Way back in 1970, Dr. Milton Friedman postulated an heretical (at least for then) idea in the New York Times Magazine. (The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits, 13 September 1970. There is no link, because it predates the internet.) The fact that it took hold over corporate thinking was, to me, amazing.

Sure, Nixon was president. And, Friedman was a leader in the Chicago School of Economics (a very right wing establishment). But, this document lacked academic (read: scientific) rigor.

In essence, Friedman’s doctrine jettisoned the theory that corporations are legal fiction and that executives had responsibility to their employees. (Actually, the executive should be an employee of the stockholders, and not one of the corporation). Given that leap of logic, it became clear that the corporation’s treasury was not a corporate asset, but the property of the stockholders. (It also has led to the ability of hedge funds to strip away assets from companies they take over for their own benefit, leaving the corporate shell barely capable of survival.)

This impetus became the beginning of global competition and enterprises. And, this doctrine led to the way for executives to obtain inflated compensation. In 1976, the concept of inflated salaries was codified by Jensen and Meckling’s treatment in the Journal of Financial Economics [Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure]. Jensen and Meckling built upon the concept of corporations being legal fictions (and, thereby, don’t exist), that corporate money is an asset of the stockholders (and not the corporation), but since the focus of the enterprise should be solely making money for the stockholders, then corporations should make executives major stockholders. As such, these executives would receive generous compensation in the form of stock. And, feathering their nests would be considered a benefit to stockholders. (Yeah. Right. A stockholder benefit. As opposed to ridiculous executive compensation.)

But, since this terrible idea made some people a ton of money, it became the standard doctrine. And, then, Reagan and Thatcher came to power and proclaimed that economic freedom was the norm- which meant making money was the solution.

Jack Welch (a PhD chemical engineer) took over at General Electric. And, he became the prime implementer of the shareholder value theory. And, GE proved the point- after all, it’s value rose from $14 billion to $484 billion during his tenure.

Of course, the return on assets (and invested capital) of corporations was decimated by this theory. From 1965 to 2012, return on assets for US corpirations managed to drop by ¾. Moreover, while executive compensation exploded, corporate performance failed miserably.

And, it’s why executive compensation is now 100X, 200X, even 500X the average wages of all those employed by their firms. And, complaints about the 1% are rampant in our society. But, changing that business environment has been hard.

Until just recently. It is entirely possible that TheDonald and his tone-deaf (and anti-American) response to the Charlottesville Terrorist Acts may be the turning point. (If we call the driving of cars and trucks into citizens in France and Spain terrorism, then the same rule must apply here in the States.)

To what point has this executive and corporate mantra change manifested? To the point that corporations do have a responsibility to their local community, to their domicile. In this era of the internet and social media, there is pressure on executives to begin conforming to social norms and to be consistent with the ethos of our citizenry.

The Charlottesville situation forced corporate executives to recognize that focusing on maximizing profits and share prices is no longer morally tenable. Despite the run-up (and general stock market euphoria) of stock prices, corporate executives recognized two key facts that may be the force that causes a resumption of corporate social responsibility.

First, it’s becoming established doctrine that Congress will not effect tax reform or regulatory relief the way TheDonald (and Republicans) have promised. After all, no bills have passed in the Capitol- not even the long-promised (7 years and counting) repeal of PPACA [the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as Obamacare].

But, even if something were to be passed, the repugnancy surrounding TheDonald- his words, his actions, and his beliefs- forced executives to recognize that their staff and their customers are unwilling to tolerate the moral compromises that will obtain by allying business with those interests.

Finally, as much as Reagan and his ilk have managed to erode our faith in government, corporations have eviscerated the faith America has in the morality- and economic superiority- of crony capitalism. (We no longer truly practice free-market capitalism.) Two financial debacles, two recessions, a recovery so anemic that many doubt its existence have changed the landscape. And, even if there is a recovery, the benefits of that recovery have accrued only to the richest 10% of our citizenry (actually closer to the 4%), which has sealed that loss of faith in the capitalism practiced in the States..

(In just 10 years, Americans’ belief that capitalism is good has dropped from 80% to 60%- which is lower than what obtains in China. Oh- and only 42% of millennials feel capitalism is worthwhile.)

Of course, I can be entirely more cynical. After all, is not TheDonald driving us to cynicism? TheDonald offered these companies the ability to claim virtue to consumers and other businesses- with very, very little downside for such actions. After all, the younger, the wealthier, and the urban consumers abhor TheDonald. Given that these folks comprise the prime corporate targets, maybe the firms are pandering.

I hope not.

I hope we see this as a major shift, one whose momentum will be obvious in a decade or so. Will we attribute that shift to the Black CEO of Merck, Kenneth Frazier, who propounded (as he quit his association with TheDonald) that “America’s leaders must honor our fundamental values by clearly rejecting expressions of hatred, bigotry and group supremacy, which run counter to the American ideal that all people are created equal.” Or, to Brian Krzanich (Intel’s CEO), who demanded leadership “set scoring political points aside and focus on what is best for the nation as a whole”. Or, maybe to Howard Schultz (Starbucks) who told his folks that “the bigotry and the hatred and the senseless acts of violence against people who are not white cannot stand. Not in this country.”

May we go from strength to strength. Our country- and our citizenry- need no less.