Question

高分悬赏翻译

When I was part of the architects of this responsibility business movement, that was so different; that was an alternative to the international chamber of commerce, it was a traders alliance, it had progressive thinkers, progressive academics, it had, you know, people who were philanthropists. It worked alongside start-up businesses that were really creative like the Body Shop, like Ben and Jerry’s. It had a social purpose. Now a lot of the thinking came out of the 60s, came out of the anti-war movement, and came out from the grassroots movement. So much of our thinking was influenced by the Scandinavian business practices. And so much of my thinking came out because I was learning about the Quakers, who were extraordinarily good at running a business, of never lying, never cheating. You know, put more money back into their enterprises than what they took out and had a social purpose so that the beginning, the architect for that thinking was really simple: “how do you make business kinder?”, “how do you embed it in the community?”, “how do you make community a social purpose for business?”
Things happened. I don’t think we in that movement—we took our eyes off the ball, we were getting to be so in love with each others voice and each others networking, that we didn’t see what was going on; we didn’t see the whole growth of corporate globalization; we didn’t see the immense power of businesses playing, especially in the political arena. We didn’t look at the language, the economic language which was about control, which was about everything had to be for the market economy. We were just flowering around on our own thinking and so we took our eyes off the ball and when we put it on the ball again we thought, “you know, its been hijacked, this social responsibility in business” and it became corporate social responsibility. And it was a huge money-earner, for these big management companies, like KPMG, like Arthur Anderson, like PriceWaterHouseCooper, all of those. They were making shed loads of money by actually doing a system of analysis about how you measure you behavior. But it was no good; it was like this obsession for measurement. It wasn’t showing you how you can put these ideas into practice and they never told you it meant a truth—truth that nobody wants to discuss, that if it gets in the way of profit, business aren’t going to do anything about it. So we still have rapacious businesses, you still have businesses in bed with government; you still have businesses that can legitimately kill, can legitimately have boardroom murder, and can legitimately have a slave labor economy, so that all of us in the West— primarily in the West, or all of us who are wealthy— are guaranteed a standard of living to which we are used to.
就是这么一大段，自己实在是不想翻了~~~不要用翻译器翻，自己翻的后面标明哦~给高分。

Answer 1

当我是这个运动的责任建筑师业务，这是如此不同的一部分，这是一个向国际商会选择，这是一个商人的联盟，它已经进步思想家，进步学者，有，你知道，人们谁是慈善家。它的工作同时启动企业，真的像人体店，像本和杰里的创意。它有一个社会的目的。现在有很多的想法是60年代出来，出来的反战运动，来自基层的运动了。因此，我们的思想影响，大部分是由斯堪的纳维亚的商业惯例。所以我的想法，因为我有很大一部分是关于谊，谁是在经营一盘生意非常好从不说谎，学习，从不作弊。你知道，他们的企业投入更多的钱比他们回来，并拿出了一个社会的目的，使开始的时候，这种想法是非常简单的建筑师：“你怎么做业务仁慈？你怎么它嵌入在社区？你怎么让社会提供了企业的社会目的是什么？”
事情发生。我不认为我们在这个运动，我们脱下球我们的眼睛，让我们是如此深爱着彼此的声音，每个人的网络，我们没有看到发生了什么事情，我们没有看到了企业全球化的整体发展，我们没有看到特别是在政治舞台上扮演企业巨大的力量，。我们不看的语言，语言是对经济的控制，其中约一切都必须为市场经济。我们只是在我们的周围开花自己的思想，所以我们脱下球我们的眼睛，当我们把球再次我们认为，“你知道，它被劫持，这在企业的社会责任”，并成为企业社会责任。它是一个巨大的金钱来源，为这些大公司，如毕马威会计师事务所的管理，如安达信，如普华永道，所有这一切。他们创造了真正做一个关于你如何衡量你的行为分析系统的资金流负载。但是，没有好的，是这样测量的迷恋。这不是你可以告诉你如何把这些想法付诸实践，他们从来没有告诉你它意味着一个真理的真理，没有人愿意讨论，如果它在获得利润的方式，企业都不会做任何有关它。因此，我们仍然有贪婪的企业，你还有的企业与政府在床上，你仍然有企业可以合法地杀死，可以合法地谋杀了会议室，可以合法拥有奴隶劳务经济，使我们大家在西方，主要是在西方，或大家谁是有钱人，都保证了我们的生活达到使用标准。

Answer 2

我试试

Answer 3

Based on the definition and characteristics of creative thinking