The US Military-Industrial Complex is Circumstantially Unethical

被引:28
作者
Byrne, Edmund F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Indianapolis, IN 46204 USA
关键词
military-industrial complex; circumstantially unethical business; superpower; imperialist amorality; domination; ETHICS; AMERICA; POWER;
D O I
10.1007/s10551-009-0361-0
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Business ethicists should examine not only business practices but whether a particular type of business is even prima facie ethical. To illustrate how this might be done I here examine the contemporary U.S. defense industry. In the past the U.S. military has engaged in missions that arguably satisfied the just war self-defense rationale, thereby implying that its suppliers of equipment and services were ethical as well. Some recent U.S. military missions, however, arguably fail the self-defense rationale. At issue, then, is whether a business supporting these latter missions may not be circumstantially unethical. No it is not, say defense industry advocates, for two principal reasons. For one, this business benefits society at large in numerous ways. And, for another, the organizer of these military missions is a superpower which by its very nature is not subject to the ethical constraints of the self-defense rationale. I dispute both reasons, argue against the second, and conclude that the U.S. military-industrial complex (MIC) is circumstantially unethical.
引用
收藏
页码:153 / 165
页数:13
相关论文
共 68 条
  • [1] ANAND J, 2004, MANAGERIAL DECISION, V24, P383
  • [2] [Anonymous], RESETTING RULES ENGA
  • [3] [Anonymous], MONTHLY REV
  • [4] [Anonymous], 1974, Obedience to authority
  • [5] Arnold S., 2008, DOES DOD PROFIT POLI
  • [6] Axinn S, 2009, MORAL MILITARY, P1
  • [7] Government contracts and contractor behavior
    Berrios, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2006, 63 (02) : 119 - 130
  • [8] BOLGIANO D, 2002, U BALTIMORE LAW REV, V157
  • [9] Brandes Stuart., 1997, WARHOGS HIST WAR PRO
  • [10] Assessing arms makers' corporate social responsibility
    Byrne, Edmund F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2007, 74 (03) : 201 - 217