I think the important point for *organizations* regarding wealth is what
role it plays in the daily and periodic operations of that organization.
An organization should exist to provide value to some one or some group.
Too often, though, the purpose of existence is to provide moeny to people
(such as shareholders). When the focus is purely the provision of wealth
for the sake of wealth, then a problem exists. Unfortunately, this seems
to be the point of capitalism. In LO8769 Dick Wolff says:
> Poverty is a growing and debilitating problem that undermines the
> integrity of the whole System. If we believe that the market
> capitalist system is the best available to us (I for one am hoping
> that something better will emerge) then it behoves us to learn
> together how to overcome those aspects of the System that destroy
> lives. Blaming the victims avoids that uncomfortable responsibility,
> and stops the learning process dead in its tracks.
I generally agree with his sentiments. I offer this thought for
consideration. If LO principles and wholistic, systemic thinking becomes
the norm and we begin to learn at the organizational level, doesn't that
constitute a change in the organization such that a system other than pure
capitalism is then operating? If this is so, then, isn't LO a means to
that end?
It's just an errant thought, but I, too, have been bothered by the
increasingly callous treatment of PEOPLE by the capitalist system in the
US. Government seeks to provide the best possible environment for
business so that it can continue to support the economy and the people who
rely on that economy. The problemis that this appears more and more to be
propaganda based on fantasy rather than simple fact-based fiction. People
are still not earning decent wages and, yet, are continually bombarded
with messages telling them that they NEED to drive this car, own that
product, live in this neighborhood, etc. Things that most people simply
can't afford.
The gap between the "haves" and "have nots" is increasing. Two examples
of what happens when the haves and have nots get too far apart are the
American and French Revolutions. Can we learn anything from those
examples? Is it too late already?
I guess it ust strikes me as ironic that Shaq O'Neal can get $120 million
to play basketball while people in this country are still starving.
--Clyde Howell orgpsych@csra.net
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>