Thoughts on the last day of classes
So today is my last day of classes at TUJ. I usually use this blog to post experiences and observations about my travels in Japan and Asia, but I can't forget that the main reason that I'm in Tokyo is to study law and learn more about international law in particular. Lawyers are infamous for greediness, selfishness, and pomposity, and like almost all stereotypes, there is some truth to that statement, but not without cause. Most of us have given huge chunks of our lives up to studying and have large amounts of debt from tuition bills and living expenses for seven years, many of us wondering whether the enormous investment of time, energy, and money has been worth the all-nighters, the wrangling over unfairly curved grades, law journal cite checks, etc. Therefore, it is only natural that many lawyers feel like they rightly deserve to make a very comfortable living and accumulate wealth for the future and for their families.
This semester, I've taken a host of classes focusing on international corporate transactions, negotiations, arbitration and taxation. Sometimes I get questions from friends who know that my passion is human rights, rooting out corruption in government, and bringing justice to those who commit horrific crimes like genocide and starving their own people in order to get richer. "Are you going to be a corporate lawyer, now?" they ask. The answer is no, but with clarifications.
Non-profit organizations do much to help individuals without voice or means to litigate a dispute. However, my main criticism of some non-profit organizations and NGOs is an overreaching idealism, spurning the study of and negotiation with institutions like large corporations, simply because they do not agree with the whole idea of corporate profit-taking without giving anything back to people. And I agree that corporations usually consist of people from the upper eschelons of society, and they often have more respect, rights, and power than the vast majority of ordinary citizens whose rights and freedoms politicians are bound to protect under the Constitution.
However, overreaching idealism and ignorance of corporate operations and law promotes an us vs. them approach to dealing with multinational corporations, a tact that is silly and ignores the present entrenched power structure in society. I advocate pragmatic idealism instead: It is better to learn more about corporate dealings and appeal to the better nature of executives who have a conscience and those who believe that, not to sound superheroeish or cheesy, but with great power comes great responsibility.
And so, when I hear a classmate compare the intellectual property rights of the Walt Disney Company, a cartoon studio, to the intellectual property rights of pharmeceutical companies who have in their possession the patents of thousands of life-saving drugs that could end the suffering of millions of poor people all over the world, a little part of me dies inside. And then, to hear a professor, another person in a position of power, advocate that stance and stifle all discussion to the contrary with the statement, "Hey, pharmaceutical companies get a bad rap! Why criticize them? They're just out to make money like everyone else!" it's almost impossible to bust out in a fit of rage.
So I need to get this out: Don't live up to your stereotypes. Some lawyers genuinely love crunching numbers, advising on business transactions, and negotiating big deals, and that is wonderful. But when the almighty buck begins to cloud your view of humanity and darken your soul, that's when there is a problem. Attorneys are put into a powerful position in society; some were born into this position and some had to fight and work tooth and nail to get there, but regardless of where you started, please recognize that the greatest attorneys, the ones who are remembered years and years from now are the ones that advocated for the people. Corporations may dissolve, shareholders may opt out, but it is not the same as a person dying despite there being live-saving medication in the world to ease their pain.
And that is my piece.
This semester, I've taken a host of classes focusing on international corporate transactions, negotiations, arbitration and taxation. Sometimes I get questions from friends who know that my passion is human rights, rooting out corruption in government, and bringing justice to those who commit horrific crimes like genocide and starving their own people in order to get richer. "Are you going to be a corporate lawyer, now?" they ask. The answer is no, but with clarifications.
Non-profit organizations do much to help individuals without voice or means to litigate a dispute. However, my main criticism of some non-profit organizations and NGOs is an overreaching idealism, spurning the study of and negotiation with institutions like large corporations, simply because they do not agree with the whole idea of corporate profit-taking without giving anything back to people. And I agree that corporations usually consist of people from the upper eschelons of society, and they often have more respect, rights, and power than the vast majority of ordinary citizens whose rights and freedoms politicians are bound to protect under the Constitution.
However, overreaching idealism and ignorance of corporate operations and law promotes an us vs. them approach to dealing with multinational corporations, a tact that is silly and ignores the present entrenched power structure in society. I advocate pragmatic idealism instead: It is better to learn more about corporate dealings and appeal to the better nature of executives who have a conscience and those who believe that, not to sound superheroeish or cheesy, but with great power comes great responsibility.
And so, when I hear a classmate compare the intellectual property rights of the Walt Disney Company, a cartoon studio, to the intellectual property rights of pharmeceutical companies who have in their possession the patents of thousands of life-saving drugs that could end the suffering of millions of poor people all over the world, a little part of me dies inside. And then, to hear a professor, another person in a position of power, advocate that stance and stifle all discussion to the contrary with the statement, "Hey, pharmaceutical companies get a bad rap! Why criticize them? They're just out to make money like everyone else!" it's almost impossible to bust out in a fit of rage.
So I need to get this out: Don't live up to your stereotypes. Some lawyers genuinely love crunching numbers, advising on business transactions, and negotiating big deals, and that is wonderful. But when the almighty buck begins to cloud your view of humanity and darken your soul, that's when there is a problem. Attorneys are put into a powerful position in society; some were born into this position and some had to fight and work tooth and nail to get there, but regardless of where you started, please recognize that the greatest attorneys, the ones who are remembered years and years from now are the ones that advocated for the people. Corporations may dissolve, shareholders may opt out, but it is not the same as a person dying despite there being live-saving medication in the world to ease their pain.
And that is my piece.
Labels: Law in Japan
posted by Wicked Words at 7:39 AM
3 Comments:
Hear, hear. You go, girl.
I do appreciate your idealism. I hope you always keep it close and use it to make the world a better place. I do plan to chase the almighty dollar for a while to pay off the mountains of debt of which you talked about. But hopefully someday I too will do some real good for the world. One point, as I speak from my soapbox. There are many people in this world working for NGO's making pittlin's (made up suthern word), who may hold the title of philanthropist, but at the end of the day, they'll pass a mother on the street panning for bread money and ignore her while they have dollars in their pocket. That same person may not stop to pick up the piece of trash that is about to be consumed by a flying pigeon who will subsequently become sick and die. That same person may go to church on sunday yet have the heart of a beast. But have the "title" of philanthropist....
Yet someone else may work for Donald Trump himself as corporate counsel and make astronimical gorbs of money as an attorney invisible to all but the tax collector. That same attorney may have the label of snake, or tool, but he may be the very one to stop and pick up that piece of trash, or make an extra trip to the ATM to get cash out to give the mother panhandling in the street for her 2 kids. That same labelled "snake" may do more good for his world with his paycheck than the philanthropic woman at the NGO.
As we have seen first-hand this semester as friends have turned to foes, it's the heart that matters. It's whats inside that eventually outshines the outer layer. You can never judge a book by its cover, and sometimes the end of the story is worth all the trouble in getting there.
I'm glad that I have you as my friend. May we both do good to the world around us. And may we always stay in touch, even though we may walk separate paths.
Right on, Rachel. Don't get me wrong, I deeply admire Bill Gates and the others who have made their fortures and choose to spend their dollars charitably, but I do think such people are in the minority. I simply can't ignore that the majority of people in the business world are greedy, smug schmucks. But yet again, I also think that most people who work at non-profits are blind to the realities of the world they are trying to change. Here's to finding the happy medium between idealism and realism.
Post a Comment
<< Home