Which Do You Believe Presents The Greatest Threat To Civil S

Which do you believe presents the greatest threat to civil society: a corporation

Discussion: Which do you believe presents the greatest threat to civil society: a corporation that commits crimes (e.g., murder, environmental crimes, or bribery), or persons who commit crimes that harm businesses (e.g., embezzlement, fraud, or larceny)? Defend your response, using at least one example from current events.

Guided Response: Respond to at least two of your fellow students’ posts in a substantive manner. Some ways to do this include the following, though you may choose a different approach, providing your response is substantive: Review the posts made by your peers. In response to your peers, first identify a non-traditional or creative way in which a corporation might be punished for committing a crime. Then discuss the consequences of implementing that punishment to the example used by your peer.

Paper For Above instruction

The debate over whether corporations that commit crimes or individuals who harm businesses pose a greater threat to civil society is multifaceted and hinges on the scope, impact, and systemic nature of the wrongdoing. While both have significant implications, I argue that corporations engaging in criminal activities tend to present a more profound and systemic threat to civil society than individual perpetrators of harm to businesses.

Corporations, given their scale and influence, operate across broad economic and social domains. When a corporation commits crimes such as environmental violations, corruption, or fraud, the repercussions are often widespread, affecting millions of people, ecosystems, and economic stability. For example, the 2015 Volkswagen emissions scandal, where the automaker deliberately manipulated emissions testing to meet regulatory standards falsely, exemplifies how corporate misconduct can undermine public trust, distort markets, and cause environmental harm (Hotten, 2015). This event not only deceived consumers but also exacerbated environmental pollution, illustrating the far-reaching consequences of corporate malfeasance.

In contrast, individuals who commit crimes such as embezzlement or fraud against businesses tend to have localized impact, although their actions can jeopardize specific organizations and their employees. While these crimes are serious and damaging on a microeconomic level, they rarely pose systemic threats to societal infrastructure. For instance, high-profile corporate fraud cases, such as the Enron scandal, challenged the integrity of financial markets but ultimately resulted in regulatory reforms aimed at preventing future abuses (Healy & Palepu, 2003).

Current events reveal the gravity of corporate crimes. The Wells Fargo scandal, where employees created millions of fake accounts to meet sales targets, underscores how corporate misconduct can erode customer trust and lead to regulatory penalties (Corkery & Cowley, 2016). Such instances demonstrate that corporate behavior—if unchecked—can destabilize entire sectors, damage reputations, and require comprehensive government intervention. These events highlight the systemic risk posed by large-scale corporate wrongdoing, showing it to be potentially more threatening than individual malfeasance.

However, some might argue that individual crimes, especially violent or malicious acts like murder or sexual assault, threaten societal safety directly and acutely, often invoking immediate law enforcement responses. Yet, these incidents tend to be discrete and localized, whereas corporations' actions can have pervasive and enduring consequences that affect entire populations over time.

Furthermore, implementing innovative punishments for corporate crimes could involve measures like disbanding or restructuring organizations, imposing large-scale financial sanctions, or even revoking operational licenses temporarily or permanently. These approaches could serve as deterrents while also preventing future harm. For example, recent proposals to break up monopolistic tech giants or hold executives personally liable for corporate misconduct are potential non-traditional punishments that could significantly curb corporate crimes (Liu, 2022). Such punitive measures could compel corporations to prioritize ethical practices and compliance, thereby safeguarding civil society from systemic threats.

In conclusion, while individual crimes are certainly harmful and demand robust law enforcement actions, the systemic and widespread impact of corporate crimes makes them a greater threat to civil society. As corporations wield significant power and influence, their misconduct—if left unchecked—can undermine trust, distort markets, and cause environmental and social harm on a large scale. Therefore, stronger regulatory oversight and innovative punitive measures are essential to mitigate these risks and protect societal interests.

References

• Corkery, M., & Cowley, S. (2016). Wells Fargo fined $185 million for widespread illegal practice. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/business/dealbook/wells-fargo-fined-for-widespread-illegal-activity.html
• Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2003). The Fall of Enron. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(2), 3-26.
• Hotten, R. (2015). Volkswagen: The scandal explained. BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772
• Liu, J. (2022). Punishing corporate misconduct: New strategies for regulation. Journal of Business Ethics, 175(4), 789-804.