The Beast at HR vs. The Puritan Gift

HR as the False Prophet of the Beast

While certainly HR is a center of Satanic activity, it should be understood when it became a form of Ideological Supervision at private workplaces: with the Civil Rights Act, to bring justice to the blacks.

IIRC, the Civil Rights Act was expanded to cover women due to the desire of a Southern politician, seeking vengeance. A decision that has it own repercussions.

(I would really date the shift to the rise of the Business degrees and the School of Business, especially the Masters of Business Administration. When senior company officers no longer rose through the ranks, but were appointed from on high, and began to be vetted by the ever-more-intensely anti-Christian academics.)

Statist Solutions to unremitting Christian failure is an ugly thing. But that has been true since the end of the Divine Right of Kings via the French Revolution, or the victory of the ex-Puritan Unitarians/ proto-Progressives during the Civil War.

Unlike European Christianity, though, American Christianity is not an artifact of the dead past. There is enough self-governance, enough of a willingness to change, enough liberty — and, fundamentally enough parents actively raising a Christian future — to build a better future.

I am not sure if there is enough repentance among White Conservative Christians: if there is, then things will start looking up for them. The pagans see guilt as a reason to forever grind down their cultural enemies

— ceremonially re-enacting their past victories,
as a kind of political magic spell to keep power in the Right Hands
and the Inferiors properly humiliated and dominated —

but God sees repentance as a reason for rebirth and re-strengthening His people. White and Black alike.1

Time will tell what road is chosen.

What I do know is that the Progressives are, indeed, the party for a totalitarian dictatorship. But is this dictatorship as unjust and as cruel as slavery days or the hour of the lynch mob? Or is it about the same level of evil, just geared to different objectives?

Or is todays rule of the perverse, in truth, less evil and destructive than the dark days of the past: unjust and lawless, but fundamentally less brutal and oppressive, all things considered?

Hard to measure evil vs evil. But God does this, and He expects His adopted sons and daughters, regardless of race, to grow their skill in judgement.

Improving your judgement before God is, after all, is necessary to secure your lawful right to rule in His eyes. And such growth is not gained in a year, perhaps not even a decade. It takes practice, and reproof/punishment for errors…

… and rewards for getting it right.

Another thing I know: the current PC Regime is, like the Segregationist Regime before it — and the Slavery Regime before THAT — heavily dependent on government support. A government that has been morally bankrupt for some time. When it becomes financially bankrupt, the charade will vanish like a mist.

And — if they are willing to pay the price — Christians can determine what comes after the PC Empire.

  • Will they choose to go down some half-wit Mighty Man road, down fascism or clerical rule or a presidential dictatorship?
  • Or will they finally take God’s Law seriously, and go down the decentralized road and bottom-up localism, leaving the days of the Centralized Pagan Empire behind? Restoring America One County at a Time, as it were?

There should be many spheres of government – family, civil, church, and other (non-covenantal) associations – but all under only one Lord, Jesus Christ, and one Law-Word, as given to Moses and modified/fulfilled by King Jesus.

It’s time to let Caesar rot.

Why You Don’t Need an MBA

Copy/Paste from Why You Don’t Need an MBA, by Gary North, a good review of The Puritan Gift.

(But also see the free downloads Enterprising Americans: A Business History of the United States by John Chamberlain and Puritan Economic Experiments by Gary North)

—<Quote begins>—

This story was featured in Business Insider. The head of the Harvard Business School has issued an apology: it has not treated women well. This is standard stuff in academia. It’s politically correct.

He said that HBS will include more case studies in which women played the main role. Only 20% of the studies have this today. He promises to take it to 40%.

I’m for it. I’m not for it for the reasons he gave.


One of the best books on business that I have ever read is titled The Puritan Gift. It is a frontal assault on Harvard Business School and all schools of management. The authors think it was a crucial mistake for businesses to substitute formal classroom education for on-the-job experience. They think that the slowdown in American economic growth since 1970 was partially caused by the rise of business schools.

Here is a very good review on Amazon.

As the title suggests, this story — for this is no dry text destined for those soulless time-serving senior managers and executives intent on seeking the latest snake oil with which to lubricate their legitimized theft of shareholder funds — traces the origins of contemporary management back to the strict disciplines of the Puritan migrants of the 1630s and their flight to America. The authors list the four abiding aspects of Puritanism which infused the managerial culture established by the descendants of those early settlers as being: 1) the purpose of life was to establish the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth; 2) an aptitude for mechanical skills; 3) a moral outlook that subordinates the interest of the individual to the group; and, 4) an ability to gather, galvanize and marshal financial, material and human resources to a single purpose at whatever scale. More briefly put: Rectitude, Pragmatism, Teamwork, and Leadership. An Appendix summarizes the quintessential of the book in a most useful listing of the authors’ 25 principles underlying good practice from the Golden Age of Management (1920-1970).

If I were to teach a course in a business school on succeeding in business, this is the book I would assign. Of course, I would not teach in a business school.

The fact that the Harvard Business School is now moving the direction of having more case studies in which women were the protagonists is good for this reason: it moves the business school away from the idea that there is some universal formula for running a business. The fact that the HBS will distinguish between businesses run by men and businesses run by women is exactly what is needed. Of course, it does not go nearly far enough. But at least it admits the obvious: there is no universal management system. There is no universal system that women can adopt and men can adopt in order to achieve maximum output, meaning maximum profitability.

The heart of the book is this: the knowledge that is gained through years of experience in a company cannot be matched by formulas taught in a business school. In other words, there is no universal means of applying a formula to any particular business, which is going to be a predictable advantage to that business. The kind of knowledge that is required is so specialized, and so tied to the atmosphere of a particular business, that it cannot even be expressed effectively in the form of a book or a teaching manual. It is knowledge gained after years of experience. It is not innate knowledge, but it becomes instinctive knowledge. The individual understands a particular situation in terms of a pattern that he cannot articulate, but he nevertheless understands it, because he has gained this knowledge through years of experience.

I like to give the example of tying your shoes. How would you write the instructions for tying a shoelace? Would these instructions be easily understood by somebody who wanted to learn how to tie his shoelaces? Even worse, what if the instruction were to tie shoelaces if you’re left-handed? The account would be long. The account would be incoherent. You would be much wiser to use a video. Best yet, you would train the person individually.

The kind of knowledge that is conveyed in a textbook is very close to useless in a specific environment, especially the environment of a small business. The people who attend the Harvard Business School expect to walk into a large corporation in a middle management capacity. This is a recipe for disaster. It is a recipe for disaster for the individual graduate, and is also a disaster for the company that hires him. Or hires her.

The case for the case study approach is this: it is specific. But if the case study approach does not lead to generalizations that are based on the cases, then of what use are they? How do you learn how to run a business, when all you have are textbook accounts of completely unrelated businesses? The case for the case study method is based on this assumption: the study of individual cases is a legitimate and effective substitute for on-the-job training in a specific business. The Puritan Gift shows that an intense study of specific cases isn’t an effective substitute.

A now-retired friend of mine was the head of a conglomerate. He got his degree from Harvard Business School over 40 years ago. He sent his daughter to get a degree from the Harvard Business School. He told me that what you get from three years there is a filled Rolodex. You get personal contact with very smart people who are going to go into the business world. You meet the people a year ahead of you. You meet the people in your own class. You meet the people a year behind you. You may even meet people two years behind you, if you actively cultivate them. This is also true for the people who are two years ahead of you. But, basically, most of the contacts will be those who are closest to you in age and experience and grade level. These contacts are important, he said. I have no doubt that they are. But that does not solve the basic problem, namely, how to get the experience you need to be an effective manager. The way you do this, according to the authors of The Puritan Gift, is to start out at the bottom in a company, stay with the company, and move up the chain of command as you gain greater experience.

Another reviewer writes this.

The Hoppers’ book should be a page-turner for people interested in 20th century business. From his personal experience, Ken Hopper, an industrial consultant, has culled thousands of facts and distilled them into a package of wit and wisdom that many academics would envy. Virtually every page in the first half of the book has some new insight into how American manufacturing came to lead the world, to transform Japan (and through it, much of Asia), and go astray. While other publications have made use of his comments on salary ratios, this reviewer found his focus on the role of shop-floor leaders and problem-solvers to be an important contribution to the literature. The critique of the “B-school” mentality, while common these days, was prescient in the late 20th century.

A third reviewer noted this.

The Puritan Gift was recommended to me by a financial journalist and he said it was the best management book he had ever read — I entirely agree with him — but like all great books you have to ‘get it’ to see the wisdom in it. This will become a classic — but will probably not find its way onto many business school shelves or on MBA reading lists as it rightly illustrates the woeful inadequacy of management education in the second half of the 20th century.

I do not think that any reform of the Harvard Business School is going to improve significantly on the classroom education provided by the school. The education that matters there is this: an education in making personal contacts with very bright people who are on a fast track into large corporations. Maybe one of them will be able to give you a job at some point. Or maybe you will be able to give him a job. The point is, the school trains you to begin as a middle manager in a large corporation. It is better to launch your own business, and make it successful enough so that you can hire bean counters from a major business school, not because of their ability to count beans, but because of their personal contacts.


I don’t think people should worry about the fact that they do not have an MBA. Unless you attend one of the most prestigious MBA schools, meaning Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, or Chicago, the MBA is not to make a fundamental difference in your performance on the job. What is going to make the crucial difference is your ability to assess specific situations in terms of the existing climate of opinion and tradition within a specific corporation.

—<Quote ends>—

1 If Black Americans think they have no reason to repent, they have another thing coming. They have sorely grieved God with their own flavour of sin, violence, perversion, and lawlessness: they also need to repent, if for different reasons.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.