The Economist - USA (2019-11-23)

22 The EconomistNovember 23rd 2019

Lettersarewelcomeandshouldbe

addressedtotheEditorat

TheEconomist,TheAdelphiBuilding,

1-11 JohnAdamStreet,LondonWC 2 N 6 HT

Email:[email protected]

Morelettersareavailableat:

Economist.com/letters

Letters

Academic incentives

In reference to “The mba,

disrupted” (November 2nd),

the most valued faculty at

business schools are academ-

ics whose publications have

most influenced their field,

which to a large extent comes

from writing in the more dis-

tinguished journals. Indeed,

the desire to teach the same

course instead of developing

new ones reflects a desire to

clear academic time for

research and writing. So

inventing new mbapro-

grammes is a time-demanding

activity that is generally avoid-

ed by faculty when possible.

Salaries and reputations

strongly reflect publication

activity. The salaries of deans

strongly reflect their success at

raising funds. Expecting busi-

ness programmes to revise

their practice and allocate

substantial time and resources

specifically to “thinking out-

side the box” in order to “spear-

head the next management

revolution” is, unfortunately,

unlikely to happen.

thomas dyckman

Professor emeritus

Cornell University

Ithaca, New York

You stressed the need for busi-

ness schools to change, yet The

Economist’s own mbaranking

perpetuates the status quo

because of its unhealthy obses-

sion with graduates’ salaries.

Companies now recognise that

profit maximisation is not the

sole purpose of business, so

you should acknowledge that

the quality of an mbais not

solely determined by the mon-

ey a graduate can earn. To do

otherwise encourages busi-

ness schools to recruit only a

certain type of student who

will pursue a certain type of

career. The schools at the top of

your ranking understand these

incentives very well. Expecting

them to embrace a purpose-

driven view of capitalism is

like asking turkeys to vote for

Thanksgiving.

saul klein

Dean

Gustavson School of Business

University of Victoria

Victoria, Canada

Religion in the public square

Banyan dismissed Australia’s

proposed religious discrim-

ination bill as “virtue-signal-

ling by the political right”

(November 2nd). Rather, it is

intended to help secure a

fundamental freedom in a

country where more than 60%

of the people retain a religious

affiliation. The bill would have

been unnecessary had it not

been for the intolerant actions

of the secular left, determined

to silence and shame religious

believers who dare to voice

their beliefs in public.

Few would be surprised if

an environmental group chose

not to employ an advocate of

fossil fuels. Yet arms are

thrown up in horror when a

religious school asks its staff to

be sympathetic to the doc-

trines of the religion in ques-

tion. A doctor or a pharmacist

may argue that religious belief

justifies their refusal to pro-

vide a service, but if challenged

in court, they will need to show

that it was religious belief, and

not merely prejudice, that

informed their actions.

Not that the right to reli-

gious freedom is absolute; it

must always be balanced

against the rights of other

citizens. Nor can religious

practice ever be justified sim-

ply because it is motivated by

faith. The law prohibits female

genital mutilation and child

marriage. No matter what

pieties are preached by propo-

nents of such practices, they

will always be illegal.

Rather than confecting

absurd examples of religious

intolerance, such as the imag-

ined expulsion of gay students,

Banyan would do better to

reflect on what it is that has

brought this country to the

point where legislation is

needed to enforce the right to

religious liberty. The tyrants of

tolerance have only them-

selves to blame for having so

taunted their religious neigh-

bours that a government came

to office pledged to act.

peter kurti

Senior research fellow

Centre for Independent

Studies

Sydney

Blowinginthewind

JimPlattsaskedwhetherwind

poweristrulysustainable,

takingintoaccountitscradle-

to-gravecarbonemissions

(Letters,November9th).

Dependingonhispreconcep-

tions,MrPlattsmayormaynot

bereassuredtoknowthatthe

answerisanemphatic“yes”.

A numberofstudiesconvey

this,includingonebyCamilla

ThomsonandGarethHarrison

in 2015 forClimateXChange.

Theyconcludethatthecradle-

to-gravecarbonpaybackfor

onshorewindfarmsissix

monthstotwoyears,unless

theyarebuiltonforested

peatlands;if thatisthecasethe

paybackperiodcanbeuptosix

years.Foroffshorewindthe

rangeisfivemonthstoone

year.Allofthesearewell

withinanassumedlifetimeof

20 years.

Theauthorsalsoconsid-

eredtheimpactonefficiency

of“conventional”generation

ofoperatingatlowercapacity

becauseofthepresenceof

windpowerinthesystem,and

concludethattheimpactis

marginal.Windturbinesthat

wereconstructedupto 30 years

agoarestillgoingstrong.

kitbeazley

Malmesbury,Wiltshire

Electing a prime minister

Could The Economiststop

sarcastically drawing attention

to the apparent paucity of Boris

Johnson’s mandate? Bagehot is

the latest culprit: “Mr Johnson

was installed in Downing

Street in July by an electorate of

just 160,000 Conservative Party

members” (November 2nd).

Winston Churchill (in 1940),

Anthony Eden, Harold

Macmillan and Alec Douglas-

Home were put in office as

prime minister by only a hand-

ful of people. Jim Callaghan

was selected as Labour leader

and both John Major and

Theresa May as Tory leader by

between 300 and 400 mps.

Gordon Brown became prime

minister without a vote being

taken in the Labour Party at all.

I don’t recall The Economist

banging on about the lack of

mandate for these prime min-

isters; okay, except for Mr

Brown (Bagehot, August 2nd

2008). Furthermore, before Mr

Johnson, only Eden actually

called an election soon after

entering Number 10.

I hold no brief for Mr

Johnson, but he won the Tory

leadership through the accept-

ed party system. A prime min-

ister’s mandate is justified by

the rules that provide it, not by

a crude numbers game.

kieron o’hara

The Hague

An eventual taste of freedom

Romania was mentioned only

once, as “a grisly counter-

example” to the bloodless

disintegration of the Soviet

Union in “Thirty years of free-

dom, warts and all” (November

2nd). Indeed, Romania’s excep-

tionally bloody revolution may

deserve its own article later

this year when it celebrates the

end of the Ceausescu regime,

which culminated in the exe-

cution of the president and his

wife on December 25th 1989.

My late father was impris-

oned in the late 1980s for

crossing the border into

Yugoslavia. In 2014 we took a

road trip, crossing four Euro-

pean borders. He was amazed

that there were virtually no

controls from Romania to

France. It was one of the high-

lights of his life. A bloody

revolution, yes, but some

stories do have a happy ending.

elena ocenic

Sibiu, Romania

The bald sage of New York

We can all relate to having a

cognitive bias (“This article is

full of lies”, November 2nd). An

episode of “Seinfeld” nailed it

with the advice that George

Costanza gave to Jerry before a

lie-detector test: “It’s not a lie,

if you believe it.”

matt demichiei

Warrensburg, Missouri