[
    {
        "id": 209904,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1983",
        "page_number": 163,
        "title": "RAS-1983",
        "content_text": "141\n\nsophisticated view of the Hong Kong government as practising ‘macroeconomic laissez-faire and microeconomic intervention’, see Glassburner and Riedel 1972). This type of economic jungle had once existed in Chinese coastal cities. In Fei Xiao-tong’s view, the ‘morally unstable’ elements in Chinese society had congregated in these cities to become the early Chinese bourgeoisie (1946: 14-15):\n\nto such ports a special type of Chinese was attracted. They are known as Compradors... They are unscrupulous, pecuniary, individualistic, and agnostic, not only in religion but cultural values. Treaty ports are ultraurban. They are a land where the acquisition of wealth is the sole motive, devoid of tradition and culture\n\nAs their children grow up, they give them modern education and send them abroad to attend Western universities. From this group a new class is formed\n\nBut, being reared in a cosmopolitan community, they are fundamentally hybrids. In them are manifest the comprador characteristic of social irresponsibility.”\n\nSome of the offspring of this bourgeoisie had migrated to Hong Kong in the 1940s and set up a new textile industry. Their moral rectitude had apparently not been strengthened. Oksenberg finds the industrialists in the cotton spinning and weaving industries to be ‘not civic minded men’ but men motivated by ‘unbridled avarice’, (1972: 6).\n\nTwo hypotheses about the social ethics of Hong Kong’s cotton spinning industrialists have thus emerged. First, proportionally fewer of them would subscribe to the doctrine of social responsibility than their Western counterparts. Second, they were mostly economic men of the classical laissez-faire mould. In order to test these hypotheses, I used a modified version of the forced choice questionnaire developed by Nichols (1969: 254-255). Nichols assumes the existence of three ideological positions with reference to the social ethics of business. Other than the social responsibility and laissez-faire positions, he posits a third orientation that justifies business decisions in terms of the long range interests of the company. He chooses four areas of concern: redundancy provisions for workers; the social\n\nI",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209933,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1983",
        "page_number": 192,
        "title": "RAS-1983",
        "content_text": "170\n\nGlassburner, Bruce, and James Riedel. 1972. “Government in The Economy of Hong Kong\", Economic Record 48, No. 1: 58-75.\n\nHeilbroner, Robert Louis. 1964. \"The View From The Top: Reflections on a Changing Business Ideology\". In The Business Establishment, ed. by E.F. Cheit, New York, John Wiley and Sons, pp. 1-36.\n\nHirschmeier, Johannes. 1964. The Origins of Entrepreneurship in Meiji Japan. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.\n\nHo, Ping-ti. 1962. The Ladder of Success in Imperial China: Aspects of Social Mobility, 1368-1911. New York and London, Columbia University Press.\n\nHong Kong Cotton Spinners Association. 1973. \"Annual Reports of The General Committee\". Hong Kong, The Association, mimeographed.\n\nKing, Ambrose Y.C., and Davy H.K. Leung, 1975. \"The Chinese Touch in Small Industrial Organization\". Hong Kong, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Social Research Centre, occasional paper.\n\nLevy, Marion J., Jr. 1955. “Contrasting Factors in The Modernization of China and Japan\". In Economic Growth: Brazil, India, Japan, ed. by S. Kuznets, W.E. Moore, and J.J. Spengler, Durham, Duke University Press, pp. 496-536.\n\nMcClelland, David C. 1963. \"Motivational Patterns in Southeast Asia with Special Reference to the Chinese Case\". The Journal of Social Issues 19, No. 1: 6-19.\n\nMannheim, Karl. 1936. Ideology and Utopia. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.\n\nMarx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. (1888) 1967. The Communist Manifesto. Harmondsworth, Penguin Books.\n\nMayer, K. 1953. \"Business Enterprise: Traditional Symbol of Opportunity\". British Journal of Sociology 4, No. 2: 160-180.\n\nMiners, Norman, 1981. The Government and Politics of Hong Kong. Hong Kong, Oxford University Press.\n\nNichols, Theo. 1969. Ownership, Control, and Ideology: An Inquiry Into Certain Aspects of Modern Business Ideology. London, George Allen and Unwin.\n\nOksenberg, Michel. 1972. \"Management Practices in The Hong Kong Cotton Spinning and Weaving Industry.\" Paper read at seminar on Modern East Asia, Columbia University.\n\nOlson, Stephen M. 1972. \"The Inculcation of Economic Values in Taipei Business Families\". In Economic Organization in Chinese Society, ed. by William F. Willmott, Stanford, Stanford University Press, pp. 261-296.\n\nOwen, Nicholas C. 1971. \"Economic Policy in Hong Kong\". In Hong Kong: The Industrial Colony, ed. by Keith Hopkins, Hong Kong, Oxford University Press.\n\nPan, F.K. 1974. \"The Simple Truth of Management and Maintenance”, a lecture delivered on 21st June, Hong Kong.\n\nRyan, Edward, 1961. \"The Value System of a Chinese Community in Java\". Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.\n\nSeider, Maynard S. 1974. \"American Big Business Ideology: A Content Analysis of Executive Speeches\". American Sociological Review 39, No. 6: 802-815.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v",
        "rank": 0
    }
]