Corporations socialize and civilize through profit motives absent in client economies.

Evidence

Does this make Third World men more sexist than David Rockefeller? The nativist argument that says “do not question Third World mores” is of course unexamined imperialism. There is something like an answer to this vexed question, which makes problematic the ground upon which we base our own intellectual and political activities. No one can deny the dynamism and civilizing power of socialized capital. The irreducible search for greater production of surplus-value (dissimulated as, simply, “productivity”) through technological advancement; the corresponding necessity to train a consumer who will need what is produced and thus help realize surplus-value as profit; the tax breaks associated with supporting humanist ideology through “corporate philanthropy”—all conspire to “civilize.” These motives do not exist on a large scale in a comprador economy like that of South Korea, which is neither the necessary recipient nor the agent of socialized capital. The surplus-value is realized elsewhere. The nuclear family does not have a transcendent ennobling power. The fact that ideology and the ideology of marriage have developed in the West since the English revolution of the seventeenth century has something like a relationship to the rise of meritocratic individualism. — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader, 543