Diagnosis of its specific Personality Disorder: Psychopath
"The question that comes up periodically is to what extent
could a corporation considered to be psychopathic. If we look at a
corporation as a legal person it may not be that difficult to
actually draw the transition between the psychosis in an
individual to the psychosis in a corporation.
We could go through the characteristics at the finest for this
personality disorder one by one and see how they might apply to
Personality Diagnostics Checklist
World Health Organization ICD-10
unconcern for the feelings of others
to maintain enduring relationships
disregard for the safety of others
Repeated lying and conning others for profit
to experience guilt
to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviours
The corporations would have all the characteristics, and in fact
in many respects corporational behaviour shows that they are the
Dr. Robert Hare, Ph.D.
Consultant to the FBI on psychopaths
Against the pathological pursuit of
profit and power!
A corporation is a legal person, which has to always look after
its own interests. The creation of this artifical person can be
traced back to Roman Law, but in order to lay off responsibility,
manifested in England in the 17th century.
As the dominant institution of our time has been created in
the image of the psychopath -
Who bears the moral responsibility for it's actions?
"The people, who are engaged in the corporation, weather
as stockholders or as executives, weather as employees or as
consumers of their production - they all have the moral
Friedman, Nobel prize-winning economist
Being a CEO of a Corporation you might as individual be the nicest
person in the world, a gentle husband and a loving father, but in
your institutional role you are a monster, because the institution
you serve is a tyrannical monster.
"There is not a single scientific peer reviewed
paper published in the last 25 years, that would contradict the
Every living system of earth is in
decline, every live support system of earth is in decline and
these together constitute the biosphere. The biosphere that
supports and nurtures all of life and not only our life, but also
the life of 30 million other species that share this planet with
We are living a terrible legacy of poisoning and diminishment of
the environment for our grandchildren's grandchildren.
Generations not yet born. Some people have called that
intergenerational tyrrany - a form of taxation without
representation levied by us to some generations yet to be. Its the
wrong thing to do."
Ray Anderson, exCEO of the
world's largest carpet corporation
There are women and men who belong to this
unique sub-species, which otherwise is not existing on terra as a
life-form, and they are specified by their habits as: THE
PLUNDERERS AND SPOILERS. For them in devastation there is business
opportunity. Money makes that possible for these corporate
"Social responsibility" isn't a deep shift, because it
is a mere voluntary tactic - a tactic, a reaction to a certain
market at this point. And as the corporation reads the market
differently it can go back. One day you see Bambi - next day you
Bernhard, Executive Director, Trade Union Pro
corporations went global in order to escape as transnationals the
scrutiny of the people in a country and it is common knowledge
what happened along that path: Environmental destruction, slavery,
child-labour, health hazards and thousands of people dying due to
GAP Inc. became the first trans-national corporation, which under
pressure from the public, finally allowed independent monitoring
of their factories anywhere.
the ugly face shows up under a new hat an, in green smokescreen
camouflage and even more bolt:
None of the
companies who joint in the "Corporate Club",
which is masterminded by the World Wide Fund for Nature e.g. in
Kenya, has opened its doors for independent scrutiny. Members
are Safaricom limited (Vodaphone & Government), Bamburi Cement,
Coca Cola, Unilever, Nestle,, Brooke Bond, Basecamp Explorer,
Express Travel Group, Club Sun n' Sand, Sher Agencies, Hotel Inter
Continental and O&M Worldwide.
What can be done? All these Corporations are not untouchable. They
need to be dismantled. Actually, most states have laws, which do
demand that they are dismantled, if they don't serve any longer
for the public good. The corporations themselves are not qualified
to determine what defines social responsibility - this only can be
done by the people themselves. The present process, where the
transnationals dictate to local states their rules, is highly
This applies to
McDonalds, Monsanto, Pioneer-Seeds, DOW Agrosciences, Aventis,
BAYER, DuPont, Syngenta, Procter & Gamble, Kimberly-Clark,
Enron, Exxon, Microsoft,
Disney, Kmart, Walmart, Worldcom, Reuters, Tyco, Andersen, Kodak,
Canon, Exxon, Samsung, IBM, XEROX, as well as
to CARE Inc., WWF Inc. and especially to the water transnationals
like (Rumsfeld's) Bechtel, Vittel or Vivendi and many
others of the "FORTUNE" 500, who not rarely have been
called "bad apples".
The rights to
nature and the commons never must ever again be wrenched from the
hands of the people!
"WEALTH IS'NT JUST THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S CREATED THROUGH
EXTRACTING AND EXPLOITING THE EARTH OR LABOUR FROM PEOPLE. WEALTH
INCLUDES THE HEALTH OF THE PEOPLE, THE WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE AND
THE INTEGRITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT!
"It is illegal for a Director or a Manager of a Corporation
to be genuinely socially responsible. We hear a lot of PR about
social responsiblity, but it is really just "PR".
In the institution of a corporation we have allowed that an amoral
and dangerous entity could be created!"
WE HAVE TO STOP TO JUST BEAR ALL THE EXTERNALITIES!
- learn more by reading his book Against
the pathological pursuit of profit and power!
or go to http://www.thecorporation.com
The Deadly Game of Deceit - UNEP
re-discovers green economics
(see the UNEP press release below)
10 Oct. 2005
COMMENT: Some have discovered a new ankle to the deadly game of
While the basic idea to include what nature provides into the
economic calculus is good and has as such been lived by indigenous
peoples, taken into consideration by responsible governments, who
have regulations to enforce sustainability, and pushed for
worldwide by many profound thinkers since long, the role of the UN
and the sudden turn of certain schools of though is rather dubious.
They will have to prove that it is not just another tax deduction
gimmick for the hyper-corporations, what they try to promote in
London as from today.
Actually Das Gupta himself seems to give away what they really
have in mind when he said:
“Poverty will only be made history when nature enters
in the same way as do buildings, machines, roads and for example
It is a particular catastrophe for the very poor,” said
Professor Das Gupta.
This school of thought still has not understood that nature isn't
just simply a machine or a building. Das Gubta et al. thereby only
give way to another deviation. He might have just seen - but not
really understood - the film The Corporation (http://www.thecorporation.com)
- highly recommended!) or might be now hired by the corporate
world together with UNEP to only diffuse these issues.
That UNEP's Toepfer is not far away from such exercises does not
wonder: Since years the head of the United Nations Environment
Programme tries to rather be in bed with the WTO and the big
corporations than to support work by his own staff, to not only
show clearly the destruction of the biosphere but also the
misdeeds by the corporate world against nature and what need to be
done to stop it. Demands for tough cuts and thorough regulations
on what is done so irresponsibly by the transnationals and their
governments against nature and the people are buried by UNEP
regularly in tonnes of papers containing conventions of
pseudo-regulations, as the recent prolongation of loopholes (not
the required 100% and worldwide stop!) of the use of methyl
Instead of wasting taxpayers money in London, Toepfer should work
e.g. towards stopping the exorbitant and blatant
over-exploitation of marine resources right in front of his
doorsteps in Kenya or abstain from being a mere stirrup-holder for
the water-corporations, whose interests through the
proxy-governance of the actual government of Kenya only create
misery for the poor, as seen by the recent evictions of indigenous
peoples from their ancient forest homeland, which is earmarked to
be the water catchment to the growing demand of the city dwellers.
These tribal forest peoples live since long, what now apparently
shall be re-invented by certain economists. People who still
manage to live close to Nature, like the Ogiek or the San are part
of nature - not apart from it, like the corporate profit
maximizers or the UN as example of corporate governance.
To state the intent to uplift "the poor" out of "poverty"
needs further explanations, as to what they actually mean, since
Toepfer even does not manage to achieve a positive chance for the
poor right in front of his nose and in his present country of
residence. The former city-planner Klaus Toepfer certainly should
not be allowed to hinder the proactive moves made by countries
like India against the corporations by misusing the London School
of Economics as a mere fig-leave institution for the interests of
the just-for-profit and governance corporations. The corporate
irresponsibility needs radical surgery rather than talk-shops,
which only could serve to deliver the wording for further PR
campaigns, paid for to mislead the public.
Enough of UNEP sentences like: "Studies from Algeria, Italy,
Portugal, Syria and Tunisia also point to the value of intact
forests." Mr. Toepfer do you need such to gasp the value
of forests? No? Well, then maybe the economists could tell you
or your writers during your London days at least that the creation
of "pro-poor markets" is a contradictio in se -
Otherwise the prize question might be just reduced to: "What
is the economic value of the Executive Director of UNEP?"
NATURA NON FACIT SALTUS
- see also http://www/ogiek.org
- click Alert
or go to http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/news-call-for-ogiek.htm
- below the original UNEP mailing:
Poverty to Rise Unless Economies Factor ‘Nature’s Capital’
into National Accounts
Economists and Environmentalists Gather in London to Bring
Environment into Centre of Wealth Creation
London, 10 October 2005 - Poverty will only be made history when
nature’s capital is factored into national profit and loss books,
one of the world’s leading economists will assert today.
Key to this is creating markets that give real and long lasting
value to the goods and services nature provides.
Traditional measures such as gross domestic product (GDP) are
short changing current and future generations says Professor Sir
Partha Dasgupta of Cambridge University.
This is because they fail to value the goods and services
generated by the natural world and instead treat them as free to
use and limitless in their abundance and ability to withstand
damage and decay.
Such services include the carbon soaking power of forests, the
fisheries and coastal defense activities of coral reefs, the
pollution filtering-potential of wetlands and the nutrient
recycling processes of the
Currently countries who fell their forests for timber exports,
dynamite reefs for fish, pollute their land for intensive
agriculture and contaminate their waterways with farm and factory
run off can appear to be getting richer in the short term.
In reality, they are likely to be sliding into poverty or, at the
very best, treading water, because they are plundering their
natural capital - a key pillar of medium and long term wealth.
“Take the Indian sub-continent as an example. On the basis of
traditional measures, like GDP, the region has been getting richer
since the 1970s but in reality wealth per capita has actually
declined. This is because, relative to population growth,
investments in manufactured capital, knowledge, skills and health,
and improvements in institutions were not sufficient to compensate
for the depreciation of natural capital,” said Professor Das
This has alarming consequences for not only this but the next
generation who stand to inherit a planet with insufficient clean
and functioning ecosystems’ to sustain their basic needs let
lone their hopes and aspirations.
“Poverty will only be made history when nature enters economic
calculations in the same way as do buildings, machines, roads and
for example software. It is a particular catastrophe for the very
poor,” said Professor Das Gupta.
“As countries mine their natural wealth to fuel economic
activity, the poorest of the poor lose their very life support
systems. If fish disappears from a rich country’s supermarket
shelves shoppers can
substitute this loss of protein by buying another form for example
pork, beef or soya. Poor people, depending on the natural
resources around them, do not have this luxury, do not have this
kind of choice,” said Professor Das Gupta.
Klaus Toepfer, Executive Director of the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) which is running a two
day brainstorming at the London
School of Economics on how to mainstream environment in pro
poor development strategies, said: “In the end we are all facing
poverty if we fail to address environmental decline, if we fail to
reinvest in nature’s capital. You cannot continue to drive a car
if all you do is put petrol in the tank. It needs servicing, parts
require replacing and we must pay for the roads and infrastructure
on which it runs”.
“In reality, nature is even more complicated. By continually
depleting and damaging it and without investment in the running,
maintenance and management costs, the Earth’s life support can
suddenly and abruptly fade or switch to become less productive and
unpredictable. I believe we are slowly winning this political and
economic argument but not fast enough. So we must hurry up
otherwise all six billion of us will eventually be scratching
around trying to survive,” he added.
Mr Toepfer said this was given fresh urgency by the Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment, the work of over 1,300 experts. According to
the assessment, some 60 per cent of the planet's ecosystem
services are currently being degraded by human activities.
This week’s two day brainstorming, running from 10 to 12 October,
has brought together some of the finest minds in environmental
economics as well as senior figures from the environmental and
It is hoped to engage the so called Multilateral Environmental
Agreements, covering areas like biological diversity, migratory
species and climate.
These treaties could go a long way towards helping refine
ecosystem valuations and to improve cost benefit analysis of
targeted investments in degraded ecosystems to boost political and
financial support for this nature-based approach.
One of the primary aims is to see how pro-poor markets can be
created that generate income for those in desperate need while
conserving the life support systems upon which they and the rest
of the world depend.
Currently, most of the goods and services provided by ecosystems
have little or no market value despite their importance in the
economic lives of communities, nations and the globe.
It has been calculated that tropical forests are worth some $60
billion a year as a result of their carbon removal activities
alone which are helping in the fight against global warming.
But these forests, found in countries like the Democratic Republic
of Congo or Indonesia, are only valued as timber resources rather
than for their even more valuable carbon sequestration services.
Thus governments and local people have less incentive to conserve
them and more incentive to cut them down.
Mr Toepfer said the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and other
reports released during the year have made compelling economic
cases for conserving ecosystems and for carrying out targeted
investments in restoring degraded ones.
Valuing Natural Capital and Ecosystems
New figures show that an intact wetland in Canada is worth $6,000
a hectare versus $2,000 a hectare for one cleared for intensive
agriculture. Intact tropical mangroves, coastal ecosystems that
are nurseries for fish, natural pollution filters and coastal
defenses, are worth around $1,000 a hectare. Cleared for shrimp
farms, the value falls to around $200 a hectare.
The Assessment also puts a value on peat bogs and marshlands. It
estimates that the Muthurajawela Marsh, a more than 3,000 hectare
coastal bog in Sri Lanka, is worth an estimated $5 million a year
as a result of services such as local flood control.
Losses as a result of damage by alien invasive species in the Cape
Floral region of South Africa is calculated at around $2,000 a
The annual recreational value of coral reefs in the six Marine
Management Areas of the Hawaiian islands ranges from $300,000 to
tens of millions of dollars a year.
Studies from Algeria, Italy, Portugal, Syria and Tunisia also
point to the value of intact forests.
These estimate that the value of the timber and fuel-wood from a
forest is worth less than a third when compared with the value of
their services such as water-shed protection and recreation to the
absorption of pollutants like greenhouse gases.
The burning of 10 million hectares of Indonesia's forests in the
late 1990s cost an estimated $9 billion as a result of factors
including increased health care and tourism losses.
There are also new findings on the link between the spread of
disease and environmental destruction. The provision of treated
bed nets, the better availability of low cost anti-malarial drugs
and the development of vaccines are crucial but so are healthy
Studies in the Amazon by researchers at Johns Hopkins University
in the United States have concluded that for every one per cent
increase in deforestation, there is an eight per cent increase in
the number of malaria-carrying mosquitoes.
This has implications for human health but also to economic
development. It is calculated that Africa's Gross National Product
(GNP) in 2000 could have been 25 per cent or $100 billion higher
if malaria had been eradicated 35 years ago.
Investing in Ecosystems to Meet the Millennium Development Goals
on Poverty, Health, Women and Water Research indicates that
investing in nature can provide an excellent rate of return and
help meet the internationally agreed development goals.
Every dollar invested in fighting land degradation and
desertification may conservatively generate over three dollars in
economic benefits helping to fight poverty among the millions
living on fragile lands.
Money could be spent on such traditional and soil conserving
features like terracing.
Meanwhile every dollar spent on delivering clean water and
sanitation is likely to give impressive rates of return of up to
$14. It indicates that in some cases the income of the very poor
could be boosted fourteen fold. Here the economic benefits arise
from areas including reduced health care costs, increased
productivity because of workers spending less time searching for
water and improved school attendance.
Conservation of habitats and ecosystems are also cost effective
when compared with the short term profits from environmentally
damaging activities such as dynamite fishing, mining and
sedimentation as a result of deforestation in the interior.
A study of coral reefs in the Caribbean indicates that sustainable
harvesting of coral fish for food and industries such as the pet
and aquaria trade may be worth $300 million a year, coral-based
tourism just over $2 billion annually and shoreline protection
from reefs up to $2.2 billion a year.
However, these economic benefits are threatened by damage and
degradation amounting to between $350 million and $870 million a
year. Overall for every dollar invested in coral reef conservation
economic returns will total up to $5.
Meanwhile the carbon storage or “sequestration” potential of
forests ranges between $360 and $2,200 per hectare which makes
them worth far more than if they are converted to grazing or
Indeed once carbon reaches over $30 a ton it becomes far more cost
effective to conserve forests than to clear them.
Natural capital also serves as back up against calamities such as
droughts or crop failures. Studies from Brazil show that farmers
in the Amazon’s Tapajos National Park turn to forests products
such as nuts and berries when crop yields tumble.
In other words, the forest acts as a kind of nature-based
insurance policy for those denied access to formal insurance and
Notes to Editors
Creating Pro-Poor Markets for
A High-Level Brainstorming Workshop 10 – 12 October 2005, London
School of Economics, United Kingdom
Organized by UNEP through its Division of Environmental
Conventions and Division of Policy Development and Law, UNEP in
conjunction with the LSE.