I couldn't wait I had to jump on this BS:
Business Ethics is laid out like this. Basically the teacher would talk about a subject, usually the environment, and then he would show ONE point of view on some news reports he copied from TV and Michael Moore episodes and a San Francisco textbook.
Next you would have to write a paper with YOUR point of view on a the subject. The next class you would get a mark out of 4. If you aligned with the point of view closest to Michael Moore and the instructor you would get 4/4. If you didn't you would get a 2/4. The rest of the class he would talk about the same subject and what would have given you full marks.
Now going back to the beginning of the course the instructor mentioned that he wasn't a socialist, because there have been many complaints of this instructor, and that he believes in markets but we must have a balanced view.
The point of the course in the end was to get the students to believe that corporations should ignore the interests of shareholders. Nevermind that without shareholder investment there is no company. Next the corporation, now ignoring shareholders, has to create social programs like daycare paid by the corp. and the shareholders will have to eat less dividends. Michael Moore in one episode said "F the shareholders!" Michael Moore is a rich shareholder so I guess he's saying "F myself!" Nevermind that not all corporations can afford this, and if forced to they would have to pass the cost of social programs onto the consumer for their products.
The last point he had to make was to get us to study HIS economic plan. He basically took an intro economics course and was disgusted by the 1st class that he quit the course. He then made a cute chart of households and firms and added the sun, made a "holistic" chart that includes the environment.
So now areas of the government are included into corporations so basically the cost will ultimately bankrupt these companies and then government will have to take it over.
One article he made us read basically asserted that "if companies don't adopt socially motivated goals and look mainly to the shareholders then the government will have to take over." It's an offer you can't refuse.
Why would anyone invest in a company that doesn't look at a return on investment as their #1 goal? The government has it's place and he basically wants all the regulation and court system to be ignored, because it's too slow for him, and the companies should do all that.
The class was a mandatory class for all accountants. I couldn't, (like my instructor), quit my class out of disgust. I had to take it. So I wrote anti corporation style and got around 3/4's from then on. Of course those who copied from the start got 4/4 and A+ at the end of the course which would obviously solidify their liking the instructor and him continuing on. Anyways most students don't turn conservative until they have to work, pay bills, and pay taxes. Not all hope is lost.
I talked to another student who was about to take that business ethics course and I told him how to pass it with honors. I told him to be super critical of business and just mirror his opinion based on the instructor. He would show up after class with a serious look on his face. "The course is just regurgitation!" I told him to keep it up because the mark is more important. Do not disagree with him. He ended up with an A+.
I talked to one girl from my business ethics class who aced it. I kept thinking to myself. Maybe A+ should be a failure. No work was necessary to get it, just conformism. I also noticed her body language. There's this thing about university courses like this that basically target a cause and then set the student up as "hero" and then the student gets an exagerrated ego and self-importance that instructors hope will translate into future "social corporation" attitudes. Once they try to pay their bills and as accountants they try and pay the bills of the company hopefully they will see it's not really the place of companies to act like government.
Hopefully with this extra detail you can sympathize with my point of view. Sure the instructor can't torture me, because he doesn't have the power to do so, but he did single me out and others just like Communists do. Some people were ethically stronger than me and continued to argue with the professor but they only got 50% by the end of the course. It wouldn't be in the interest of the school to fail people because lawyers would get involved and the school would have to answer for those tactics by institutions they don't control.
This idea of targeting students is not uncommon. The Marxist form has been done since the 1960's. I'm just a newer generation that had to go through it.
At least I got my degree and don't have to go back there again.