whyroots

The New York Times has decided that Mormons tipped the balance in favor of Proposition 8. The Economist has (lamely) proclaimed that the Mormon work ethic has insulated Utah from the economic storm. What should we, proponents of equal marriage rights, do to counter the homophobic economic engine running in the mountains? Organize, march, sue, convince. Make a ton of money.

Economists argue that bias is irrational -- not a great way to make money. A company that makes hiring decisions for reasons other than competence and talent is going to be punished by competitors who take advantage of that talent for their own gain. Now, proponents of same-sex marriage have an opportunity to punish states that deny marriage rights, and reward those that do. Move to Connecticut and Massachusetts! Revel in our New English autumns. Bring your entrepreneurial spirits and wallets. Fill state coffers with income and sales tax receipts. At least vacation here!

Of course this will happen on its own, as same-sex couples come to live in a place that will recognize their unions. And a mass exodus from California would cripple efforts to turn this year’s Proposition 8 near-loss into next year’s victory. However, as we we attend political rallies and speeches, we can and should make decisions about where to live and work and what we buy with an eye towards punishing bias.

In response to pro-gay marriage boycotts in California -- some more sensible than others -- Prop 8 supporters have called the efforts "intolerable," and "mob justice." I don't understand this. The free market’s definitional quality is right there in the title -- it’s free! If I’m free to make a purchasing decision based on something as insubstantial and unrelated to underlying quality as a celebrity endorsement or witty advertising campaign, then I am damned well free to make a purchasing decision based on whether my money's going to keep my friends from getting married.

Respond to fear-mongering and bias by moving to (or vacationing in) Connecticut and Massachusetts. Earn a ton of money. Spend it on businesses that support equal rights. Make the Economist write an article marveling at the economic benefits of justice.

Last spring, one of the consultants at my management consulting firm won an election for part-time office in a south western state. He was elected on a progressive platform. During one of his first post-election meetings back at the firm, a senior executive and one of our clients joked with him that he wasn't sure how he felt about having someone so liberal and "pro-union" consulting for him. Meanwhile, over the course of the election, which included a primary contest, this consultant was criticized for his corporate ties by an opponent on the left. Seems as though no one is comfortable with a progressive in the corporate world.

Naturally so, you might say, given the amount of time prominent progressives spend railing against corporate power, and the huge sums of money corporations have spent lobbying against progressive government reforms. But many self-described progressives have collected a corporate paycheck, or had a parent's corporate paycheck pay their way through school, or at the very least spent money on corporate products. (Your outfit might be head-to-toe American Apparel, but your Converse kicks are as corporate as it gets.) So many progressive Dr. Jekyls with a lurking, corporate Mr. Hyde, eh?

I don't think it can really be any other way. There are bills to be paid, and there are only so many plum non-profit jobs to go around. Besides, someone has to donate something to make those NGOs run. Like it or not, corporations are extremely efficient engines of economic growth (financial meltdown or no meltdown, this point stands). Progressives have every reason to be wary of corporate ambitions to twist public servants to serve their self-interest at the expense of the public good. But corporate self-interest is very often aligned with the public good, not opposed. 

Progressives need to avoid dogmatic opposition to corporations and businesses more generally. Society has too much to gain from efficient, well-run firms of all sizes, small and big alike. Progress demands pragmatism, not tribalism. So when considering the meaning of progressivism, let us define it by its successes, not its conflicts, by its ideals, and not by its caricatured enemies.