Business education (?) in Brazil
The great majority of Brazilian scholars, considering statistics and reliable information, are Marxist or Social Democrat - perhaps more dangerous - dissimulate! In equal proportions, professors in the areas of management and business! That's it! Out of the mouths of democratic social rights. Book of bedside, surely among them Rousseau.
Democracy that estatizes property - obviously not theirs! - and of social programs that sucked the purchasing power of the real workers through scalding taxation. It is true that many of these doctors support themselves with such taxes.
Nothing bad to read Marx! Most of them have not even read, and those who have read or use it, relate it to "economic processes" that make no sense in the reality of current catalyzation. They are the same worshipers of postmodern, phantastic and abstract French philosophies.
They never came close to an economic literature with liberal ideas. Many have even heard of the Austrian School and the assumptions of real thinkers of economic freedom. Ignore them in political and economic theory. In no way did these teachers have their professional lives involved in economic processes of the reality of business life. They lecture on theories and bookish dogmas disconnected from the truthful business world.
Now the same postmodernists have become apologists for self-management, in which it is (humanly!) stated that the organizational goal is the attainment of mission, the purpose connected with social and / or environmental ends, not profit! It is clear that such a business model can be successful in certain ventures. The problem is the panacea!
It is illusory to think that in certain industries that operate in global businesses, which require extensive integration and coordination capabilities among various transactional units, self-management may be the best form of organization. In for-profit organizations obviously the goal is profit! Today, organizations are concerned about their social impacts and environments, similarly possessing targets in these areas, even as a way to earn more money to perpetuate themselves in the markets. But make no mistake about profit!
In the same way, I do not think it is credible to oppose foreign capital in a world where more and more global value chains prevail. Logic of reality. By inference, such masters advocate taxation, subsidies, and more state intervention in the Tupinik economy of the navel. They proclaim community, not individual freedom to undertake!
Yes, the dictatorship of leftist thought is preoccupied in business schools. The system is protected and spread. Herd behavior drives away divergent ones. I often come across postings, copied and pasted from suspicious sources, in which severe criticism is added to the structuring measures that must be implemented, in order to have a free market economy, genuine free competition.
As in an elitist cube (English or French?), they exchange their comments about these economic reforms. They take advantage of tragedies to demonize the figure of the businessman. Of course there are incompetent - and criminal - business processes that must be severely punished. But then they equate businessmen as perverse, soulless ones who only wish to exploit "the people" to profit, too much sadistic creativity and cheap opportunism.
They do not realize that in an effectively free market, patrimonialism and clientelism are mitigated, and competition - by the people - punishes and eliminates bad entrepreneurs. Usually they start from good-natured lures and premises without any robust and / or realistic grounding. They propagate untruths, some out of sheer ignorance, others through intentional self-deception. Academic corporatism is very brave! Hard to break ...
Well. I have my doubts if it is possible to train professionals for the market. It is feasible, given the peremptory ignorance of the market processes and the real needs of the national business community - and its struggle to create jobs and income (With all this bureaucratic paraphernalia)?
I am worried about theoretical ideological abstraction in the face of practical reality! I am impressed by the support, lack of vision, experience and the purposeful "one-sided currency" in this skewed academic context.
It will take that the recent voices that have risen alerting on this problematic have the desired effects.
Alex Pipkin, PhD