Category: Absolutism

Assessing the Ethics of Price Gouging During the Covid-19 Pandemic

The topic of exploitative pricing has been a long-standing theme irrespective of the world situation. However, due to the recent Covid-19 pandemic, the controversy of excessive pricing on unforeseen circumstances has become a central debate again. According to OECD (2020), attributable to the coronavirus, the business environment has been subjected to instability resulting in the disruption of supply chains. The insufficient production and difficulties in product distribution, simultaneously, with increased demand, has led to shortages in certain products (ibid). As a result, price gouging occurred. Accordingly, this leads us to consider the notion of fairness, just and ethicality. In this way, the following essay will define exploitative pricing with a highlight on particular examples in the times of Covid-19. Subsequently, evaluating on the ethicality of price raising during a pandemic with the justification of various ethical theories.

As defined by Snyder (2009), exploitative price, also known as price gouging, refers to the sudden price increase for necessities after disasters. Using the case of Covid-19 as an example, a significant price rises can be observed in a number of essential products among the world. For instance, in most European and African countries, there is a sudden surge in sanitary products and protective equipment such as surgical masks, gloves and hand sanitizers (OECD, 2020). Besides, an overcharging price is also reviewed in the coronavirus tests and even funeral services. In order to minimize exploitative abuses, competition authorities have announced different actions as a response.

From the presented example, the first theory to be discussed is the ethical relativism. According to Frederick (1999), ethical relativism demonstrates the impossible existence of universalism. In other words, it articulates the difference in culture within countries as what is considered right and moral in one might be illegal and wrong in another. This theory can be applied to exemplify the difference in excessive pricing regulations among Europe and the US. With regard to the EU competition law, it is stated that irrespective of the circumstances, it is unfair and unmoral to impose unreasonable price on products (Giosa, 2020). However, in countries such as the US, Australia, Canada and Mexico, there exists no prohibition of excessive pricing (OECD, 2020). The phenomenon is simply a reflection of the outcome in a free-market system and is completely not unlawful. Hence, to determine whether price raising is ethical during a pandemic, ethical absolutism, which depicts a ‘whenever, whoever and wherever’ universal truth, might be an appropriate application (Frederick, 1999). This theory reviews a consistency when confronting the pandemic which is demonstrated by Cary et al. (2020) recognizing that sudden and significant price hikes should be investigated and prohibited despite this is an inevitable situation occurred with rapid soar in demand. The acknowledgement can be presented by the launch of actions to pursue price gouging and protect consumers’ welfare. In the US, there is a price gouging law which avoids excessive pricing for essential products during abnormal supply chain disruptions, whereas the European competition authorities have enforced a series of tasks forces such as temporary price controls on hygiene products and investigating overpricing of face masks among online platforms (OECD, 2020).

However, although the word ‘exploitative’ is denoted as an unethical behavior in its nature, one may argue that ethical absolutism does not explain whether the ethical view is morally justifiable. Nevertheless, while ethical absolutism summarizes an unethical behavior in exploitative pricing during pandemic, ethical relativism does not provide a clear ethical guideline in price gouging behavior under normal circumstances.

Absolutism in Leadership of Peter the Great and Louis XVI: Analytical Essay

Both Louis XVI and Peter the Great were robust and influential leaders of their time. Louis XVI served as France’s last king between the years 1774 and 1992 in the era correspondent to the time of revolution in France. On the other hand, Peter the Great was a Russian emperor ruling between 1685 and 1725. As rulers, Louis and Peter were focused on achieving remarkable things, and as a result, the two had significant similarities in their goals, although their policies to achieve the goals also depicted some differences.

The leadership of both leaders can get regarded as autocratic, whereby they both perceived that decision making about their countries rested on them. Additionally, they were both interested in the expansion of their respective countries aiming to expand physically, acquire more land, and raise stronger armies to raise the prestige of their countries. In this regard, they both made considerable investments in such developments especially Versailles for Louis and St. Petersburg for Peter the Great. Therefore, as rulers, they took absolutism as a weapon of gaining power, although while Peter the Great mostly focused on making improvements on Russia to institute change, Louis XVI aimed at expanding the territories of France.

The nobility held incredible control in limiting both status and power in controlling the government and larger societies at both the reigns of Russian Peter the Great and France Louis XIV. As autocrats, they placed the nobles at distinct and separate positions from the community so that they could be able to watch happenings at a closer point. Also, their ideas on religion had a remarkable impact on the power and position of the nobility. Considering that the two had deep roots in the protestant faith, although it never gained positivity in the long run for Louis. The two rulers took numerous measures in subduing both their governments and nobility since they chose to despise them.

Self-sufficiency rose as an achievement to both Louis XVI and Peter the Great’s countries. The success was triggered by favorable outcomes in the cultural and economic trends facilitated by the absolute monarchs. For instance, Louis XVI utilized the incentives acquired from taxes and funds from the government to raise production rapidly. Besides, Peter the Great utilized the immense knowledge acquired about Europeans’ reforms, and successfully applied them to improve Russia (Platonova, 2009). As a result, he introduced a voyage school with improved education systems and St. Petersburg port, which had an outstanding convenience fr travels to the western region by sea.

Restriction of nobility powers bore consequences on both France and Russia. When the two rulers restricted these powers, Louis made efforts to make the aristocratic movement weak by exempting the aristocrats from the national assembly. On the other hand, by Peter the Great building the port, Moscow was able to settle within the capital. Moreover, Louis constructed a capital in Versailles for aristocrats to serve he princes as they depended on him exclusively, thus attaining more power (Mansel, 2019). Also, as aristocrats were used by Peter on his port, Louis made aristocracy inferior as it was already weak.

In a nutshell, both Peter the Great and Louis Xvi utilized absolutism significantly in their leadership. However, they used different methods of detaining nobility, but they both acquired self-sufficiency. Also, they employed diverse methods in making developments in their countries while utilizing absolute monarchy. It is thus evident that although absolutism took root in the two rulers, it was used for different aims and in diverse methods.