This case describes an ethical dilemma faced by an employee of an established business organization. Working in a business environment rife with unethical practices, Zafar came to believe that some of these practices were acceptable for the business to survive, particularly in the context of dysfunctional state institutions. Where he drew the line was when an act became detrimental to the interest of his organization. Also, he chose not to become directly involved in such practices. In his personal life, a cause close to his heart was helping the poor for which purpose, in addition to other things, he started a school for children of poor families in a low-income area with the help of a friend named Qasim. Funds were needed to run this school, which he generated from his income and through the support of his family and friends. He also convinced Qasim to secure business from his organization, ZSP, even if it required using commissions, and use the funds generated through this venture to further their charitable causes. The dilemma Zafar faced was when a company, FEP, contacted him to help it materialize a deal with ZSP in exchange for a handsome commission. Being a reputable name, FEP had all the ingredients of a valuable partner. While Zafar believed that taking a commission for a deal of this kind would not harm his organization, he could not bring himself to benefit from the financial gain personally. One way out was to utilize the funds for the poor children who attended his school. Refusing to take the commission would not have any impact on this practice since someone else in his organization would be quite willing to accept it. It would also mean the loss of a good opportunity to support an important cause. Zafar was unable to decide.
This case describes an ethical problem faced by the owners of a reasonably successful business. It gives students an opportunity to analyze the contrasting approaches of the two owners of this business towards an ethical dilemma commonly faced by those businesses in Pakistan that have to pay heavy duties on imported goods. The case highlights the fact that morally upright individuals can be pushed into very difficult situations wherein they, despite their good intentions, at times choose not to uphold duties imposed by law and morality. The difficulty felt in remaining within the confines of law, and upholding moral principles is amplified by the cumulative effects of moral failures that become endemic to a society. The pressure created by the policies of a government deemed corrupt, inefficient and, in the final analysis, illegitimate on the one hand, and unscrupulous competitors on the other, can become, at times, important contributors to morally questionable behaviour. This brings to the fore the dilemma of an individual trying to make an honest living in a very unfavourable context. The moral conundrum may be resolved either by making the difficult choice of following the law to the hilt, or through constructing an argument that legitimizes an illegal and seemingly unethical course of action.
In this article, we use the critical theory literature to describe the processes of co-optation by which capitalism engages with its radical alternatives in order to subvert their emancipatory potential. We chose the global Islamic banking industry as our empirical context, which represents bold efforts to build a radical alternative embedded in Islamic moral precepts. However, we observed that the performative intent of capitalist discourse, reflected in a strong preoccupation with effectiveness and efficiency, has come to dominate all economic claims in the Islamic banking industry. The oppositional ideas that were intended to disturb the economic status quo now reproduce it along with its privileges, despite the vaulted rhetoric about establishing a genuine alternative. The article ends by mapping out some implications of re-introducing co-optation in the critical theory literature.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.