Economic liberalism asserts that entrepreneurial freedom is a condition necessary to economic dynamism. It is efficient and just that those who exercise that freedom suffer the consequences of bad choices. “Competition may well be the ruin of a man, but it is the business of the parties involved to be on their guard,” wrote Scottish philosopher and economist Adam Smith in “The Wealth of Nations” (1776).
Up until the end of the 19th century, companies were small enough that the risk taken by entrepreneurs could be underwritten by their private fortune. The dominant legal form was the partnership, in which the manager is responsible and liable to the extent of his personal fortune in the event of bankruptcy. The risk he took assured the legitimacy of his power as well as the self-limitation of his excesses. In “The Control of Industry” (Nisbet & Co., 1923), English economist Dennis Roberston defined this connection between responsibility/liability and the risks incurred as capitalism’s “golden rule.”
But that golden rule has run up against a second golden rule: capital accumulation is the engine of capitalism. As a result of competition, companies that accumulate more investment capital may eliminate others; consequently, they have a tendency to increase their size. Hence, private fortunes became inadequate to guarantee the growing risks and it was not in families’ interest anymore to concentrate their patrimony into a sole entity, the bankruptcy of which would ruin them. So, beginning around 1900, limited-liability joint stock companies replaced partnerships; they allowed capital to be opened up to shareholders whose liability was limited to their investment – in contradiction, therefore, to the first golden rule.
The more companies became national, then international, then global, the more their financing needs grew, and, in parallel, the more did the personal risk incurred by economic decision-makers – managers and/or shareholders – shrink.
As formerly, families and investors – especially when they are investing household savings – try to limit their risk by diversifying their portfolios. The connection between economic decisions and private risks becomes tenuous.
On top of that, the failure of big companies may lead to such significant consequences that governments have to intervene – as during Washington’s rescue of American banks or General Motors. That’s the too-big-to-fail principle. The very large company ends up transferring the risk of bankruptcy to the taxpayer, which is the last straw for a capitalist society based on decentralization of economic decisions.
So there is a contradiction between the first golden rule (economic decision-makers’ responsibility is based on personal risk) and the second (capital accumulation allows company growth).
Known since the dawn of capitalism, this contradiction has been exacerbated by the fact that the economy has produced gigantic firms in which shareholders and managers incur an ever-more-limited personal risk.
These companies pose a political problem to which we must respond by clarifying who is liable for what, according to what laws, rights and duties, and under penalty of what sanctions. That is the complex and tentative role of corporate governance.
Pierre-Yves Gomez is professor at EM Lyon and director of the Institut français de gouvernement des entreprises [French Institute for Corporate Governance].
Translation: Truthout French Language Editor Leslie Thatcher.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy