Politics Of Big Business And The Crisis Of The Canadian Bourgeoisie - Book Report/Review Example

Politics Of Big Business And The Crisis Of The Canadian Bourgeoisie It is no doubt that Don Nerbas in his book, Dominion of capital, resortsfor a Marxian analysis of the society. This concerns with a particular group conferring considerable economic advantages that they control the socio-political sphere of the Canadian society. Material analysis of the history of a nation is essential since it offers a pragmatic perception of the development of the society. In this sense, individuals behave according to the relative material endowment. A privileged wealthy class thereby harnesses domination over a less materially endowed class. This is a special revelation since the Canadian society is highlighted as one of the most egalitarian ones. In essence, the book analyzes the detrimental relationship between big businesses and the government. More essentially, it reviews how the changing relationships between the big businesses and the government affected the domination of major corporations. The book pays respect to traditional economic analysis. For instance, it highlights that the problem of how crony capitalism, whereby big corporations form intimate relationships with the government, highly affects the amateur industrial economies. This is because emerging industrial countries face the task of building up the infrastructure. Infrastructure lays the platform for industrial success. For instance, proper roads allow for quick transport of products to given market centers. In the case of Canada, this was evident in the building of railways. Such projects generate significant revenue and demand a huge outlay of capital. The big businesses can easily harness huge capital for undertaking such projects. In spite of that, they still require an intimate relationship with the government in order to attract tenders for the given tasks. However, as the economy diversifies, several industries emerge and introduces a new economic setting whereby individual business competitive skills become responsible for success. The book illustrateshow the individuals of provincial beginning rise to dominate large businesses. This is a similar story in the American case whereby most wealthy people come from the Southernstates. For instance, Howard Robinson was born and brought up in New Brunswick whereby he established his wide array of businesses. Howard interests lay in the utilities sector that began from a 1904 telephone business. In the provision of such, the book is more revelatory than analytical. For instance, it portrays the ambitious and close to ravenous nature of the initial capitalists who engaged in very level of business. The book attempts to subtly illustrate how such people gained control of other spheres of the Canadian society. For instance, Robinson gained control of the newspaper business by acquiring press houses such as Saint John ’s Daily press. Besides, he made ensure that his views permeated the public life and discussion. The idea that capitalists could gain a significant access of the press, which is the chief and the most reliable informant to the public, manifests how big businessmen could manipulate the public psychology for their own good. Robinson, for instance, would only support private property as he was a principal beneficiary of the economic system. Robinson later rose to acquire directorships in major corporations such as the Royal Bank of Canada. Although the author highlights Robinson as a community entrepreneur, Nerbas does not explain the capitalist’s motivation for such a noble move. Milton Friedman explains that primary social responsibility of a business is to make profits. In this sense, any involvement of a business id geared towards the making of more profits. This is not an attempt at vilifying businesses but it is an effort of explaining the rationality of business. On the other end, consumers only purchase to maximize their utility. This explains the difficulty for a business person to engage in societal concerns unless such an endeavor improves the brand of one’s business. However, the recent age has brought major changes as corporations participate in day-to-day problems of the society. In the capitalist age of the early 19th century, Robinson’s model of community entrepreneurship is suspect. In a large way, by seeming to advocate for the businesses of his hometown, he was actually advocating for a favorable business environment for his own ventures. The extra urge to be in various directorships points towards a concealed attempt to manipulate public policy. Once a powerful business occupies a position of directorships, it is difficult to imagine that one would advocate for issues that conflict with his interests. For instance, having been in the Royal Bank of Canada, he would have been influential in the setting of interest rates that favor the borrowing of capital. This is because Robinson’s community entrepreneurship contrasts with the penetration of his businesses into key sectors of the Canadian economy. Use of statistics highlight an inherent privileged class that dominated businesses. Most businessmen arose from particular backgrounds that favored their ascendancy to business stardom. In a capitalistic system, a certain form of leverage help given individuals achieve a start head in businesses. For instance, in the feudal society, the monarch and priestly classes enjoyed socio-economic privileges that made sure they were richer than everyone else. The statistics revealed a given geographic concentration as the major business owners were either from Toronto or Montreal. Collective dominance is a pertinent issue in this case as the businessmen formed elite social clubs that promoted their further alliances. Unlike the expected idea of acting as competitors, the data reveals that the major business owners had a coalescing social life. The author makes a relevant economic analysis that highlights these clubs as the access points to the government. The role of religion in this narrowness of background manifests in the dominant Presbyterian Anglican backgrounds. Interestingly, the author offers a counteractive account of Charles Dunning. Dunning was a progressive businessman who sought for meritocracy and equal-level play in business. Dunning offered a revolution in business by seeking a liberal capitalist model that allowed for mobility in social structures(Nerbas69). Indeed, Dunning rose from a humble farming background to the upper social circles. Such accounts offer a different twist to the perception of big businesses. In a huge sense, if certain businesses did not offer a different direction for industries, the business environment would have remained exploitative and reliant on the status quo. For instance, Dunning moved away from political partisanship and conservatism towards a progressive form of business. It is crucial to highlight that such form of business activism relied on politics. In turn, a businessman could participate in political activism for a greater good. Dunning campaigned for efficiency and reinstated that class politics are ineffective and that class differences can be reconciled. Dunning, in this frame, became an idealistic businessman who believed that the existence of the powerful classes could end in order to give forth a fair world. The book, however, does not give account of how such liberalism created a problem during the 1930’s economic crisis. A developmental historical account of a country is important since it highlights certain radical changes that lost value over time. Such changes lose value, not because they are not essential anymore, but because new contexts demand new approaches. For instance, Dunning campaigned for ultra-liberal markets that denied any form of government intervention in the market. Although liberal markets would have been articulated as a basis for democracy, they promoted the tyranny of businesses that had better competitiveadvantage. Competitive advantage, in this frame, arises out of large economies of scale rather than on proper marketing strategies, which are more meritocratic. In addition, Dunning deviates from the community entrepreneurship model of conservative business to promotion of individual proprietorship that creates a significant room for the individual to acquire rewards for one’s success. In addition, it fails to explain why Dunning’s proletariat beginnings might have influenced his views. This explains why he could not attain a direct ascendancy from poverty to wealth. Politics was essential in elevating him to the position of policy making. This fact reveals that it would have ben difficult for an individual in the earlier Canadian society to flourish without the ability to influence policies. In turn, both Robinson and Dunning share a similarity in the fact that they employed policy-making status to agitate for industrial models that would help their businesses succeed. Although this is an anecdotal evidence, Dunning, as a person rising from humble beginnings, might have easily realized that his only path to success was through an egalitarian society that leveraged the chances of success for everyone. This was a basis for agitating for the welfare of his fellow individuals who might have had an unfair chance at the old economic models that promoted the existence of monopolies. The book notes that Dunning began his activism by campaigning for a favorable economic system for the small scale farmers. The book highlights intertwining issues between business and politics. The book uses raw data in reinstating the idea that a society develops linearly. In this view, as aspects of the society, such as politics, changes, the other aspects change. Community entrepreneurship model meant that a few people could influence policies for the general populace. On the other hand, liberal economic policies meant that individuals could harness an upper hand over the policies that affected them. In this system of government, control power emanated from the bottom to the top. The government only existed to facilitate the welfare of the individuals rather than impose its thinking on the people. In addition, the government had to take into account the views of the common man. In turn, this form of politics promoted egalitarian principles whereby the society transfers its gains across all the spheres of the society. Besides, it considers with a political system whereby the public keenly scrutinizes the actions of the government. On the other hand, such liberal view is utopia sine it ignores the involvement of big businesses in contributing significant taxes to the government. The author fails to properly highlight the factors that led to decreasing domination of the big business class. A society that strongly advances towards democracy easily destroys a monopolistic class whose interests are narrow. Education is a huge factor that can play such a role. Through education, individuals become more enlightened about their entitlement. Education is an essential commodity that does not lock out the poor classes in spite of their limited wealth. It is essential to highlight that Dunning might have easily benefitted from this leverage as he attained the ability to challenge the business class intellectually. Dunning engaged in the form of politics that encouraged intellectual discourse and constant reexamining of the society. This involves siding with the dominated classes rather than the powerful access who possess a considerable access to socio-economic advantages. In addition, education improves the intuition and skills for doing a business in a way that does not necessarily rely on huge capital. This includes smart financial strategies, marketing tactics, and greater public involvement in economic policies. In addition, the diversification of the economy might have been a great factor in this development. Technological ventures allowed for the manipulation of manpower for greater revenues. Sectors such as finance could also have allowed proper strategists to ascend to the elite business club. However, the author highlights the essence of regional dominance in promoting business’ success. Dominion of capital is a great book since it highlights the development of big businesses. It shows a human side of investors as they try to remainrelevant through history. In turn, the book manifests that the management of large businesses is a tricky affair that might have necessitated intimate relationships with the government. The book, however, is not a critique of big businesses but it seeks to reveal their ascendancy into power. This is possible through the use of data that highlights the historical development of key figures in the Canadian business. More essentially, the book manifests how businessmen manipulate policy making towards their favor. On a lighter note, the book details the contribution of politics in changing the Canadian business landscape. Through liberal policies, the business environment become more egalitarian and redistributes its benefits to the lower classes. In addition, it restricts government intervention in private property. Works cited Nerbas, Don. Dominion of capital: the politics of big business and the crisis of the Canadian bourgeoisie, 1914-1947. Montreal, CN:2013. Print. Read More