The ultimate responsibilty of the corporation is to its workers, according
to jlongo. Though I don't necessarily endorse this, the fact is that the
CEO of a publicly traded corporation is legally obligated to operate in the
best interests of the stockholders, not the workers.
Michael Moore's failure to consider this feature of American capitalism is
one of the failures of his film as an analysis of GM's behavior. By making
it seem like the problem was the uncaring Roger Smith, Moore suggests that
the problem is not a systematic one, but a problem of personalities. In
this sense, Smith was ambushed, and unfairly, because the film doesn't
acknowledge the constraints on HIS actions.
I'm not getting all weepy over poor Roger (he's probably getting by), but
neither do I think Moore's attack was very much on-target.
University of Notre Dame
[log in to unmask]