broke down the post-1909

works in the following manner using the following section headers. The first section looked at

“the uncompleted major projects”; this included topics such as the economy, society, religions,

50

sociology of religion, societal orders, and power (Schluchter, 2004, p. 34). The title of the second

section was “Comparison and Developmental History” (Schluchter, 2004, p. 40). It compared

various religious beliefs and their impact on the development of societies throughout the world.

The third section started to focus more on the impacts of Judaism; its title was, “The Old

Testament as a ‘Crucial Turning Point’ in the Total Cultural History of the Near East and the

West” (Schluchter, 2004, p. 45). Finally, the last section reviewed, “The (mis-) construction of a

Jewish pariah people’s situation from the Persian-Babylonian exile stage up to the fall of the

second Temple” (Schluchter, 2004, p. 48). This in-depth historical piece defines the role Judaism

played in the development of capitalism and a free market society.

The study was a detailed piece that centered on historical theory as well as religious

beliefs systems. As noted by Schluchter, “economics and sociology are only able to develop into

social sciences and cultural sciences when they are rooted in a theory of human action which

does not assimilate human creativity to mere utility” (2004, p. 50). Human action correlates to

documented history as noted in religious texts. Consequently, it will be difficult to separate the

religious ethical and moral norms from socio-economic and political biases without recasting an

entire nation of people into something that they were never groomed to be. An example would be

a country founded on Judeo-Christian principles that has been suffering the ongoing systematic

process of having those same principles denounced as being unacceptable by individuals that

lack any moral fortitude while being forced to adhere to an ungrounded secular moral equivalent

belief system. Finally, capitalism and freedom of thought were never intended to be a Protestant-

only domain as many who criticized Weber made his work out to be; they were used an example

by Weber.

51

The value of the article was limited to one critical fact; it “aimed at identifying the

distinctiveness of the European and American modern rationalism and at explaining its

emergence, especially from a religious-ethical viewpoint” (Schluchter, 2004, p. 56). In other

words, Schluchter actually discovered that in the absence of an oppressive ruling body, economic

freedom could take root. As previously mentioned, many religions offer a few ingredients to the

simplistic concept that an individual, if left unfettered by religious or secular beliefs, has the most

power in shaping his or her own life and that an overbearing government can only hinder a

society’s progress. As noted by Feuer, secularism and Marxism is just another religion called

humanism.

Tsui, A., Nifadkar, S., and Yi Ou, A. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational

behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations. Journal of Management, 33;

426-478.

This qualitative study was a meta-analysis that compiled 93 individual studies that

spanned ten years. The authors reviewed the key concepts of individualism and collectivism in

regards to two types of studies. Type I studies reviewed culture “as an independent variable” and

Type II studies reviewed culture “as a moderating variable” (Tsui et al, 2007, p. 435). In addition

to the comparison and contrasting of the study results, the author offered seven recommendations

for future studies to assist researchers. In the conclusion, it quickly summed up the key point that

cross-cultural and organizational progress occurred during the years of 1996 to 2005; however,

there were many opportunities for future improvement. For example, beyond the various Western

theorists, there was little contextual evidence of individualism, collectivism, leadership, and

52

management. Researchers may want go out and find alternatives that could revolutionize thought

on the previously noted topics.

There was a questionable statement found in the study; it stated, “Few studies considered

non-cultural variables, either theoretically as predictors or empirically as controls” (Tsui et al,

2007, p. 454). If a few studies did not look at non-cultural variables, then the conclusion that the

“similarities or differences in organizational behavior are because of culture” (Tsui et al, 2007, p.

454) was a statement of the obvious since culture was the only thing analyzed. Another critical

point was that the authors only focused on organizational behavior research publications and

journals. This excluded other key publications that included strategy, conceptual, and practical

application journals that could have provided some information to fill in the blanks left by the 93

articles. Overall, the study was enlightening and complete while providing useful morsels of

information.

The most significant morsel focused on the topic of ethical orientation and how an

individual responded to questions on the concept of “ethically suspect behavior” in either an

individualistic or a collectivist dominated society (Tsui et al, 2007, p. 435). Those employees and

managers exposed to an individualistic-dominated society responded negatively to the

“willingness to justify ethically suspect behavior, whereas universalism and pecuniary

materialism positively related to it” (Tsui et al, 2007, p. 435). This depicted that people in a

collectivist society could suffer or be misled by a case of groupthink, in which it was easier for

individuals to accept ethically suspect behavior.

53

Turner, S. (2007). The continued relevance of Weber’s philosophy of social science. Max Weber

Studies, 7(1), 37-60. EBSCOhost database.

This paper compares and contrasts the opinions of various modern social science authors

and Max Weber on the topics of rational decision-making. Furthermore, it reviewed Weber’s

intended use of the ‘ideal-types’ concept, cultural social moral norms, group consensus, and

intelligent group action. This article did not directly defend the Spirit of Capitalism; however, it

did defend it indirectly since most of the general criticisms were similar to the Spirit of

Capitalism. Most modern philosophers discredit Weber because of his neo-Kantian beliefs and

his outdated terms used in his writings. However, Turner defends Weber by adding context to the

terms and thereby giving them their modern equivalents. Furthermore, in the defense of Weber,

Turner did not delve into the metaphysical other than an occasional reference to God. The

arguments in this paper focused on rational philosophy and the perceptions that come from the

decision-making process.

In reviewing the article, the author used another modern philosopher, Donald Davidson,

as a way to counter some of the arguments made by those that disagree with Weber. The specific

arguments noted included “action explanation, anomalous monism, and the impossibility of a

‘serious science’ of psychology” (Turner, 2007, p. 37). In doing so, Turner used this

counterargument as proof that Weber’s theories were still relevant. However, as the paper

indicated there were some contextual issues as to the specific meanings of philosophical phrases.

For example, Turner had to redefine the expression “ideal-types”. With that said, Davidson did

provide an alluring emendation to Weber’s neo-Kantianism ideology that modernized the spirit

54

of capitalism. An interesting side note came in the section on decision theory; it paralleled some

of the concepts used in game theory and conflict strategy.

As mentioned, Turner broke down Weber’s Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

in a manner that removed religious ideology and reviewed the context of decision-making theory.

This allowed Turner to apply logic to Weber’s theories without delving into the metaphysical. It

forces those that have criticized Weber to deal with his logic on the topics of casual explanation,

cultural-social moral norms, group consensus, and intelligent-group action. Consequently, it also

validated Bradford’s opinions as a relevant source used in breadth portion of this KAM.

Wang, J. & Wang, G. (2006). Exploring national human resource development: A case of China

management development in a transitioning context. Human Resource Development

Review; 5; 176-201.

In this qualitative study, the authors decided to complete a holistic review of the complex

issue of management development (MD) in China when the country itself has been transitioning

from a totalitarian state, based on communism, to a market socialist state where a heavily

restricted, free market now exists. “The study assessed the ‘national, organizational, and

individual’ issues facing human resource managers while using ‘broader social, economic, and

institutional contexts’ ” (Wang & Wang, 2006, p. 176). Not surprisingly, the study revealed that

a holistic approach to MD implementation has been “piecemeal, fragmented, and immature”

(Wang & Wang, 2006, p. 197). The authors suggest that further research needs to be completed

in a manner that does not compare it to true free market concepts; however, the authors suggest

55

that research should be in a manner as if it were a scientific field experiment where the

researchers have been asked only to observe.

The study implores the reader to observe China’s inconsistency in planning,

implementing, and following through on MD process. However, fundamental root cause analysis

required the researcher to ask why. For example, why has China treated MD halfheartedly? To

answer this question would require the researcher to be critical of the Chinese government, its

corruption, and its policies. In a couple of instances, the authors did mention political restrictions

as an afterthought. In addition, they suggested that in regards to the individual, “participation in

MD activity may not be necessarily driven by the governmental policies or organizational

requirements but by managers…” (Wang & Wang, 2006, p. 191). In a society that still suffers

from numerous human rights issues, it seems the responsibility would be much higher.

The value of this article was to understand the limitations of change in a controlled,

socialistic environment. Again, the study suggested a holistic process to research MD; however,

it failed to answer the simplest of questions. How can an individual affect change in a system that

instills totalitarian socialistic beliefs, at the earliest ages of childhood, which may put them at

odds with the government? The study does ask and even tries to answer this question, but it side

steps the largest issue that dominates all others. It is a kin to asking an electrical engineer to solve

an electrical problem on a production line when a brown out is affecting incoming plant power.

He has no control or power to solve the problem.

56

Yakushko, O. (2007). Career development issues in the former USSR: Implications of political

changes for personal career development. Journal of Career Development; 33; 299-315.

In this qualitative study, the author used Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of career

development to evaluate the status of career development systems in the former Union of Soviet

Socialist Republics (USSR), now called Russia. The ecological model required the author to

evaluate career development systems in the following manner: the author reviewed the

“individual system, the microsystem, the mesosystem, the exosystem, and macrosystem”

(Yakushko, 2007, p.300). One of the key points in the study was found in the ‘Mesosystemic

Influences’ section; it stated “…educational systems did not focus on helping students connect

their educational experiences to vocational preferences” (Yakushko, 2007, p.306). This problem

appears not to be just a regional issue since many parents and employers in the US have been

saying that about their educational system.

The main critique of this article comes from the conclusion where the author writes about

the impact of environment and how society should coerce an individual to choose a vocational

field. Furthermore, the author stated, “Lessons drawn from the former Soviet system and from

observing the current changes within the former Soviet states can aid Western career scholars in

modifying models that tend to over emphasize individualistic career processes” (Yakushko,

2007, p.312). This passage says more about the belief system of the author than it does about the

career development issues in Russia. Unfortunately, the author failed to realize that if the state

coerced vocational decisions, then the state could eliminate dissension in policies through the

same coercion. In turn, it would silence one of the most essential voices of freedom.

57

In reviewing the history of the Soviet Union, the author had a knack of describing life in

the former Communist state as something that was near perfection if it was not for one thing or

another. For instance, the author describes life prior to the Revolution of 1917 and before Stalin’s

ascension to power as something that was harmonious and natural. Then Stalin took over and

implemented repressive policies that led to severe restrictions in personal freedoms that

culminated in purges within the population. Then the years between the death of Stalin and the

1980s were not quite as bad. Unfortunately, the 1980s and 1990s were marked with extreme

corruption. Despite the author disregarding the reasons why socialism turned from her perception

of utopia to hell on earth, she did provide detailed analysis on the struggles of an ill-prepared

individual desperately trying to make ends meet.

Literature Review Essay

In doing research for the annotated bibliography and the literature review, a somewhat

random approach to study collection occurred. Simple word searches that used socialism,

collectivism, free market, and capitalism quickly generated a list of 22 articles. Based on the

theme and potential insight16 were selected. Furthermore, of the 16 selected, 10 of those had

socialistic concepts that also included the theme of Democratic Centralism. The five other

articles focused on modern interpretations of Weber’s theories noted in The Protestant Ethic and

the Spirit of Capitalism. The conclusion encapsulated the final article. As the depth portion of

this KAM develops, general themes synthesized from the articles formed a couple of salient

themes for both democratic centralism and modernizing Weber’s theories. In regards to

democratic centralism, the focus was on Marx, the application of his concepts, and potential

discrepancies in the authors’ theories or observations. The section on modernizing Weber looked

58

at the main arguments critics made against his theory and how the authors responded to

arguments made by the critics.

Democratic Centralism

Using simpler terms to classify democratic centralism (DC), Angle referred to it in his

study on Decent Democratic Centralism as a softer gentler version of socialism where the

individual has a voice. In reviewing the 10 articles that either mention or talked about the

specific concepts of DC, the theme recorded in this section reviewed the applied concepts while

noting any discrepancies and offering observations. The most prevalent theme in the 10 articles

concerned Russia (including satellites) and China as they transitioned from a central planning

state to a state that was in the process of implementing free market concepts. The various articles

researched the value differences between entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs, character and

leadership styles, communal living as a source of work motivation, human resource development,

and career development.

In an established Marxist system, the expectation of individual was to serve the role as an

easily replaceable cog in the grand machinery of society. In addition, the individual was to be

highly dependent upon the state, especially since the education provided by the state

indoctrinated the individual with the Marxist secular religion. To ensure the indoctrination was

complete and repeated, the state controlled any relevant information using its own media

resources. Finally, the family unit was supposed to be non-existent and discouraged. Most of the

authors addressed these systematic socio-economic realities to one degree or another. In a study

that evaluated business people and non-business people, there were inconsistencies in the study

59

when compared with the results of previous studies concerning the same issue. “One possible

explanation of this difference from earlier scores could be that younger Russians (under 30 years

of age) have a radically different value systems from those of older generations” (Ardichvili &

Gasparishvili, 2003, p. 39). In poor or struggling societies, the family unit becomes a focal point

of the individual as noted by Petersen & Ruiz-Quintanilla and Realo et al. Furthermore, it would

not be surprising that some individuals in Russia and Georgia tried to reestablish the family unit

as a means of survival in unknown economic times that occurred during the economic transition.

Consequently, the strength of both a business and non-business person’s family bonds in

uncertain economic times could have caused a dramatic shift in values.

Ardichvili authored another study that compared the professional development needs of

engineers in the rural city of Vladimir and the socio-economic capital city of Moscow. This study

focused on the social differences within a culture instead of two countries, as noted in the

previous paragraph, (Russia & Georgia) which had a dissimilar origin. As noted Moscow scored

higher on everything except family (-0.01); despite being lower, Vladimir did mirror Moscow’s

results with an average difference in each mean of 0.41. The mirroring results of this study were

not surprising since the two cities were only 179 km away from each other. Notable things that

did come out was that despite Marx’s recommendation to split up the family, the family unit

survived the leanest years even when Soviet doctrine elevated the school teacher above the parent

and had the child reporting on their parents for activities detrimental to the Soviet state. Another

key note came from the passage, “the differences [between Moscow and Vladimir] was

especially pronounced in the case of status and prestige (Muscovites being much more interested

in their work’s ability to provide this outcome), and being able to serve society” (Ardichvili,

60

2005, p. 115). This could suggest that since the USSR was a strong central planning government,

the Russian Federation has kept a key contingent of that central planning power in Moscow

thereby making some the free market transitions superficial. This was especially true after the

Russian government took over corporations that provided natural resources. Furthermore, it has

been suggested that oil and natural gas supply was one of the reasons Russia invaded Georgia.

The result means that Russia has become more like the old USSR than the market socialism

practiced in Europe; as a result, it has only extended the hardships caused by the economic

transition.

Uncertain economic times were something new to those caught up in the Russian and

Chinese socio-economic transitions. If there were one thing true about the economies of the

former communist countries noted, it would be that they were consistent. Despite how bad things

became, all citizens were still dependent upon the state to provide food and work. This was a

reality of a Marxist state, where individualism was highly discouraged since it suggested that the

individual could be self-sufficient. Self-sufficient thought was independent thought; the state

system twisted this in meaning anarchism. This falls in line with the title to Kets de Vries’ article

The Anarchist Within: Clinical Reflections on Russian Character and Leadership Style.

Unfortunately, for the people that lived in the USSR during the days of communist rule, the

individual had to suppress natural human desires of freedom and self-expression in order to avoid

being sent to the gulags. As an example how brutal the communist state was, Kets de Vries

quoted Nikita Khrushchev, “When Stalin says dance, a wise man dances” (2001, p. 586).

Unfortunately, this lead to a twisted dichotomy of thought in regards to the state and the “attitude

toward authority figures implies not only a readiness to be abused but also a willingness to

61

assume the position of sadistic authority with others” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 593). In addition,

Kets de Vries suggested that individuals growing up in the Soviet-era had developed a conscious,

“false self, or public self” while the “private self” was imprisoned within the subconscious (2001,

p. 585). To compound this duality and the fact that the state made it a requirement not to be self-

sufficient, the state incorporated the societal concept that “suffering was a virtue” and somehow

this lead to society believing that “the actions of the aggressor [were to be] excused” (Kets de

Vries, 2001, p. 594). In a weird way, this made it acceptable for the individual to take out their

repressed frustrations on someone else in order to release the anarchist within.

While Kets de Vries wrote about the Russian character, Peterson and Ruiz-Quintanilla

examined Hungry, a former Russian satellite. They tried to compare Hungary’s work motivation

with the work motivation in the US and Japan. The authors of this study admitted to using MOW

concepts that did not theoretically mesh with the intent of their study, which skewed their results.

However, the authors tested worker motivation in a central planning society compared to a

capitalist society. One of their hypotheses tested worker entitlement systems as one of the keys to

worker motivation. Unfortunately, the authors received mixed results. William Bradford would

not have been surprised with the author’s results from the study because of the confusion

generated by a communal concept used during the first years of Plymouth Plantation. A key

variable to worker motivation, according to Peterson and Ruiz-Quintanilla, was individual

effectiveness. It would have been wrong for the authors to expect an increase in individual

effectiveness when Marxist ideology views this as management taking advantage of their

laborers and that could potentially put another person out of work. This potential exploitation

was one of the main driving forces behind Marxism. Consequently, efficiency would not be the

62

primary objective of a worker in a communal or socialistic society. When the authors mentioned

worker entitlement value systems, this was an equivalent description of trade unions. From a

theoretical standpoint, anytime the work place adds additional layers of bureaucracy, problems

become more complicated and work output becomes secondary to the entitlements of the

individual. Even though there were no unions at Plymouth, there was a contract that required the

leadership to put limits on the productivity of the individuals trying to survive. If it were not for

the leadership trying free market concepts, Plymouth and the colony located at Cape Cod would

have continued to struggle and possibly fail.

In the Wang and Wang study, they looked at the possibility of creating a holistic MD

system in China; however, a couple of reoccurring themes seemed to have come up from

previously reviewed articles. These topics included worker motivation as noted in the previous

paragraph, character, and value systems. For instance, “the deeply embedded cultural norms are

likely to have constrained Chinese managers from understanding and accepting business and

social practices that differ from their own” (Wang & Wang, 2006, p. 184). This problem has had

a snowball effect, because it created several other problems. The potential problems included

“job design, leadership, motivation, performance and productivity improvement, and

organizational development” (Wang & Wang, 2006, p. 184). The authors passed this off as a

cultural issue; however, if an individual steps back and looked at the broader picture then it

would not be difficult to see that the theories of Karl Marx have been the common theme in the

countries listed in this literature review. Another irony that the Wang & Wang study provided

was that they were surprised to find an incomplete and inconsistent MD system. The true

economic engine behind China that made it an economic powerhouse was due to the cheap and

63

vast labor resource. Opening up the Chinese economy to Western countries did not mean the

Chinese government relinquished its control over its people. As a result, harsh treatment is the

consequence for any person speaking out. A worker in China would look at the Western theories

behind management development systems with trepidation. For a Chinese worker to make a

simple suggestion would take a large amount of will power just to overcome their cultural

upbringing that had socialist ideology imprinted in to them since early childhood. As previously

stated, the authors did mention political restrictions. However, they choose to down play those

restrictions and elevate Confucian ideology as the primary reason. Taiwan, Japan, and South

Korea that have well-developed free market economies while practicing Confucianism. In recent

years, Japan has provided leadership and management development techniques that have US

companies have been trying to emulate. Consequently, this leaves socialism as the potential root

cause preventing the Chinese worker adapting to a new socio-economic system.

Yakushko wrote the next to the last article to focus on former communist countries. Its

titled intent was to investigate the impact of political changes on career development in the

former USSR. However, the author wanted to use concepts from the former USSR and

incorporate them on Western secondary educations systems. To begin with, Yakushko briefly

described the history of the USSR from the revolution in 1917 to the current situation that

individual’s face on a daily basis. In addition, Yakushko concedes that brutal tyranny, corruption,

and, in general, systematic central planning malfunctions marked the period that starts with Stalin

and ends with the current socio-economic state. (2007, p. 303). The period after the revolution

and before Stalin, Yakushko initially offers little detail in depicting historical relevance.

However, throughout the rest of the study, the author indirectly implies that it was the age of

64

enlightenment. This was evident in one of the points in Yakushko’s conclusion. Yakushko

wrote, “Lessons drawn from the former Soviet system and from observing the current changes

within the former Soviet states can aid Western career scholars in modifying models that tend to

overemphasize individualistic career processes” (2007, p. 312). This appears to be conceptually

alarming; Yakushko wanted worldwide higher educational entities to incorporate Soviet systems

as means of guiding students in selecting career fields that society either has a need for or find

socially acceptable. The author ignores that these same Soviet systems aided and endorsed the

rise of a brutal totalitarian dictator in Stalin. At the very minimum, Yakushko encouraged higher

education leadership to select career paths that would remove or limit the choices of the

individual. It would make the bastions of free thought into bastions of socially approved or

limited thought. Marx would agree with the suggestions of Yakushko.

The final study that reviewed former communist countries was the one conducted by

Andolšek & Štebe. Interestingly, it compared the work values and commitment of Soviet

Satellite countries of East Germany, Hungary, and Slovenia with those of West Germany, Great

Britain, USA, and Japan. This study culminated in some mixed results; however, there were three

documented items of interest. The first occurred when individuals fell on rough economic or

transitional times; “Economic circumstances are important in understanding of why people are

less committed to an organization in spite of the fact that they have fewer chances in the labour

market” (Andolšek & Štebe, 2004, p. 204). When individuals lose faith in organizations, the

family was the only thing left to fall back on. This result may vary with different countries, but

the statistic reality was that it did happen, which could explain the importance of the family unit

increases as economic stability decreases. The second item of interest was something that was

65

surprising because collectivist societies rated higher in efficiency while countries like USA and

Japan rated lowest. If the authors looked at the gross domestic product of all countries during the

time span of the study, they would have noticed that the inverse was true. Consequently, using

opinion polls without quantifiable and empirical results can skew the results. The last item of

interest was a Marxist-tactical reality, when a group of revolutionaries wants to implement class

warfare within a society and sow the seeds of discord they would want to focus on lowering AC

scores in order to turn the workforce against management.

The next three articles were more theoretical in nature and emphasized the theme of

Democratic Centralism. The approach taken in these articles centered on collectivism as it

relates to education, political policy, and the psychological justification for the implementation of

Marxist ideology. In Ambrose’s article, he evaluated the resources available for gifted children

faced with low-income social stratification preventing them from having the same access to

resources available to well-to-do children. The resolution to the problem offered by the author

excluded non-governmental solutions such as voucher or charter school systems. Instead, the

author suggested a very Marxist and unimaginative solution to an issue that ultimately will not

elevate individuals based on educational need. Using Marxist ideology, the system will only

differentiate between two individuals when a party need has become apparent. Consequently, if

there were openings in a school for the gifted, the openings would require a highly political

selection process making those selected ‘more equal’ than other children as sometimes happens

in the US military academy selection process. Ambrose misses the point and excludes every other

child not classified as gifted while being forced to attend a substandard school. What makes it

acceptable or right to condemn those not worthy enough according to some arbitrary selection

66

criteria that may or may not start out as being empirical in nature? The author should have

addressed the issue with substandard schools instead of creating another layer of bureaucracy,

because to one degree or another all children are gifted. The creation of school systems should

allow any child to maximize their potential.

The next article was qualitative in nature and provided the basis for a section header in

this paper. Written by Angle its title was “Democratic Centralism”. In it, Angle endorsed China’s

current socio-economic system when he wrote, “The author examines the possibility that a

reformed democratic centralism – the principle around which China’s current policy is officially

organized – might be legitimate…” (Angle, 2005, p.518). Angle goes on to say that,

“contemporary Chinese political theory” and “Rawls’ notion of a ‘decent society’” provide

legitimacy to his theory (Angle, 2005, p.518). To rebut some of the author’s comments, market

socialism as currently deployed by China was nothing new, especially since Barone, Lange, and

Taylor suggested the idea in the early to mid-1900s. Simply, Angle wants the Chinese central

planning system minus the human rights issues. He hopes that the theories of Rawls will promote

“Decent Regimes” that will not commit human rights violations that continue to plague the

Chinese socio-economic system. (Angle, 2005, p.520) Despite all of Rawls’ theoretical rhetoric

about the political class showing restraint, Rawls mentions the concept of “well-ordered peoples”

(Angle, 2005, p.524). Angle accepts this premise as a method of constraint for individuals in a

society. Unfortunately, both Angle & Rawls assume that the theories and law used to create well-

ordered people applied to all people. History and current political environment has demonstrated

that this assumption was erroneous at best. In what will end up as a quirk of fate, the academic

intelligentsias that have been ardent supporters of socialism will end up being some of it first

67

victims. For those who do not tow the party line will become outcasts, an example of this has

been occurring with scientists that doubt man-made global warming. These often castigated and

discredited individuals will end up losing research grants to individuals more in-line with the

current societal norms of the party. The dwindling concept that America’s learning institutions

have been the bastion of free thought will finally be lost as the party using the power of the

government begins to enforce its concept of well-ordered people. Consequently, the learned

individuals that supported socialism will overlook the abuse of power that occurs when the

balance of power has shifted to the political class, as it consolidates the necessary power required

in a central planning scheme. The consolidation will never have an end date, because any new

problem within a central planning paradigm requires new powers to allow the system to adjust. In

the end, Democratic Centralism or Decent Centralism will be just centralism. The democracy

noted in the title will end up being a token notion of what use to occur politically in this country.

Using central planning to create a well-ordered decent society becomes a ruse for socialism and

then totalitarianism. A well-ordered citizen becomes nothing more than an indentured servant,

slave, or serf as noted by Hayek.

Realo, Allik, and Greenfield wrote the last study that argued for collectivism and

Marxism. The study was a quantitative in nature and it reviewed the subjective concept of social

capital. Realo et al defined social capital as a group of positive connections or acts of exchange

within a social network made up of individuals. The amount of positive interaction determines

the strength or weakness of the social capital. Positive interaction was supposed to represent the

level of trust, public spirit, participation in voluntary organizations, and willingness to sacrifice

for the societal greater good. (Realo et al, 2005, p. 448) For a society that encourages diversity in

68

thought, the concept of social capital seems to be a system that encourages groupthink and

discourages anything deemed politically incorrect or insensitive. For example, what would Realo

et al classify the recent tea parties that occurred on April 15, 2009? Local involvement in

Northwestern Ohio used Internet social networking blogs and news outlets. The major news

outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, and ABC either down played the extent of the

national event or highly criticized them using derogatory terms. The argument made here was not

for the tea parties, but whom or what entity has the legal and moral footing to define the events as

good for the public or creating public ill will. For the people who participated in the tea parties, a

portion of them probably felt the nationwide events created a large amount of social capital. For

those that criticized them with extreme amounts vitriol; then they would view them as counter

productive and carry a social capital that had negative worth. Who was right, who was wrong?

The most unfortunate aspect about the article, in the process of establishing institutional

collectivism to create social capital was that the authors decided to trash the family unit. As noted

in the annotated bibliography, a strong family unit occurs in response to negative socio-economic

events. It does not generate them as the study suggests. Furthermore, if groupthink and the

destruction of the family unit become unintended consequences in the authors’ attempt to create

a radius of trust, then totalitarianism has an unimpeded path in becoming reality.

Modernizing Weber

This section will provide further analysis of the five studies that reviewed various aspects

of Weber’s theories. The studies and a majority of the criticisms of Weber’s theory, also found in

the breadth portion of this KAM, can generate several questions. For instance, was the Protestant

69

religion the only religion that was conducive to capitalism, can the concept of ethics survive

without religion, is there a possibility that Weber’s theories can expand globally, why did

Capitalism evolve in the West, and are Weber’s theories still relevant in today’s society? This

section will answer those questions while providing commentary to expand the points made by

the authors, because Capitalism has never been just about greed. It is about choice and providing

the opportunity to live a life in the pursuit of happiness. All socio-economic systems require

some sacrifice; however, there is a fundamental choice offered in today’s political environment

when talking about Capitalism and Marxism. The first option, do you want to pursue happiness

in a free society where sacrifice is a part of individual responsibility? Alternatively, does the

individual want the second option that requires him or her to give up that responsibility in order

to live a structured life of theoretical equal rewards and where sacrifice is a form of indentured

servitude to the state and the impulsive nature of the populace?

The first article in this section actually compared the progress of capitalism first between

Northern Europe and Southern Europe, then second, between Europe and Latin America. The

findings in the quantitative study were inconclusive in regards to the stated hypothesis of the

study since it could find statistical relevance in the first of the two comparisons. However, the

authors did note a potential cause in their conclusion that may have lead to inconclusive results.

They wrote, “These studies as well as others conclude that most of the differences in

international income levels are attributed to differences in total factor productivity” (Cavalcanti

et al, 2007, p. 122). There has always been one dominant force essential in promoting or

hindering productivity; it was the socio-economic system and the level of control that the people

in power choose to pursue. Religion in regards to productivity, as noted by Weber, was at best

70

tolerant when it benefited from the capital that the increase in productivity created. Capitalism

has always been a monetary freedom of thought, expression, and pursuit; consequently, when

governments and controlling entities begin to enforce punitive legislation they were actually

subjugating the freedom of individuals to speak freely economically. It was not surprising that

authors’ results were inconclusive, because the authors and Weber missed the mark when using

religion as the reason for capitalism and the subsequent increase in productivity. Capitalism grew

because government and the religious entities in power relaxed restrictive policies that provided a

tolerant environment for individuals to maximize their potential economically. Indirectly, the

results of Cavalcanti et al support this assertion since their results were not repeatable; it

demonstrates that capitalism is not religion specific. In addition, the information found in the

study supports many of the critics of Weber when they mention that his theory only analyzed a

specific situation on the micro level and then tried to extrapolate to the macro-level. In order to

modernize Weber, an individual must drop the precursor of religion while keeping the social

moral norms of a free society.

To support the premise that religion was never more than another form of bureaucracy,

with potentially heavy handed rules and guidelines that restricted the freedom of expression

through economic transactions, would automatically assume that capitalism could take root

anywhere regardless of religion as long as the socio-economic environment was tolerant to

economic freedom. The next article written by Novak supports this premise. In the article, he

reviews the research of a former Marxist, Jagdish Bhagwati, which chronicles how slightly

rolling back oppressive economic policies unleashed a fury of activity that dramatically cut the

poverty rate in two countries of India and China. The primary religions of the two countries were

71

not Protestantism. However, the industrious work ethic that was similar to the Protestants existed

long before the respective governments chose to change economic policies. It was only after

changing respective socio-economic policies that the individual could maximize his or her work

ethic and speak in relative freedom economically. As a result, each country experienced an

increase in productivity and the general well-being of a majority of its citizens improved.

Furthermore, Novak also discovered that depending on the religious environment religion could

provide society a social moral network of fair play while providing the individual with discipline,

integrity, an understanding of individual responsibility, and self-confidence.

Schluchter’s study concerning Weber and ancient Judaism serves as another example that

the Protestant work ethic was as much as a human condition rather than a religious one. Despite

the study serving more as a historical piece rather than a religious one, it does provide detail

about the human spirit and its thirst for freedom. In note number 55 on page 49, Schluchter wrote

about the re-establishment of political freedoms by Judas Maccabaeus in the second century BC.

(2004) However, Schluchter acknowledged in his first note on page 33 that Weber intended to

defend his “original thesis of the study on Protestantism. Weber does indicate in various places

that he intended to ‘extend’ his investigations forward and backward, and indeed in his final

reply to the critiques of the ‘Protestant Ethic’” (2004). Even though Weber never completed this

final defense of the Protestant ethic, Weber did acknowledge that his original piece was a

snapshot in time and it provided a turning point in regards to capitalism and religion.

Nevertheless, one fact remains true, the human spirit and its desire to improve his or her current

situation has been and always will be a part of the natural desire to survive. That was why

72

capitalism has always been a symptom of freedom, not the reverse. Finally, this was the reason

why the spirit of capitalism has relevance today, as it will in the future.

In Turner’s study concerning the Continued Relevance of Weber’s Philosophy of Social

Science, the author went out to illustrate that despite a reader’s opinion on neo-Kantianism,

Weber’s premise still holds true. The primary writing that Turner was defending was Weber’s

essay on ‘Objectivity’ in Social Science and Social Policy, which was published in 1904. This

piece was important, because it dovetails into the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

Some theorists and sociologist have used the strategy of discrediting one essay as a means to

discredit both. The defense of Weber requires a mutual defense of both, because some of the

general criticisms of both were the same, neo-Kantian beliefs and outdated terminology.

Concerning Weber’s outdated terminology used in both essays; some critics suggest that it makes

both essays outdated for today’s use. Strangely, some academics seem to overlook Marx’s and

Engels’ outdated terminology when arguing its relevance while disparaging Weber. With the aid

of a modern philosopher, Davidson, Turner modernized Weber’s writings on sociology. In

addition, as a means of indirect defense, the article also brought to light some key concepts of

choice or decision making process that pertain to the overall intent of this paper. More

specifically, Turner and Davidson needed more research to ascertain a rational decision theory.

Once defined, regulation, taxation, laws, social moral norms, to name a few can manipulate the

decision process of individuals. However, even without a concrete theory, the manipulation of

decision processes of people throughout the world has been happening at various levels for

sometime making freedom disappearing faster than the rain forests of South America. Because, if

what Stephen Covey said was true, that “freedom was the space between stimulus and response”

73

(Loving, 2005, p. 1), then an overbearing government with society and religion playing

supporting roles has reduced the amount of freedom available to individuals.

Much of the focus of this section has been on defending Weber; this next study addresses

Weber’s main concern that becomes prevalent after the rise of Capitalism, which causes

morality, ethics, and religion to decrease. Jackson attempts to answer Weber’s concern about

ethics by offering recommendations on improving ethics in business. Unfortunately, Jackson

aims too low by only going after business schools. The irony in Jackson’s statement, “A

scrutinizing public, media, and government will not allow corporations to work exclusively on

profit maximizing in the service of shareholders while ignoring impacts on other constituencies”

(Jackson, 2006, p. 68). It has been increasingly apparent that scrutinizing groups need their

ethical measuring sticks recalibrated. The problem with ethics in US society has been a systemic

one not addressed in early childhood. However, to Jackson’s point, business schools can add

additional training and understanding to the importance of ethics in business. As with business

schools re addressing ethics, so should every school of thought throughout academia. A society

“well versed in a range of moral-reasoning techniques” (Jackson, 2006, p. 77) will increase the

chances of holistic success more than just focusing on one school of thought found in most

college campuses. A systemic issue requires a holistic approach, especially since those preaching

secularism have quickened the natural erosion process that has occurred with the increase in

capitalism. The secularists, which include all of the variants of Marxism, have worked hard in

stripping away most of the moral ethos that have had religious overtones from our society. To fix

this problem will require an acceptance of a moral philosophy on the national level that replaces

the politically correct secular environmental ethics. Ethics should be the primary concern for our

74

government, since the passing generations is the only true measure of the effects of change. The

reality of our current political environment in government will never allow a politician of less

than desirable leadership skills to look past the next election cycle; consequently, it is up to

academia. Unfortunately, a large portion of this group has been made of individual’s hell bent on

destroying individual freedom. Unless some leader can galvanize thought in a direction that

promotes ethical freedom, then individuals must survive only as they know how.

In conclusion, the depth covered various articles with themes that engaged an assortment

of Marxist and Socialistic concepts. Most of which appear to display an overwhelming bias

towards Marxism and its variants, the least of which was collectivism. In addition to the ten

studies noted in the Democratic Centralism portion of this paper, one other study captured this

prevalent theme that if humankind was to advance as a society, then it could only have happened

through the theories of Marxism. The study indirectly reasserted Marx’s concept that the focus

of society should be the society and not the individual or the family. However, before noting the

conclusion, the authors penned a group of recommendations that included this one statement in

which the authors lamented that the advancement in cross-cultural organizational behavioral

research has been “overshadowed by several conceptual and methodological issues, some of

which are quite basic, to our astonishment. The fundamental concept of culture has not been

systematically examined, nor has the proliferation of cultural frameworks with overlapping

dimensions and inconsistent measurement” (Tsui et al, 2007, p. 460). This statement actually

questions the results of numerous studies that have leaned towards Marxism; the authors

inconspicuously noted that collectivist societies suffer from groupthink much more than

individualist societies. The specific test that the study reviewed was “ethically suspect behavior”

75

and the result was it was much more likely to happen in a collectivist-dominated society (Tsui et

al, 2007, p. 435). This explains the statement, “For many party officials, however, democratic

centralism was nothing more than a slogan used to suppress disagreement and genuinely free

discussion” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 618). This implied that the descriptive words such as

‘decent’ and ‘democratic’ used by some of the authors were nothing more than marketing ploys

to draw in naïve individuals in search of social change as to advance Marx’s negative ideology.

This unfortunate indoctrination into a misleading social agenda has opened the door to a

potentially less than desirable reality that socialism and the consolidation of power into a central

authority becoming the stepping-stone to fascism and totalitarianism as Hayek predicted. Despite

the best of intentions academia, history has proven that if an unscrupulous individual or regime

has gained power in a central planning system, they never relinquished power without some sort

of violent struggle. The alterative, as suggested by Weber, would require the dispersal of power

equally to all individuals with in a capitalist socio-economic system. A good portion of the

articles reviewed suggested an updating Weber’s theories could provide true positive social

change. Unfortunately, Capitalism and Weber have not been in vogue for some time. This reality

captured in numerous studies recognized in this paper, which has encouraged individuals to

surrender freedom, individual responsibility, and the power of self-sufficiency. The result has

been societal decay and the failure of incorporating real holistic positive societal change.

APPLICATION

SBSF 8330: PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL AND SOCIAL

SYSTEMS

In a world lost in ideology, there have been two theorists that standout. Their theories

have transcended time to be as current today as they were when first authored over a century ago.

Marx and Weber’s theories withstood the rigors of time and scholars. In this portion of the KAM,

the opposing points of view captured the essence of their theories. In addition, relevant

experiences of William Bradford will support or refute the stated theories of Marx and Weber.

This synthesis of information will continue to include the studies noted in the depth. Together

they will form the comparative foundation used to evaluate the social change policies

implemented by President Obama and his administration. Furthermore, is these policies positive

social change or just change?

Comparative Review

The information for the comparative review has three primary sources. For Marx, it came

from a book he wrote with Engels; its title was the Basic Writings on Politics and Philosophy.

For Weber, it came from heavily ostracized The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. A

series of William Bradford’s journal entries as written in the book, Bradford's History of

Plymouth Plantation, 1606-1646 provide a real life comparison example. Information from these

three books will form a foundation. Modern studies from the depth will augment the foundation.

The process of augmenting compared and contrasted the foundational information to information

found in the studies. The result was to provide a modern interpretation, a review of attempted

implementations, or an upgrade on the original theories. In doing so, this provided a fundamental

77

basis of understanding applied to current events. The intent is not to discredit, but to educate and

serve as scorecard to note the progress of ongoing social change.

Foundation

The foundation in regards to Marx can be located in the first chapter of his previously

acknowledged book; the chapter called the Manifesto of the Communist Party. It provided the

roadmap for those politicians that aspire to tear down capitalistic society in lieu of a central

planning system under the guise of a class struggle. The use of the term guise in describing a

class struggle came from three statements from two sources. The first statement was from Sayer

(1992), when he mentioned that classes never disappear. They just reform under systematic

constraints as something else, because there will always be those on the inside making the rules

and those on the outside having to live by the rules. The last two statements actually come from

Marx. There were more from his book; however, two statements standout because of what they

implied. The first occurred when Marx (1959) describes the dangerous class as a useful tool for

the party and then second occurred when he described the general population as the working

class. If what Marx suggests were true, then this would make those in the party leadership the

upper class and the ongoing class struggle as nothing but a charade. Furthermore, once a nation

becomes socialistic, then the never-ending class struggle, as described by Marx, will actually turn

against the working class to ensure the status quo. However, Marx paints a picture of positive

social change via a revolution as he laid out his roadmap in the Manifesto of the Communist

Party. In later chapters he prescribed certain philosophies, if followed, a theoretical utopia would

exist.

78

To initiate the revolution, there were several prerequisites that had to happen before a

revolution could occur. The most prevalent prerequisite that provides the best success for the

implementation of socialism was capitalism. Socialism is not about wealth creation, it requires a

capitalistic foundation not only as a source of wealth but also to create the appearance of a

system between the haves and the have not’s that excludes the aristocrats and intellectuals.

Consequently, to replace capitalism the aristocrats and intellectuals then execute a plan that

causes a series of events to occur. Marx’s (1959) 10-point roadmap to tear down a capitalistic

society in an advanced country was as follows:

1. Abolish all concepts of individuals owning property and having property rights.

Thereby making the central planning government and its local subsidiaries the

sole point of contact in the issuing and use of property. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p.

28) The ultimate impact of this point is that it will eventually make everyone

subservient to the whims of central planning unit and government officials.

2. “A heavy progressive or graduated income tax” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 28) is a

process that encourages income redistribution by penalizing those that have

theoretically plundered the under privileged. In addition, it puts limits on any

potential counter-revolution by limiting or depleting available resources and

capital.

3. “The concept of a right of inheritance in all its forms must be abolished” (Marx &

Engels, 1959, p. 28), this breaks the cycle of hereditable wealth forcing those

typically found outside the main stream to conform to newly created societal

norms. It also has the added benefit of limiting potential opposition.

79

4. “Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels” (Marx & Engels, 1959,

p. 28), despite the initial need to use emigrants as fodder, a central planning unit

will have to target them. As resources become limited, emigrants will become an

unaccounted burden on the system. If anything, this course of action offsets the

need to ration societal resources. The targeting of emigrants will be necessary in

order for the central planning system to survive past its infancy. In regards to

rebels, anyone voicing dissent or acting contrary to the whims of the central

planning unit will give up their right to live in a socialist system; historically, this

meant forced labor interment camps or prison. A brutal reality is that it is far

cheaper to keep people in forced labor interment camps with a heavily restricted

resource need than as an active citizen and a burden to the system.

5. “Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank

with state capital and [making the government] an exclusive monopoly” (Marx &

Engels, 1959, p. 28), as part of the process to both establish and consolidate power

within the central planning unit. This provides a path for government to de-

capitalize the capitalist society as theorized by Marx.

6. This point was extremely critical to both the revolution and its continued survival.

In a state, that practices Marxism or its variants, all information and its citizens

become its two greatest assets. Both require the state to invest resources in order

to manipulate and control them. This indicates that the “centralization of the

means of communication and transport” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 28) becomes a

high priority objective. History has demonstrated that this not only allows the

80

government to control the release of information, it also requires the government

to spy on its citizens since the citizen’s intellectual property is the property of the

state. Furthermore, it allows the government to know the general whereabouts and

anticipate the movements of individuals.

7. Numerous workers will become displaced and unemployed during the destruction

of the capitalist system. Since work becomes an entitlement provided by the state

to the worker, factories and various production centers will become entities of the

state. Not all of the workers can be employed in factories, there will be a need to

keep workers busy by cultivating various types of “wastelands and the

improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan” (Marx &

Engels, 1959, p. 28). This can include the harnessing of energy in accordance with

the socialist central plan.

8. Communal concept of work becomes the responsibility of everyone in society;

this includes the equalizing of labor output rewards. Communal concept of work

paves the way for the creation of “industrial armies” needed to tackle massive

state projects. Marx suggests that a good portion of these armies need to be

created for agriculture (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 28). It is unknown if Marx knew

of the inefficiencies of a socialist system and the potential food shortages.

However, he must have known that hunger breeds discontent in the populace.

9. The consolidation of various regulatory and government agencies provides the

central planning unit increased efficiency in control and manipulation of the

people and information. This was intended to be done through a “Combination of

81

agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction

between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over

the country” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 28). However, in modern terms, there will

no longer need to be an identifying distinction between various municipalities,

states, and the nation; consequently, lower levels of bureaucracy can be peeled

away to allow for the maximum of central control. Ultimately, this means the

termination of municipal control and states’ rights.

10. The final point, the control and indoctrination of future generations into the state-

run Marxist system by providing “free education for all children in public

schools”; there will be no need for children to work other than to receive training

in future vocations (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 29). The need of the state

determines vocational choice. Furthermore, the children will adhere to the social

moral norms as mandated by party officials with the teachers serving as moral

arbiters. Not only do the parents give up parental rights, the children scrutinize

every action the parent makes. If the parents do anything that questionable, the

state requires the child to report any discrepancies to the party via their teachers.

Other key items that Marx noted prior to the 10 points were very instrumental as well and these

become initial targets of the revolution. Based on individual responsibility, target selection

included religion, morality, political science, and law. These targets make up what Marx called

‘eternal truths’ (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 27). “There are, besides, eternal truths, such as

freedom, justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But communism abolishes eternal

truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality…” (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 27) The abolition

82

of law and morality, which were the precursors to political science, erodes away before the

revolution occurs through the concept of moral and social equivalency. For example, the erosion

of morality can occur whenever an out of context and insignificant prior occurrence offers an

explanation to minimize an unjust action. Another example includes those who supposedly do

not know cannot be held accountable. The inverse of moral equivalency also can occur when a

group or person elevates minor social non-conformities into egregious acts to push a social

agenda of change. No matter the type of moral and social equivalency, each act is like a series of

waves along the seashore; erosion occurs either slowly in calm or quickly in a storm. Like social

and moral equivalency, freedom can be eroded using change agents of security and sacrifice. In

socialist systems, both will provide reasons to incarcerate and reprimand the individual. In order

to achieve Marx’s never ending revolution, there will always be a pending catastrophe that

requires the government to intervene and increase the level of security. In addition, there will

always be some type of societal need requiring the general populace to make an even greater

sacrifice; both of which can be either justified or unjustified.

Knowingly, Marx offered snippets of paradise to entice the lower classes to ban together

in a class struggle in the search for social equality. Realistically, all Marx has ever offered in the

Manifesto of the Communist Party was struggle and historical systematic failures of previous

Marxist-like systems. According to Marx, there was one undeniable truth; his belief was that the

utopian nature of socialism and communism was the elimination of class antagonisms. (Marx &

Engels, 1959, p. 38) For him, there was the bourgeois or the haves and then there was proletariat,

the have-nots. Furthermore, in his worldview, it was the bourgeois that held all of the unyielding

83

power that kept the all other classes, including the political class, at bay. For this and all other

perceived wrongs was the reason Marx saw a need for the worker to revolt.

For Weber, the foundation of his thoughts concerning capitalism hinged on two topics:

the concept of a calling, and maintaining a societal moral balance. In many societies that have

limited choices in vocations, the concern should be whether the individual would be motivated to

achieve a level of success in their limited endeavors? Will continual systematic underachieving

drive societal progress? Why is a calling so important? In regards to morality, it is something that

every society needs regardless of socio-economic system, because everybody needs to know the

rules on how to interact with other members of society without requiring heavy-handed legal

action. The last topic explains Weber’s reasons on how success in a capitalistic system can

mistakenly discard its moral foundation.

One of the most important concepts that Weber wrote about in The Protestant Ethic and

the Spirit of Capitalism was that of a calling. The chances of it occurring in a free a society,

where the individual can choose a vocation, are much greater. Furthermore, in a free society,

vocational choice might run contrary to current societal trends or needs. Fortunately, the whole of

humanity has always provided these ‘out of the box thinkers’ necessary for sudden leaps in

societal progress or enlightenment. Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Mother Teresa, and a whole

host of others have always been there for humanity. Unfortunately, a societal leap was something

that a central planning system typically suppresses or avoids all together since it would require a

systemic overhaul of government systems that in general have become bloated and heavy with

bureaucracy. In addition to freethinking individuals, a calling provides the worker with the

potential to maximize their efficiency. Freethinking and maximizing one’s potential has always

84

been attributes of liberty, which makes capitalism an attribute of liberty just as free speech has

been an attribute of liberty. However, “a [person] without a calling lacks systematic, methodical

character which is, as we have seen, demanded by worldly asceticism” (Weber, 1958, p. 161).

Asceticism, or the abstinence of trivial items, requires the individual to be creative and self-

sufficient. Self-sufficiency has been a necessary character trait that has allowed the individual to

survive in a capitalist society. “Hence the faithful must follow the call by taking advantage of the

opportunity” (Weber, 1958, p. 162). According to Weber, if an individual was industrious, they

can combine several callings into a lifelong pursuit of individual happiness. (Weber, 1958, p.

162) In a productive society, the object of government was to protect and provide its citizens the

tools of success in which the individual can find their calling. To do contrary would make the

individual dependent and unproductive. Remember, Weber’s warning, “Nations and societies de-

evolve when companies and individuals ‘cry out for government aid’” (Weber, 1958, p. 65-66).

An unspoken reality that has occurred in societies that do not allow the individual to pursue a

calling has been the concept of an ‘I can’t’ culture. Why try when ‘I can’t’? I can’t because I am

not allowed to or because I do not know how to or whatever excuse that society instills in the

individual to make them dependent. Society ends up enslaving the individual in his or her own

ineptitude. In contrast, a calling was something that has been essential for societies that want to

advance and grow for the common good of all individuals. For productive hands, free of

governmental bureaucracy, makes everyone happier.

Another of Weber’s topics, which serves as a warning, focuses on the issue of morality.

His warning to all “I fear, wherever riches have increased, the essence of religion has decreased

in the same proportion. Therefore, I do not see how it is possible, in the nature of things, for any

85

revival of true religion to continue long…” (Weber, 1958, p. 175) Furthermore, “In the field of

its highest development, in the US, the pursuit of wealth, stripped of its religious and ethical

meaning, tends to become associated with purely mundane passions, which often actually give it

the character of sport” (Weber, 1958, p. 182). Did this come to fruition or has something else

contributed to the decline of religion, morality, and ethics? A part of the moral decline was due

to capitalism, since traditionalism, which makes up religion, morality, and ethics seems to find

itself at odds with the advancement of capitalism. (Weber, 1958, p. 58) “In fact, [capitalism] no

longer needs the support of any religious forces, and feels the attempts of religion to influence

economic life, …, to be as much an unjustified interference as its regulation by the state” (Weber,

1958, p. 72). However, those forces within the country that have been secular, liberal, and

Marxist in nature have increased the pace in which the erosion of religion, morality, and ethics

has occurred in the US. This was especially true since Marx ridiculed ethical behavior thereby

making it a necessity to abolish religion, laws, and morality of a capitalist system. This unspoken

internal revolution has been going on for decades. For those who criticized the ever-growing

socialist movement as being wrong have been belittled, ridiculed, and eventually discredited.

Regardless of what has been causing the decline in organized religion, morality, and ethics, the

problem becomes how does a society restores the moral and ethical foundation while using a

non-specific religious approach. In the discussion portion of this section, one possible approach

addresses this issue.

With respect to William Bradford and the Plymouth Plantation, two significant themes

come out in respect to current events and the role of government in socio-economic policy. The

first and the most obvious was an observation made by William Bradford concerning a system

86

that was based upon a communal or central planning concept. This communal idea, Bradford

wrote, “applauded by some of later times; -that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in

communitie into a commone wealth, would make them happy and florishing; as if they were

wiser then God” (1908, ¶ 217). This was not the case at Plymouth as Bradford observed, “For

this comunitie (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard

much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte” (Bradford, 1908, ¶ 217).

Here again Bradford comments about the communal concept and the arrogance of a relatively

few individuals found in the political and intellectual classes that they somehow know more

about everything than a vastly greater number of individuals found in the general populace.

Furthermore, some of the failures of socialist systems, as noted by Marx, were their inability to

adapt to an environment that was constantly changing. It actually requires the central planning to

be light and nimble in order to keep up with the changes. If government had to become massive

as to plan and control every possible scenario, thereby suppressing change and retard societal

growth, it would make Marxism and its variants a low or no socio-economic growth concept. In

regards to the light and nimble concept of central planning that only required the equality of work

and equal access to the bounty of the harvest, at Plymouth, a central planning unit could not get

any lighter or more nimble. Yet, in the extreme conditions that occurred at the Plymouth

Plantation where the leadership’s only focus was on survival, it still failed. The dire

circumstances required the leadership to incorporate free market concepts and the issuing of

property, only through those actions did the settlement begin to survive and eventually thrive.

Despite the communal or socialistic failures noted by Marx and the failure at Plymouth, the

intellectual and political classes still find Marxism enticing. One can only surmise that the

87

rapture of power has captured their imagination and thoughts causing them to discard the very

thing that has allowed them to speak publicly without persecution. Unfortunately, the multitude

found in the populace pay for the folly of a few. In which, to re-iterate a point made by Bradford

in a different manner, regardless of education, the combined intelligence of a few cannot outthink

the collective intelligence of the many in regards to all facets of life.

There was very significant letter from an unknown author that provided a deep

understanding of individual responsibility, team building techniques, and leadership.

Furthermore, the words of wisdom came from an individual that had an obvious understanding of

the ordeal that the Pilgrims were about to undertake. The author of the letter went by the initials

IR; the actual name has been lost to history. The letter offered five points of advice as the

Pilgrims planned to set sail. The first point was religious in nature, and it suggested that the

group should repent daily for any sins known or unknown sins and trespasses committed.

(Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B2) From a non-religious point of view, the point suggests that

everyone should try to remain civil and focus inward on self-improvement. (Bradford &

Winslow, 1966, p. B2) Since they would be in a situation where events could be outside of their

control, the one thing they could control was their own personal actions. In dealing with group

interaction, the next point suggests that the Pilgrims acted not in haste but with patience.

Furthermore, they should try not to be easily offended while not trying to offend others as this

will only build animosity within the group. (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B2) The third point

stressed the importance of not wasting time complaining about all the things that may go wrong,

because it will be a waste of energy and time. If an individual continually complains, they have

lost sight of the overall big picture, which was the survival of the group. (Bradford & Winslow,

88

1966, p. B3) Furthermore, this point covers the continued search for any type of charity, since it

wastes the resources of the person offering charity while squandering the time and energy of the

person who embarks on a continual search for help. The answer to all of one’s needs lies within

him or her. The continual search for aid only ensures that a class system will develop and

maintained, which weakens the group’s overall performance. In more simple terms, the

individual should search for answers, not handouts. As stated previously in this paper, the fourth

point warns about avoiding the “deadly plague” of complacency and a lackadaisical attitude.

Complacency can easily put the group at risk in the face of an unknown danger, because the

individual has become complacent in working the lands, the group’s protection, or simply not

appreciating family, friends, and loved ones. (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B4) An individual

that has become complacent in their daily activities has lost the understanding and respect of the

gift of life. The final point referred to the characteristics of good leadership in which people

selected for leadership positions should be selfless and an arbiter of good. Furthermore, a good

leader should seek to provide aid to those in search of improvement or those in need, be legally

responsible in the administration of laws, and as important, not to be swayed by the “foolish

multitude” (Bradford & Winslow, 1966, p. B5). Allowing short-term public opinion to sway the

group from its long-term vision and goals can be deadly. A good leader educates and gains

reacceptance of the long-term vision, which should always include the pursuit of happiness. This

simple list was prophetic in providing guidance not only to the Pilgrims, but also to all current

citizens of the US. Its wisdom captures many facets on how an individual should conduct him or

herself in a dynamic group situation.

89

Theoretical Updates

The theories of Marx and Weber were originally penned anywhere from the 1840s to the

early 1900s. Despite that fact, they continue to be the center of debate in recent years and even

weeks. In recent years, there have been new interpretations or adaptations that can trace their

origins back to the theories of Marx and Weber. This section will incorporate research from those

recent studies in order to add extra detail to the lessons learned from the original theories. In

doing so, they will provide a modern interpretation, a review of attempted implementations, or an

upgrade on the original theories. As noted in the foundation section of this paper, Marx laid out

some targets and a 10-point plan to tear down a capitalistic society in an advanced country.

(Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 28-29) In reviewing the studies noted in the depth portion of this paper,

several provided a possible plan of action in order to create social change. However, this pursuit

of social change draws back to Marx’s plan noted in the Manifesto of the Communist party in

which he laid out a set of targets and a 10-point plan.

To start out with, in an effort to initiate a class war between management and those

working on the shop floor and thereby launch a Marxist revolution, Andolšek & Štebe wrote

about affective commitment (AC), in which the US received the highest scores followed closely

by Japan. The authors noted that the “development of AC probably conditions some specific

work ethic, which gives employees the feeling that their work is important for the community

and they also feel that through it, they can contribute to the community in a meaningful way”

(Andolšek & Štebe, 2004, p. 203). Andolšek & Štebe did not intend for this to be the outcome,

but if a revolutionary leader was able to create enough insecurity in the job and financial markets,

that individual could drive a wedge between Marx’s proletariat and the modern bourgeois.

90

“People with higher job insecurity are less committed (AC and CC) and they do not appreciate

their present job anymore because of the job loss threat” (Andolšek & Štebe, 2004, p. 203). By

creating insecurity, the revolutionary leader reduces AC, which in turns separates workers from

their commitment to business leadership and local community organizations. To maximize the

affect, the revolutionary leader spins the problem as being the fault of business leaders and in

turn causes greater insecurity. Ultimately, it makes the worker more dependent upon the central

government.

The authors of one study brought forward a concept that is actually a target of the Marxist

revolution, the destruction of the family unit (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 24). Which is also subtly

implied in points three and six of Marx’s10-point plan. In the study authored by Realo, Allik, and

Greenfield, they observed that a society that had strong family ties often had “a negative

predictor of participating in the protection and promotion of human rights, social welfare

services, and labor unions” (Realo et al, 2008, p. 458). The participation in protection and

promotion of human rights, etc., is a form of social capital. (Realo et al, 2008, p. 448) In essence,

the point made by Realo et al is that a strong family unit decreased an individual’s willingness

participate in a communal society thereby decreasing the social capital the individual would want

to share with the community. Social capital, like intellectual property, was something that needed

controlled in point six of Marx’s plan. In addition, if the complete destruction of the family unit

occurs, an individual’s right to inheritance becomes invalid since anything inherited is actually

property of the state. Point three of Marx’s plan includes the destruction of the right of

inheritance. Furthermore, a strong family unit means individuals have become self-sufficient. A

91

Marxist society cannot allow this since it implies the exploitation of the labors of other family

members.

In points seven and eight of Marx’s plan, he wrote about keeping the working class

immersed on various industrial and agricultural projects deemed necessary by the leadership of

the party. (Marx & Engels, 1959, p. 28) The individual no longer needs to be concerned about

searching for work since everyone will be required to work. Not working falls in the category of

labor exploitation; consequently, making labor not just an entitlement, but also a requirement of

the worker. An individual’s entitlement to work was something Peterson and Ruiz-Quintanilla

wrote about in their study Cultural Socialization as a Source of Intrinsic Work Motivation. They

wrote, “Every person in our society should be entitled to interesting and meaningful work”

(Petersen & Ruiz-Quintanilla, 2003, p. 209). As the title suggests, the intent of the study to

improve worker motivation using socialistic techniques; subsequently, the best worker

motivation can only be found in socialistic countries.

To support worker entitlement programs, vocational selection and educational preparation

play an important role in a Marxist system. Two separate studies covered those exact topics. The

first study written by Yakushko, Career Development Issues in the Former USSR: Implications

of Political Changes for Personal Career Development was concerned that “…educational

systems did not focus on helping students connect their educational experiences to vocational

preferences” (2007, p.306). As a resolution to this dilemma, Yakushko suggested “lessons drawn

from the former Soviet system and from observing the current changes within the former Soviet states

can aid Western career scholars in modifying models that tend to overemphasize individualistic career

processes” (2007, p.312). Simply, since the needs of society become paramount, the government

92

will guide future students into career paths with limited options. This limits the choices a student

may make in choosing a career path and pursuing a calling. In regards to the second study,

published by Ambrose and titled Socioeconomic Stratification and its Influences on Talent

Development: Some Interdisciplinary Perspectives. In it he wrote, “These issues require that we

channel more of the critical activism we normally employ in advocacy for the gifted and talented

per se toward advocacy of adequate provision for deprived high-potential children” (Ambrose,

2002, p. 178). The well-intentioned author of this study offered another politically corruptible

band-aid solution that steers gifted and deprived children into social activism, which in the

current state of education means socialism. In the end, so they can lead others down the path, it

will require the indoctrination of those children deemed gifted and deprived into socialism. The

two studies noted in this paragraph fall under the tenth and last point in Marx’s plan in changing

a highly evolved capitalistic nation into a socialistic one.

The ultimate goal of Marx was to introduce socialism on a global scale. As noted by

Feuer, “Marxism, which declared itself the harbinger of a new international order…” (Marx &

Engels, 1959, p. ix). Jackson faintly reiterates this ultimate goal when he wrote his study on

Breaking Down the Barriers: Bringing Initiatives and Reality into Business Ethics Education. In

the study, he suggests a company should take a multi-national approach to ethics, which seems

harmless until he reveals his solution. Jackson writes, “The solution lies in the idea of

reputational capital a concept that links shareholder and stakeholder conceptions and brings

economic and social reality to students’ minds” (Jackson, 2006, p. 67). Jackson’s approach is

two-fold; it incorporates the Marx’s tenth point concerning education and it takes socialistic

concepts, or advancing the revolution, on a global scale. It is interesting that Jackson’s attempt to

93

solve Weber’s dilemma, which has ethics and morality decreasing when capitalism increases,

requires the student to lose their national identity and a portion of their freedom to speak freely

using economic terms since the student will be required to repudiate capital. Furthermore, the

study implies that a majority of the unethical behavior throughout the world emanates from

businesses practicing pro-capital concepts as expressed by Milton Friedman. Again, if capitalism

is something allowed by government, then Jackson’s approach purposely misses the unethical

behavior in the controlling government entity while restricting economic free speech. Marx

would have approved of this approach.

Promoting socialism on a global scale is something that Angle writes about in his study

as well, which is titled, Decent Democratic Centralism. Concerning globalism and Decent

Democratic Centralism, Angle wrote, “…my approach might better be termed [a] ‘global

philosophy’” (Angle, 2005, p. 520). Despite the name, democratic centralism is nothing more

than a variant of Marxism that provides the illusion of democracy while requiring all citizens to

be ‘well-ordered’. Angle wrote, “… decent democratic centralism possesses fundamental

political legitimacy; liberal democracies and decent democratic centralisms will share the title of

well-ordered people” (Angle, 2005, p. 540). Well-ordered is explained in this manner, “members

of the society should not be forced to embrace the people’s common good, though they can, of

course, be forced to follow the law” (Angle, 2005, p. 523). The law that Angle speaks of is an

international ‘Law of the Peoples’ concept expressed by Rawls. It appears that Angle assumes

that those in power will not abuse his version of centralism and the consolidation of power. In

addition, he also assumes the people can reject the laws the central authority creates. If a group of

94

people in a small portion of the globe decide some law is unjust, will they still be well-ordered or

just ordered to follow the law?

In regards to well-ordered people, Kets de Vries wrote about a group of well-ordered

people in his study. His subject group happened to be the Russian people. In his study, he

analyzes the Russian character using three clinical psychoanalytic rationales. These were 1) “A

rationale lies behind every form of irrationality”, 2) “much of the people’s motivation is

unconscious”, and 3) “our behavior is very much a product of previously learned behavior

patterns” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 587). Kets de Vries blamed most abused nature of the Russian

character on the Czars; however, he quotes a couple of Russian citizens that suggest Stalin was

even more brutal and oppressive. More importantly, Kets de Vries highlighted a Marxist socio-

economic reality; it was the reoccurring theme that “suffering is a virtue” (2001, p. 594).

Suffering was a common commodity in Russia’s socialistic paradise. In regards to democratic

centralism as noted by Angle, Kets de Vries had added this interesting quote to his study. He

wrote, “For many party officials, however, democratic centralism was nothing more than a slogan

used to suppress disagreement and genuinely free discussion” (2001, p. 618). The irony in this

quote was that it reaffirms the illusion created by theorists naming things something that they

hope will happen. In this instance, democratic centralism was nothing more than socialism

quickly snuffing out any democratic dissent.

Despite the inherent flaws of Marxism, which include, capital conversion, the creation of

a low or no-growth society, potential for abuse by those in power, etc., Marx’s ultimate solution

to all of his problems was to take the revolution global. The ultimate problem with socialism is

change and the rate at which it occurs. It has to be controlled or suppressed in order for a

95

typically bulky bureaucratic central planning unit to keep pace. The only way for slowing change

on a global scale is to create a central planning unit on a global scale. In doing so, those countries

that were highly advanced and operating freely under a capitalist system must reduce their

standard of living. With the eventual societal regression, the leveling of the playing field occurs

and opens the door for Marx’s ultimate objective of globalized Marxism. Whether the authors in

some of the referenced studies realize it or not, their efforts only aid societal stagnation if not

full-scale regression, which is the beginning of the equalization process. This process defines

classes and breeds discontent in the populace. The manipulated manufactured angst will lead to a

class struggle; thereby, creating the need to maintain a greater level of control to ensure humanity

has a well-ordered populace. Those individuals fighting amongst themselves will not have the

energy or resources to fight the central authority. Consequently, laws imposed will be more

restrictive to quell the unrest caused by the combatants. Eventually, the new world socialistic

system is fully entrenched.

Regrettably, for all, a fully entrenched socialistic system will only end up breeding the

type of tortured bipolar souls as described by Nikolai Nekrasov in referencing the Russian

psyche. “Wretched and abundant, Oppressed and powerful, Weak and mighty, Mother Russia!”

(as cited by Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 586). This tortured bipolar soul is a result of the individual

developing a “false self” (Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 604). “When people’s developmental processes

are governed by compliance, however, especially when they are subjected to unempathic

authority figures, they are in danger of being seduced into a ‘false… self’ to the outside world”

(Kets de Vries, 2001, p. 604). Furthermore, as the false self develops, this “contributes to a sense

of futility, makes for pseudo-maturity, and will not foster people’s creative sides” (Kets de Vries,

96

2001, p. 604). May be the anarchist within, as expressed by Kets de Vries in the title of his study

about the Russian character, is actually the trapped inalienable right of freedom wanting to come

out? The former Soviet Union has proven that the bipolar disorder previously described can

happen at the national level. Furthermore, decrepit conditions that occur in most liberal cities

suggest it can happen on a much smaller scale. Unfortunately, as socialism progresses,

disillusionment is sure to follow as the US progresses into the serfdom as described by Hayek.

In the studies that either referenced Weber or expressed his concerns, there were two

dominant topics. First, the Protestant religious belief is not a prerequisite for Capitalism. The

second is about freedom’s anarchist tendencies, in this instance economic free speech called

Capitalism, and how does a society approach it in a civilized manner. In Weber’s research, he

noted how Protestant religious leaders at first turned a blind eye toward economic freedom as

long as it did not promote ungodly acts and the church ended up profiting from the activity. The

result was an economic explosion that propelled the Protestants ahead of other religions and

classes, much to the ire of the ruling, political, and intellectual classes. For it allowed, even the

most common individual to wield more power than was once thought to be above their station.

In regards to Capitalism and the Protestant belief; Cavalcanti, Parente, and Zhao tried to

explain why, despite having similar religious roots, Capitalism prospered in a Protestant

dominant community more than a Catholic one. Not surprisingly, the results of the study were

inconclusive. Their hypothesis could only explain differences between northern (Protestant) and

southern (Catholic) Europe, but they could not explain differences between Europe (Protestant

dominant) and Latin (Catholic) America. The study failed to explain why Capitalism does not

automatically spread like wildfire in some religious cultures when the religious cultures are

97

similar to others where there was a successful implementation of capitalism. The authors missed

the point that religious beliefs alone do not spread capitalism more effectively than other

religions. There are numerous reasons why capitalism does not spread successfully and most of

those reasons have something to do with the local or regional socio-economic power brokers.

Cavalcanti et all’s negative results actually offered some positive affirmation that capitalism is

not the progeny of religion, it actually can occur in the absence of restrictive religious and non-

religious policies. Furthermore, without burdensome policies, societies progress as Novak noted

when he quoted Abraham Lincoln in offering a prediction as to what will happen if capitalism

where to continue to grow, “most favorable – almost necessary – to the emancipation of thought,

and the consequent advancement of civilization” (2005, ¶ 21). Lincoln suggests that only through

economic freedom, which is capitalism, can a society grow and advance.

In his article, Max Weber Goes Global, Novak wrote about the poverty rates in India and

China. More specifically, how the poverty rates dropped after the introduction of limited

economic freedom, called capitalism, into their respective socio-economic systems. Those two

countries contain almost no Protestants and yet they benefited from their controlling entities

relaxing economic regulations. The article went further as to explain why other religious sects

were successful in employing capitalistic concepts. Novak reiterates the point made in the

previous paragraph; it is not the religion it is the freedom allowed that provides the best

environment for capitalism. As previously stated, capitalism is nothing more than a form of

freedom that allows individuals to ingeniously use their belongings to generate more capital as

they potentially pursue a calling. A calling can be something that they are naturally good at

98

doing, something they learned, or something they have a passion for doing. An individual that

can combine passion with work may not work a day in their life.

Some authors nibble around the edges using others as their moral and ethical compass. In

these instances, the author validates or disputes a previous work while not addressing the key

aspects directly. For example, Schluchter wrote about Weber’s works that ranged from 1910

until his death in 1920. In it, he references other religions but specifically mentions the trials and

tribulations of Judaism. Regardless of the religion, Schluchter “aimed at identifying the

distinctiveness of the European and American modern rationalism and at explaining its

emergence, especially from a religious-ethical viewpoint” (2004, p. 56). Indirectly, Schluchter

provided evidence that Weber was working to expand his theory of capitalism by reviewing

several different religions throughout humankind’s existence in order to ascertain a holistic

approach to socio-economics. Unfortunately, Weber died before he was finished and Schluchter

eventually settles only on Judaism and the contributions it made before the destruction of the

second temple in Jerusalem hundreds of years ago. The real opportunity for Schluchter was the

‘religious-ethical viewpoint’ in socio-economics and the way it was able to transcend through

different societies and religions.

Weber’s justified concern about the growth of capitalism was the decrease in society’s

acceptance of religion, ethics, and morality. As Weber stated, “I fear, wherever riches have

increased, the essence of religion has decreased in the same proportion” (Weber, 1958, p.175). In

this instance, ethics and morality are the essence of religion. However, Weber’s concern was

actually the understanding that as society’s progress they turn secular and amoral in nature,

thereby confirming Marx’s notion that socialism becomes the next logical state after capitalism.

99

If Weber’s assertion is correct, then it is only through responsibility can an individual increase

his or her freedom. (Weber, 1958, p.50) Then as a nation becomes rich with wealth, it will have a

tendency to want to share that wealth. Consequently, in the process of removing life’s burdens a

society makes its people less responsible for their own actions and justifies it with moral

equivalency in the deeds of others. This socio-economic support with compounding moral

equivalency encourages individuals to become dependent and less responsible for their own

actions. Subsequently, dependency allows a society to de-evolve and fall pray to socialism and

then totalitarianism. As a capitalist country gets closer to the point of socialism, the system will

have a large dependent class and a smaller paying class. Somehow, society needs to find a

balance between aid and responsibility in which it needs to error on the side of expecting too

much in individual responsibility. Unfortunately, as Henry David Thoreau was one quoted to

have said, “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the

root” (1854, p. 77). In this case, some of the thousands are intellectuals trying to solve this

dilemma through legislation and government. Whether knowingly or not, as some individuals

search for positive social change, they have hastened the continued societal degradation; as a

result, they cause society to flail about trapped in quicksand.

One author who tried to fill an ethical void with hyperbole was Jackson, his article

concerning business ethics as previously noted in this section. He stated, it is about bringing

ethics into business by “integrating ethics into all facets of business” (2006, p. 66). His globalist

approach based on reputational capital lacks two ingredients. In a diverse world, who does he

assume to be moral arbiter of the world’s populace and why did he only focus on business?

Jackson is correct in writing about business suffering morally and ethically; however, many

100

schools do have courses that focus on business ethics. In addition, in evoking real change,

Jackson should have looked at politics and public administration as well since ethics and

morality are a societal issues, not just business issues. With his focus solely on business, he

suggests that business schools teach students to go out and change societies by scrutinizing a

vague concept called the company’s “aversions and preferences” (Jackson, 2006, p. 79).

Somehow, Jackson expects the businessperson to find a moral equivalent balance between total

societal immersion and righteous indignation when travelling abroad. Again, it is not that

businesses should abstain from trying to do what is morally and ethically right, on the contrary.

However, it is difficult for a business to be ethically clean when some countries look at bribes as

the cost of doing business. Instead of focusing on changing the world through business ethics,

Jackson should have searched for a set of societal ethics within his own country before taking on

the world. It is surprisingly arrogant to look at other countries problems expecting them to

change through business practices when we have glaring issues at home.

In Jackson’s defense, he is trying to solve the ongoing ethical and morality issues found

throughout the world. Other authors seem to de-value humanity as noted by Dr. Martin Luther

King, “They are the naturalists or the materialists; they are the Marxists; and they would see man

merely as an animal” (1988, p. 13). Unfortunately, for most in the US during the past several

decades, the individual has ignored the assuming pleas of politicians and intellectuals as warning,

which has lead to voter complacency and apathy. Since apathy and complacency were a social

‘deadly plague’, it has allowed a group of Marxist inspired politicians to occupy various seats of

power. The same type of people that Bradford commented on when he lamented about those that

‘thought they were wiser than God’ and confiscating property for the good of the community

101

(1908, ¶ 217). Despite socialisms historical failures, society still ignores these socio-economic

lessons of the past; maybe this is why Marxists discourage an accurate account of the past. How

else will they be able to sell false hopes of a future they have historically never provided?

Discussion

Marx’s roadmap was a picture that provided the illusion of equality and deliverance from

theoretical oppressors while sacrificing individual freedom and long-term growth. The illusion

includes theoretical socio-economic liberation; however, Marx’s own words suggest that the

highly speculative intellectual heaven on earth requires continued sacrifice of the people. History

has provided examples of how citizens become indentured servants to Marxist-like central

planning systems. As a result, this shapes individuals in a socialist society into tortured bipolar

souls as described by Nikolai Nekrasov in referencing the Russian psyche. Recent trends in

American politics have mirrored Marx’s unproven dreams and a path that ultimately leads to the

takeover of all capital. If political and populace resistance continues to develop, the takeover of

capital may need to be achieved through brute force, intimidation, extortion, etc. as history has

demonstrated. Unfortunately, Marxism only requires the exaggerated deeds of charismatic

unimaginative leaders implementing a system under false pretenses designed to maintain the

status quo where the power of the few will overrule the desires and dreams of the many. With the

lessons from the past ignored, the US has elected an administration that has used disinformation,

bait and switch techniques, and thug politics to win an election. It has been amazing to watch a

society turn its back on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for a societal plan that believes

sacrifice is a virtue. The result is an administration implementing Marx’s grand design and the 10

points designed to tear down a capitalist system. The executive orders and legislation passed has

102

occurred at a blazing speed, so much so that those listed only represent a portion of the ones

worked on or signed in the administration’s first 7-months. This section will discuss executive

orders, signed legislation, and pending legislation while comparing them to Marx’s roadmap in

tearing down an advanced capitalist society.

Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 funded numerous non-military related

departments within the federal bureaucracy. It was highly criticized for having numerous

earmarks. The question left unanswered as this bill passes into law, was it necessary in tough

economic times when the government demands sacrifices of its people? It appears that the

subservient class that pays taxes should expect future sacrifices while government depletes its

resources making taxes increases inevitable. This act exacerbates the need for higher progressive

tax increases found in point two of Marx’s plan. Ironically, one item chopped from the approved

$410 billion Omnibus spending bill was the successful $18 million dollar Washington D. C.

School voucher program. The cancellation of the voucher program ensures that point 10, a

consolidated public school system, in Marx’s overall plan continues forward. Hypocritically, the

spending bill cancels a successful school voucher program while giving $181 million to

ACORN, a political action group that is working to ensure that the government is the primary

lender in regards to home sales for the poor. Ultimately, this will lead to the abolition of property

rights, as US citizens currently understand them and in turn accomplish the first point in Marx’s

plan. (GOP, 2009)

The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act grows the number of paid volunteers from

75,000 to 250,000 in the hopes of establishing various educational opportunities. The program

has the potential to do societal good; however, it breeds dependency because it trains volunteers

103

to become more dependent on the services government, not less. It provides people the

understanding that the answer to life’s problems is not found within them, but in a government

program that only increase taxes and validates the need for a higher progressive tax. In addition

to point two in Marx’s plan, it covers points seven, eight, and 10. Points seven and eight

reference growing the government workforce and deploying the labor to support central planning

activities, in this case the government workforce indirectly grows by 175,000 while performing

various tasks deemed necessary by the current administration. While the educational aspect of

this act is just another form of indoctrination as deemed necessary by the government that falls in

line with point ten of the plan.

The Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 is a piece of legislation that is a

quick fix in order to offset the problems caused by Congress when they forced financial

institutions to relax lending practices and then compounding the problem by not addressing the

issues with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. By creating bad policy and ignoring the pleas of

regulators, Congress blamed financial institutions that were less than ethical in the application of

the policy that they created. Consequently, they create this piece of legislation that allows the

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to force lending institutions to amend

loans; furthermore, it also allows bankruptcy judges to reduce principals and interest rates. This

act indirectly centralizes power to control the credit of home loans in the hands of the Secretary

of HUD and bankruptcy judges, which is point five in Marx’s plan. In addition, it allows the

government to control the property, which is point one in Marx’s plan.

In a bit of irony, the Obama Administration has created numerous appointed positions to

run special task forces; these positions have an unofficial title that includes czar. Most of these

104

positions come by presidential-executive order. Consequently, Congress has little input in their

activities. Senator Robert Byrd believes that the use of czars has tipped the balance of power in

favor of the executive branch since Congress has no say in their activities, especially when

Congress has already appropriated funds for specific activities. (Bresnahan, 2009) For example,

cyber security or Internet czar allows the government to monitor the internet. Coincidently, it is

point six of Marx’s plan. The auto or car czar is a unique appointment, since that appointment

does not require any knowledge about the automobile business. Much like his predecessor,

Steven Rattner (De la Merced & Sorkin, 2009), the new car czar Ron Bloom has admitted that he

does not have any experience in the car business. (Martin, 2009) At least Bloom, an ex-steel

workers union official and private investment banker, has had experience in handling struggling

businesses in major industries. Unfortunately, the reality is that the car czar has control over two-

thirds of the US auto industry, Chrysler and GM. These czar positions can employ several

different points in Marx’s plan. The most important of them being point five, the taking over of

credit; points seven and eight that establish and control labor. To Senator Robert Byrd’s point,

the list of czar names includes the HUD or Housing Czar, Executive Pay Czar, Health Insurance

Czar, Energy Czar, Bank Bailout/TARP Czar, Drug Czar, etc. In total, there are over 32

appointed czar positions within the Obama Administration as of mid-July of 2009.

Future legislation endorsed by the Obama Administration in order to implement a Marxist

agenda includes Cap & Trade, Health Care Reform, and Card Check. Some of President

Obama’s harshest critics have asserted that if any of the three bills listed end up passing into

legislation, the US will no longer exist as the founding fathers intended the nation to be. Even the

Russian state press Pravda has been amazed at the speed and audacity at which the Obama

105

Administration has taken the US into the depths of Marxism. (Rodina, 2009) Pravda’s opinion

comes before Congress seriously talked about any of the three bills noted. It is for that reason that

some critics state that if Cap & Trade, Health Care Reform, or Card Check pass, the US will not

be able to turn away from Marxism. Using Marx’s plan to convert a state from Capitalism to

Marxism, the three bills in questioned will have a general description and then evaluated on how

they fit into the Marx’s 10-points of conversion.

The first of the three discussed in Congress was Cap and Trade. Most of the proposals

talked about by the President and in Congress come down to one common theme; it is the control

of carbon dioxide emission. The sources of carbon dioxide emission range from energy plants,

factories, homes, cars, and even cola products. Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency,

or some Czar will establish limits on the sources of carbon dioxide. This forces any entity that

emits carbon dioxide to ration resources in order to stay below or at the established limits. If the

entities stay under established limit, they sell off the excess as a theoretical carbon credit. Those

that consume more than the established limits will buy the carbon credits as a carbon offset.

(Lieberman, 2007) The cap and trade concept is nothing new since Europe and numerous other

countries have been practicing it for some time. Recently, the impetus for cap and trade comes

from the claims made by geologists and climatologists that global warming is manmade. Even

more recent, these same scientists were highly criticized for using dubious scientific

methodology in some of their results. In addition, current global temperatures have not increased

since 2001. As a result, Australia and other countries have suspended their versions of cap and

trade systems for being too costly to maintain, increased unemployment, and deemed not

necessary due to climate conditions. (Strassel, 2009) In March of 2009, a study of the effects on

106

employment of public aid to renewable energy sources assesses Spain’s efforts in using

renewable energy since the mid-1990s. The study substantiated recent claims that renewable

energy in its current form has a negative social impact that has some opponents of ‘cap and trade’

calling it ‘cap and tax’. (Álvarez et al, 2009) Despite growing concern, the Obama

Administration continues to push for cap and trade legislation. In Marx’s grand scheme, the

Obama Administration would be targeting capital, in all it’s various forms since any increase in

the cost of doing business in regards to energy will affect every part of society, both the rich and

especially the poor. Moreover, it will be reduce society’s innovative spirit and rate of change to a

crawl. Simply, the barrier in entering an established market increases; consequently, only large

corporations will be able to launch new products. The direct net affect of cap and trade is a heavy

progressive tax, which is point two of Marx’s overall plan. The indirect consequences include the

confiscation of bankrupt properties as happened with Chrysler and GM (point one), with a heavy

progressive tax and an increase bankruptcies will require a stronger central bank and credit

system (point five). The increase energy tax will curb travel and transportation (point six).

Finally, the proponents of cap and trade claim that it will provide those on unemployment an

increased opportunity of government subsidized jobs (points seven and eight). Whether a person

is for or against cap and trade, the socio-economic impact is enormous.

The next spending bill that the Obama Administration wants passed as soon as possible is

Health Care Reform Legislation. According to a Whitehouse Press Release, the legislation’s

intent was to rein in costs while providing high quality healthcare to every citizen. (Whitehouse,

2009) Excluding Medicare, Medicaid, and other existing government medical related cost, the

estimated additional cost debated in Congress is under one trillion dollars. However, the

107

Congressional Budget Office doubts the debated cost and it estimates the cost over a trillion

dollars. (Bolton, 2009) In regards to quality healthcare, the US ranks highest in several

categories. For example, using cancer survival rate as a unit of measure to evaluate cancer

treatment, the US ranks number one in having the highest survival rate while countries (Canada

and Europe) with centralized healthcare have significantly lower survival rates. (McCaughey,

2007) As a result, if the new centralized healthcare legislation passes, an already high standard in

regards to quality needs to serve as a basis to evaluate it. Another key portion to healthcare

legislation is the plan to increase competition in the health insurance market by creating a public

government option. However, critics have noted that proponents of a public healthcare insurance

are asking private insurance companies to compete against a government funded public option.

Consequently, private companies that have to make a profit will square off against an entity that

is not required to make a profit and it has a seemingly infinite budget to absorb any losses and

budget shortcomings. If the budget is not infinite, then the healthcare quality and service will

decrease as other industries drop their company funded private option in order to offset the extra

cost of doing business because of higher taxes. If the budget is endless, then the unemployment

in the US will increase because it drives insurance companies to go over seas or bankrupt. In the

end, less income revenue through payroll taxes forces the government to decrease healthcare

quality and services. Even some of the presidential advisors on healthcare have conceded that if

healthcare legislation passes, all of society will feel the ‘pain’. (McCaughey, 2009) The key to

true healthcare reform is actually job creation in the private NOT government sector.

The Marxist understanding of healthcare reform is actually a two-pronged attack on

capitalist system. As with anything dealing with Marxism, the absorption of private capital into

108

centrally controlled, public sector is the primary goal. With insurance being a commodity

purchased by the insurance holder, absorption of capital in the form of insurance policies will

have a tremendous boost to any effort in centralizing capital while de-capitalizing the private

sector as noted in point five of Marx’s plan. To pay for this, some legislators have suggested a

need for a higher progressive tax imposed on those making a combined household income of

$200,000 to $250,000. However, other legislators have suggested a value added tax that would

affect any purchase made by anyone, including the poor. The new taxes would fit into point two

of Marx’s plan while having the added benefit of the continued de-capitalization of the overall

economy. The second part of the attack would allow the government to have indirect control of

the actions’ of every citizen. The government will not cover any activities deemed unhealthy

under a centralized medical system. Similar to some wellness programs, those who smoke, drink

alcohol, do not exercise, eat fast foods, have irregular lifestyles, etc. can have their coverage

reduced or voided. Remember, the government cannot save money on the healthy; it can only

save it on those who have poor life styles or those who are sick. This tactic will become

necessary for legislators as tax revenues decrease with the abundance of capital already

confiscated by the government. The debate on healthcare legislation in it various forms combines

various entities such as hospitals, treatment facilities, insurance companies, etc. into one large

indistinguishable government entity, which is point nine of Marx’s plan. Furthermore, this will

require a centralized database system to control health records. A database system was a

necessary item to ensure the speedy retrieval of medical records in a medical emergency.

However, point six of Marx’s plan requires the control of all information. Finally, the wellness

programs in the healthcare legislation laid out by the government as cost avoidance measures can

109

provide a method to control and indoctrinate future generations, which is point 10 of Marx’s

plan.

Card Check or the erroneously labeled the Employee Free Choice Act, is another issue

that the Obama Administration has been pushing. It is erroneous because the Employee Free

Choice Act does not provide anything more in regards to employee free choice than a secret

ballot already provides. On the surface, it would allow the employee to vote a union in his or her

place of work by either signing an actual petition or a yellow shop (petition) card. (Allen, 2009)

Currently, the employee has to sign a petition or shop card in order to set up the opportunity for a

secret ballot. “A second provision would give federal arbitrators power to impose contract terms

on companies that fail to reach negotiated agreements with unions” (Trottman & Mullins, 2009, ¶

5). Opponents of the bill mention that its two provisions offer a deadly one-two punch in regards

to jobs and ultimately tax revenue. Furthermore, the union does not need to notify the employee

that the act of signing is equivalent to voting yes for the union. (Trottman & Mullins, 2009)

Other opponents have stated that by not signing the card, an employee is open to harassment and

intimidation that already occurs in the current process. With a secret ballot, it allows the

employee the opportunity of anonymity, which is one of the reasons why local, state, and federal

elections use it. A senate filibuster ultimately stopped the bill in March of 2009; however,

various union officials have vowed to take up the fight again in the near future. What the bill

offers those that believe in Marxism and promote its communal agenda is a shift in power of

theoretical employee rights from the bourgeois to the proletariat. In addition, it lays the

foundation of organizing a country based on Marxist, Socialistic, or Communistic national party

ideology. Ultimately, it solidifies points eight, nine, and 10 on Marx’s roadmap to convert a

110

capitalistic socio-economic system to a Marxist central planning concept where each individual

is beholden to the national party. In doing so, everyone will be a part of a national industrial or

agricultural armies as noted in point eight. Eventually, the differences between various unions

will become obsolete as the work force transforms into a national union to address the needs of

the state, which is point nine. Finally, it provides another avenue to indoctrinate and maintain all

workers, both future and current, in Marxist ideology throughout their working life thus ensuring

long-term party survival. Short term, card check legislation will only drive more chaos into a

dying capitalist system requiring more government intervention in order to solve.

Despite the inevitable societal implosion found throughout history, class antagonisms

have always played a part in any system that becomes dependent upon a central planning

concept. In its simplest form, a Marxist system requires a political class on the inside with the

power and the workers on the outside walking on eggshells trying to avoid breaking the endless

stream of rules. The sacrifices of the worker go for naught as two things become very apparent.

First, the freedom lost never returns peacefully. Second, as the central planning unit adapts to an

ever-changing world the level of sacrifice will only increase. This will eventually lead to public

dissent. Consequently, this makes all variants of Marxism in a never-ending struggle to suppress

all forms of internal class struggle while promoting theoretical class struggle a broad. This angry

cycle of hate will only breed more hate. (King, 1998) Consequently, locking all individuals in a

perpetual cycle of class struggle and hate elevates Marxism on global scale. From the perspective

of the individual, the distinctive qualities that allows humanity to rise above the rest of the

animal kingdom will no longer exist because “… the naturalists or the materialists; … the

Marxists; …they would see man merely as an animal” (King, 1988, p. 12 & 13). Weber’s (1958)

111

claim supports King’s point that an individual’s dependence upon a centrally planned

government actually causes societies to de-evolve. Furthermore, since a centrally planned society

robs or seriously curtails an individual in pursuing their calling, the individual loses their

ingenuity, motivation, and self-dependence. (Weber, 1958) The individual de-evolves to a beast

of burden serving the needs of the Marxist state. Remember the warning spoken by Thomas

Jefferson, “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take

everything you have.”

The title of this paper was Marxism versus Capitalism. As the learning process unfolded,

Marxism versus Capitalism was an inaccurate assumption since one is a socio-economic system

of government and the other is a freedom that is dependent upon a system of government.

Capitalism, or what has been called a free market system is just that, free, and its freedom is

depended upon regulatory agencies and various levels of government. Free markets thrive in the

absence of government. However, as Weber noted as a concern, a free market without some type

of moral or ethical understanding is anarchy. The question that remains unanswered, if Marxism

is a socio-economic system that enslaves and robs humanity of its dignity and ingenuity, then

what stops a society’s natural progression to de-evolve into a Marxist, Socialistic, or

Communistic system as Karl Marx has predicted? Those who have struggled for freedom

throughout history continue to provide the answers. If an individual wants to make true positive

social change, then he or she should study the works of our founding fathers, Abraham Lincoln,

and most recently, Dr. Martin Luther King. Friedman and others can temper their thoughts in an

economic sense. However, it is the founding fathers, as noted by Dr. King, which has provided

the mission and vision for societal growth. Dr. King (1998) went as far to quote the mission and

112

vision from the Declaration of Independence in his ‘American Dream’ sermon. “We hold these

truths to be self-evident, that all [people] are created equal, that they are endowed by [their]

creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of

Happiness”. It is with that thought in mind that Dr. King shapes the true goals for the individual

in the Breadth, Length, and the Height concept. (1988 & 1998) Simply, those true goals provide

the constancy of purpose necessary for the individual to be successful and its wisdom woven into

a letter of advice written to William Bradford upon his departure to the New World. Its wisdom

can answer some of the concerns Weber wrote about in the Protestant Ethic. Specifically, “only

through [individual] responsibility does a person increase his or her freedom” (Weber, 1958,

p.50). The irony any important religious book incorporates the concept of individual

responsibility. Furthermore, society can drop the religious references if it wants as long as the

equal enforcement of ethics, morals, laws, and regulations adapted by society continues on an

equal and consistent basis regardless of whom the offender may be. As soon as the first exception

transpires in regards to the application, the erosion process starts. This is not to say that ethics,

morals, laws, and regulations are impervious to change. Change is a necessary function of

survival. However, uncontrolled change creates chaos. When uncontrolled changes occur to the

foundation, society risks suffering a societal collapse; consequently, changes as in any design of

experiments have to done in a controlled and strict manner. The affects of societal collapse, such

as unemployment rates have hit new highs in some areas while the Obama Administration

continues to embark on radical change while moving as fast as possible without regard to societal

consequences. This social change without any foresight to the damage it will inflict will require

immense sacrifice to endure the pain. If the Obama Administration truly cared about the

113

capitalistic economy and wished to improve the socio-economic conditions of all citizens there

have been numerous examples from Hayek and Friedman that provide a better plan to socio-

economic redemption. Of course, this would require true change and it would start with the

administration’s socio-economic philosophy.

It is with these thoughts in mind that the first knowledge area module closes and the

second one opens. As previously stated, history has demonstrated that Marxism and any other

secular religion fails to advance a society as the society flails about trying to provide everything

to everyone and in turn actually provides very little except for broken promises and more

sacrifice. Weber and Capitalism provides a path to societal growth; however, as one becomes

successful, the path becomes clouded and lost. This opens the door to the secular religions. In the

next KAM, various authors will be used to discuss true positive social change, change that is

inclusive rather than exclusive. Nevertheless and to the point, it will begin to answer the

concerns of Weber, while adhering to the advice provided by Bradford in order to avoid Marx’s

prophetic societal demise.

114

References

Allen, M. (2009). Card Check Battle Starts Tomorrow. Politico. Retrieved July 14, 2009 from http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19786.html

Álvarez, G., Jara, R., Julián, J. & Bielsa, J. (2009). Study of the Effects on Employment of Public

Aid to Renewable Energy Sources. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos. Retrieved July 6, 2009 from http://www.clean-coal.info/drupal/pubs/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf

Ambrose, D. (2002). Socioeconomic Stratification and Its Influences on Talent Development:

Some Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Gifted Child Quarterly; 46; 170-180. Andolšek, D. & Štebe, J. (2004) Multinational Perspectives on Work Values and Commitment.

International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4(2), 181–209. Angle, S. (2005). Decent Democratic Centralism. Political Theory, 33; 518-546. Ardichvili, A. (2005). The Meaning of Working and Professional Development Needs of

Employees in a Post-Communist Country. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 5; 105-119.

Ardichvili, A. & Gasparishvili, A. (2003). Russian and Georgian Entrepreneurs and Non-

Entrepreneurs: A Study of Value Differences. Organization Studies; 24; 29-46. Bolton, A. (2009) CBO: Healthcare bill exceeds $1 trillion. The Hill. Retrieved July 8, 2009

from http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/cbo-healthcare-bill-exceeds-1-trillion-2009-06-15.html

Bradford, W. (1908). Bradford's History of Plymouth Plantation, 1606-1646. (Davis, W.). New

York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Retrieved November 27, 2008 from http://www.mith2.umd.edu/eada/html/display.php?docs=bradford_history.xml&action=show

Bradford, W., & Winslow, E. (1966). Journall of the English plantation at Plimoth. March of

America facsimile series, no. 21. Ann Arbor [Mich.]: University Microfilms. Cavalcanti, T., Parente, S., & Zhao, R. (2007). Religion in macroeconomics: a quantitative

analysis of Weber’s thesis. Economic Theory 32, 105-123. De la Merced, M. J. & Sorkin, A. R. (2009). Rattner to Serve as Lead Adviser on Auto Bailout.

Retrieved June 25, 2009 from http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/rattner-to-serve-as-lead-adviser-on-auto-bailout/?hp

115

Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and Modern Social Theory: Analysis of the writings of Marx,

Durkheim, and Weber. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goodwin, J. (1920). The Pilgrim Republic: An Historical Review of the Colony of New

Plymouth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. GOP (2009). H.R. 1105: Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. Retrieved June 25, 2009 from

http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr1105 Hayek, F. A. (2007). The Road to Serfdom: Text and Documents – The Definitive Edition.

(Caldwell, B.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Jackson, K. T. (2006). Breaking Down the Barriers: Bringing Initiatives and Reality into

Business Ethics Education. Journal of Management Education, 30, 65-89. Kets de Vries, M. (2001). The anarchist within: Clinical reflections on Russian character and

leadership style. Human Relations, 54; 585-627. King, M. L. (1988). The Measure of a Man. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. . King, M. L. (1998). A Knock at Midnight: Inspiration from the Great Sermons of Reverend

Martin Luther King, Jr. (Carson & Holloran). New York, N.Y.: Warner Books. Kittredge, B. (2009). The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act. Retrieved June 25, 2009 from

http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/03/the-edward-m-kennedy-serve-ame.shtml Lieberman, B. (2007). Beware of Cap and Trade Climate Bills. The Heritage Foundation.

Retrieved June 25, 2009 from http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm1723.cfm Loving, C. (2005). Communication Skills – What They Didn’t Teach You in Chair School: A

Brief Review. Loving Leadership. Retrieved March 21, 2009 from http://www.engr.washington.edu/advance/workshops/NationalWorkshop/2005/CommunicationReview.pdf

Martin, J. (2009). Ron Bloom to replace Steve Rattner as car czar. Politico. Retrieved July 14,

2009 from http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24876.html Marx, K. (1970). Critique of the Gotha Programme. Moscow: Progress Publishers. Retrieved

March 21, 2009 from http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf.htm Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1959). Basic writings on politics and philosophy.(Feuer, L). Garden

City, N.Y.: Doubleday.

116

McCaughey, B. (2007). U.S. Cancer Care Is Number One. National Center for Policy Analysis:

Bulleting 596. Retrieved July 8, 2009 from http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba596. McCaughey, B. (2009). Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan. Bloomberg.com.

Retrieved July 6, 2009 from http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

Novak, M. (2005). Max Weber Goes Global. First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion &

Public Life, 152, 26-29. EBSCOhost database. Peterson, M. and Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. (2003). Cultural Socialization as a Source of Intrinsic

Work Motivation. Group & Organization Management, 28; 188-216. Realo, A., Allik, J. and Greenfield, B. (2008). Radius of Trust: Social Capital in Relation to

Familism and Institutional Collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology; 39; 447-462.

Rodina, M. (2009). American capitalism gone with a whimper. (Mishin) Pravda.ru. Retrieved

July 6, 2009 from http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/ Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science: A realist approach. New York, NY; Routledge. Schluchter, W. (2004). The Approach of Max Weber’s Sociology of Religion as Exemplified in

His Study of Ancient Judaism. Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions 127, (juillet-septembre 2004) 33-56.

Strassel, K. (2009). The Climate Change Climate Change: The number of skeptics is swelling everywhere. Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved July 6, 2009 from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

Thoreau, H. D. (1854). Walden; or, Life in the Woods. Ticknor and Fields: Boston. Trottman, M. & Mullins, B. (2009). Labor Bill Faces Threat In Senate. The Wall Street Journal.

Retrieved July 14, 2009 from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123664230925077531.html Tsui, A., Nifadkar, S., and Yi Ou, A. (2007). Cross-National, Cross-Cultural Organizational

Behavior Research: Advances, Gaps, and Recommendations. Journal of Management, 33; 426-478.

Turner, S. (2007). The Continued Relevance of Weber’s Philosophy of Social Science. Max Weber Studies, 7(1), 37-60. EBSCOhost database.

117

Wang, J. & Wang, G. (2006). Exploring National Human Resource Development: A Case of China Management Development in a Transitioning Context. Human Resource Development Review; 5; 176-201.

Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York: Scribner. Whitehouse. (2009). Healthcare Press Release. Retrieved July 6, 2009 from

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/health_care/ Wilson, B. (2009). Obama's Czars Spark Concerns Among Some Lawmakers. Retrieved June 25,

2009 from http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/17/obamas-czars-spark-concerns-lawmakers/

Yakushko, O. (2007). Career Development Issues in the Former USSR: Implications of Political

Changes for Personal Career Development. Journal of Career Development; 33; 299-315.