Opportunism

This article is written like a personal reflection,

personal essay, or argumentative essayLearn
that more

This article needs additional citations for

verification. Learn more

Opportunity Seized, Opportunity Missed, engraving by

Theodoor Galle, 1605

Opportunism is the practice of taking

advantage of circumstances – with little
regard for principles or with what the
consequences are for others. Opportunist
actions are expedient actions guided
primarily by self-interested motives. The
term can be applied to individual humans
and living organisms, groups,
organizations, styles, behaviours, and
trends.

Opportunism or "opportunistic behavior" is

an important concept in such fields of
study as biology, transaction cost
economics, game theory, ethics,
psychology, sociology and politics.

Definitions
Opportunism is the conscious policy and
practice of taking selfish advantage of
circumstances.[1]

Although in many societies opportunism

often has a strong negative moral
connotation, it may also be defined more
neutrally as putting self-interest before
other interests when there is an
opportunity to do so, or flexibly adapting to
changing circumstances to maximize self-
interest (though usually in a way that
negates some principle previously
followed).

Opportunism is sometimes defined as the

ability to capitalize on the mistakes of
others: to exploit opportunities created by
the errors, weaknesses or distractions of
opponents to one's own advantage.[2]

Taking a realistic or practical approach to

a problem can involve "weak" forms of
opportunism. For the sake of doing
something that will work, or that
successfully solves the problem, a
previously agreed principle is knowingly
compromised or disregarded - with the
justification that alternative actions would,
overall, have a worse effect.

In choosing or seizing opportunities,

human opportunism is most likely to occur
where:

People can make the most gains for

themselves at the least cost to
themselves.
Relevant internal or external controls on
their behaviour are absent.
People are pressured to choose and act.

Criticism of opportunism usually refers to

a situation where beliefs and principles are
tested or challenged.
Human opportunism should not be
confused with "seeking opportunities" as
such, or "making use of opportunities
when they arise". Opportunism refers
rather to a specific way of responding to
opportunities, which involves the element
of self-interestedness plus disregard for
relevant (ethical) principles, or for intended
or previously agreed goals, or for the
shared concerns of a group.[3]

Somewhat confusingly, though,

opportunism is sometimes also redefined
by businessmen simply as "the theory of
discovering and pursuing opportunities".[4]
These businessmen are motivated by their
dislike for the idea that there could ever be
anything wrong with capitalizing on
opportunities. According to this
redefinition, "opportunism" is a euphemism
for "entrepreneurship".

Etymology
In the early 19th century, the term
"opportunist" as noun or adjective was
already known and used in several
European languages, but initially it rarely
referred to political processes or to a
political tendency. The English term
"opportunism" is possibly borrowed
originally from the Italian expression
opportunismo. In 19th-century Italian
politics, it meant "exploiting the prevailing
circumstances or opportunities to gain
immediate advantage for oneself or one's
own group". However, it is more likely that
the English expression was directly
borrowed from the French term, when it
began to refer specifically to the
opportunist Republicans, since the term
first entered the English language in the
early 1870s.[5] In this sense the meaning
"opportunism" has mutated: from those
who claimed to advocate a principle (in the
original French case, an amnesty for the
Communards) but said that the time was
not yet "opportune", to what may be
thought of as the opposite - those who act
without principle.[6]

In Latin, opportunus means opportune or

favourable (opportunitas = opportunity);
the word itself is a contraction of ob portus
("toward the harbour/entrance") or
oppositum portus ("facing the
harbour/entrance").

Moral connotations
As a style of human behaviour,
opportunism has the connotation of a lack
of integrity, or doing something that is out
of character (inconsistent). The underlying
thought is that the price of the
unrestrained pursuit of selfishness is
behavioural inconsistency. Thus,
opportunism involves compromising some
or other principle normally upheld.
However, the boundary between
"legitimate self-interest" and "undesirable
(or anti-social) selfishness" can be difficult
to define; the definition may depend on
one's point of view, or position in life.[7]

Some people regard an opportunist stance

positively as a legitimate choice, which
can be the lesser evil. Thus, the British
Conservative statesman Stanley Baldwin
is supposed to have quipped:[8]
 "I would rather be an
opportunist and float than go to
the bottom with my principles
around my neck"

– Stanley Baldwin[9]

Life can be viewed as presenting "an

endless series of opportunities", where the
pattern of one's responses defines who or
what one is (i.e. individual identity). It can
also be viewed as a striving to realize or
express certain principles. However, the
moral dilemma implied by opportunism
concerns the conflict of self-interest with
the interests of others, or with following a
principle: either to do what one wants, or
to do "what is the right thing to do". Thus,
substantively, opportunism refers to
someone who acts on opportunities in a
self-interested, biased or one-sided
manner that conflicts or contrasts in some
way with one or more general rule, law,
norm, or principle.

The fact that the self-interested action

evokes this conflict, often implies that the
tendency to use opportunities to
advantage is excessive or improper, the
corollary being a deficiency of character or
at least a lack of propriety. Hence the term
opportunism often has the pejorative
connotation of morally unsound behaviour,
or behaviour that sacrifices a greater good
for the sake of gaining an advantage for
oneself or one's own group. Moralists may
have a distaste for opportunism, insofar
as opportunism implies the violation of a
moral principle.

It is often difficult for an outsider to

understand why an action or an idea is (or
is not) "opportunist", because the outsider
does not know the whole story, or the
whole context, or the true intention behind
it. The way things appear can give an
impression which is quite different from
the real motivation that is behind it.

Human behaviour
In human behaviour generally,
opportunism concerns the relationship
between what people do, and their basic
principles when faced with opportunities
and challenges. The opportunist seeks to
gain personal advantage when an
opportunity presents itself, putting self-
interest ahead of some other interest, in a
way contrary either to a previously
established principle or another principle
that ought to have higher priority. Hence
opportunist behaviour is usually regarded
at least as questionable or dubious, and at
most as unjustifiable or completely
illegitimate. Opportunism is regarded as
unhealthy, as a disorder or as a character
deficiency, if selfishly pursuing an
opportunity is blatantly anti-social
(involves disregard for the needs, wishes
and interests of others). However,
behaviour can also be regarded as
"opportunist" by scholars without any
particular moral evaluation being made or
implied (simply as a type of self-interested
behaviour).
The sociology and psychology of human
opportunism is somewhat related to the
study of gambling behaviour, and centres
on the way people respond to risk and
opportunity, and what kind of motivation
and organizational culture is involved.
Both the element of risk and opportunity
play a role. To be opportunist in behaviour,
a person or group must:

refuse to take a risk, if doing so would

reduce influence, support, wealth or
popularity, even although taking the risk
is consistent with the principles the
person or group uphold.
take a risk for the purpose of
gaining/maintaining influence, support,
wealth or popularity, although taking this
risk is inconsistent with the principles
being espoused.
take advantage of an opportunity to
increase influence, support, wealth or
popularity, although it is not consistent
with the principles being upheld.
refuse to respond to an opportunity, only
because responding to it might forfeit
influence, support, wealth or popularity,
even although taking the opportunity
would in truth be consistent with the
principles being subscribed to.
Thus, the opportunity exploited for selfish
ends can itself exist either because an
action is taken, or because of deliberate
inaction (when action should really have
been taken). The propensity to engage in
such kinds of behaviours depends a great
deal on the presence of absence of
personal characteristics such as integrity,
moral character, personal insight or self-
awareness, personal flexibility and
balance. It also depends on the ability to
judge the consequences of different
courses of action correctly. Strong
emotions and desires may also play a role,
and much may depend on how permissive
a person, group or organization is (see
permissive society). These factors
influence the capacity to know "where to
draw the line" appropriately, and regulate
one's own behaviour so that it remains
consistent. Much also depends on the
beliefs people happen to have about
themselves and the world they live in, and
on the morale of an organization.

Whatever the opportunist's exact motive, it

always involves the element of
selfishness. Psychologically, it follows that
opportunism always assumes a basic
ability to make one's own choices, and
decide to act in a way that serves one's
own interest. In turn, that presupposes at
least some basic self-motivation, inner
direction, inventiveness and behavioural
freedom; subjectively, an opportunist must
at least be able to recognize and respond
to opportunities when they are there.

Eight main contexts

Personalities and beliefs are shaped by

the specific environment where they form.
It is likely that the possibilities for
opportunist behaviour are promoted in
contexts where there is not only an
incentive to engage in them, but also
where it is also extremely difficult for
some reason to remain behaviourally
consistent, or where ordinary constraints
on behaviour are lacking. In that case,
opportunist behaviour does not seem to
have much adverse effect or consequence,
at least in the short term, compared to the
much greater benefits of engaging in it.
Eight main contexts are referred to in the
literature:

Power: according to Lord Acton's

famous dictum, "all power corrupts, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely". If
there are only weak sanctions against
unprincipled behaviour, this creates a
setting where opportunist behaviour can
flourish, and if the positions of people
are very unequal (in terms of power,
wealth, status, knowledge or strength)
the possibility exists that some will take
advantage of the disadvantage of
others.
Advantages: the prevalence of
opportunist behaviour is likely to be
influenced by the perception that the
pay-off or advantage of engaging in it,
outweighs possible disadvantages or
penalties. Opportunism is facilitated if
the situation permits an actor to
appropriate the gains or advantages to
be had from an activity to themselves,
while shifting the costs, blame and
disadvantages to others. This may be
regarded as unfair competition.
Predicaments:The propensity of
opportunist behaviour is influenced by
the general life-situations that people
find themselves in. If one's own position
is strong and secure, it may be much
easier to be an opportunist – because if
it would result in losses and failures,
those losses and failures can be easily
sustained given the resources available.
Conversely, a person's existence may be
so precarious, that he has "nothing to
lose" by seizing any opportunity
available to benefit himself. Opportunist
behaviour can be self-reinforcing: if there
is a lot of opportunism, then not to be
opportunist oneself would mean that
competitors take advantage of that, and
therefore people can be forced into an
opportunist role as a defensive strategy.
Resources: if a new bonanza (an
abundantly available resource, or
market) is discovered, accessible or
opened up, people may try to "grab what
they can" without regard to the
consequences for others, perhaps with
the thought that if they do not avail
themselves of this opportunity, others
will (and that if others do, it
disadvantages them). Examples might
be a gold rush and the tragedy of the
commons. In this case, opportunist
behaviour may be facilitated, especially
if precise rules for how a resource
should be distributed are lacking, or if it
is unclear who really owns it, or if proper
use cannot be enforced.[10]
Information: opportunism is facilitated
in the absence of relevant information,
knowledge or awareness about the
interests and values involved in a
situation or activity, making it difficult to
identify and judge all the consequences
in pursuing an opportunity. This could be
due to deliberate disinformation. Self-
interest may be followed because it is
unclear or undecided what other
interests are at stake, or because a
shared morality is lacking. If the
situation is one where shared rules are
lacking, where it is quite uncertain what
the relevant rule to apply is, or where
everything is very uncertain or chaotic,
plenty of scope exists for opportunist
behaviour.[11]
Competition: in a situation of intense
conflict, competition or war,[12] it may be
that people will do anything to survive,
win, retain support, or defend
themselves, never mind the principles,
ideals or beliefs they had. Ordinary laws
and "rules of the game" break down,
creating new opportunities for those
positioned to take advantage of them.
Awareness: if people are for some or
other reason deceiving themselves
about the real consequences of their
actions, they are more likely to initiate or
condone opportunist behaviour; if they
were more aware, that wouldn't happen
to the same extent. Opportunism is
facilitated if for any reason there is a
low level of awareness that it is
happening. Perceptions of the strengths
and vulnerabilities of others and oneself
may play an important role.
 Success: opportunism often involves
the presence of a very strong desire to
be popular, to exercise influence or to
succeed in making gains. That
motivation can promote the urge to win
something "by any means necessary",
even if it means to "cut corners" and do
things not consistent with relevant
principles. If people are for some reason
motivated "to do anything at all to
achieve success", they are more likely to
engage in opportunist behaviour for that
very reason.

Five main organizational

influences
Opportunist behaviour is also strongly
influenced by the organizational context in
which it occurs.

Controls: some organizations may have

a code of behaviour or set of rules that
makes opportunist behaviour difficult,
because organizational policy sets clear
and immediate penalties for such
behaviour. Other organizations may be
so loosely structured and so lacking in
controls and sanctions regulating
behaviour, that opportunism becomes
almost unavoidable.
Rationale: much depends on whether
the organization really has a principled
basis for its activities to start out with (a
clearly defined, agreed understanding
about the relationship between goals
and the means to achieve them).
Lacking such a principled foundation,
the organization may find itself
constantly trying to compensate for
both opportunist errors and factional
errors.
Norms and values: behaviour that some
organizations regard as "opportunist"
may be perfectly acceptable in others, or
tolerated as normal. Sometimes
expectations of behaviour are made
explicit by the organization with the aid
of formal rules communicated to
members. Sometimes they are only
implicit and informal - possibly because
formal rules are not easy to formulate,
or to enforce, or because it is assumed
that members understand and share
relevant norms and values.
Size: in general, the larger an
organization is in terms of members, the
more scope its members have to
engage in opportunist behaviour, since
the larger it is, the less individual
members are practically able to check or
control the behaviour of many other
members, and the more possibility there
is that groups of members will develop
self-serving interests that deviate from
the stated goals of the organization.[13]
Purpose: the scope for opportunism
depends very much on the nature and
goals of the organization itself, and on
the strength and integrity of its
leadership. If for example the
organization sets itself the task to
exploit risks and opportunities to
advantage, then no matter what its size
is, it tends to facilitate opportunist
behaviour. If, on the other hand, the aim
of the organization is to carefully
conserve a state of affairs or belief
system, this is much less likely to attract
opportunists.
Use of the term in specific
areas
Professional

In professional ethics, the concept of

opportunism plays a role in defining
criteria for professional integrity.[14] In
providing a service, a professional may
have personal discretion (choice or
leeway) about how to provide the service.
Professionals may, to a great extent, make
their own judgements, interpretations, and
decisions about the exact approach to
take—without an explicit rule that they
must perform in a specific way. Such a
situation can be exploited with opportunist
motives that are contrary to the stated
ethics of a profession. Consequently, it
becomes necessary—for the sake of
preserving professional integrity—to
explicate "guiding norms" that define the
boundaries of acceptable practice, or to
divide up roles in such a way that different
people in an organization can effectively
check and control what their colleagues
actually do ("to keep them honest").

Intellectual

The term intellectual opportunism—the

pursuit of intellectual opportunities with a
selfish, ulterior motive not consistent with
relevant principles—refers to certain self-
serving tendencies of the human intellect,
often involving professional producers and
disseminators of ideas, who work with
idea-formation all the time. The
phenomenon of intellectual opportunism
is frequently associated by its critics with
careerism. When human knowledge
becomes a tradeable good in a market of
ideas, all sorts of opportunities arise for
huckstering, swindling, haggling and
hustling with information in ways which
are regarded as unprincipled, dubious or
involve deceit of some sort.
The intellectual opportunist adapts his
intellectual concerns, pursuits and
utterances to "fit with the trend/fashion" or
"fit the situation" or "with what sells" – with
the (ulterior) motive of gaining personal
popularity/support, protecting intellectual
coherence, obtaining personal credit,
acquiring privilege or status, persuading
others, ingratiating himself, taking
advantage or making money. Normally this
assumes some degree of intellectual
flexibility, agility or persuasiveness.

Sexual
Sexual opportunism is the selfish pursuit
of sexual opportunities for their own sake
when they arise, often with the negative
moral connotation that in some way it
"takes advantage" of others, or "makes
use" of, or "exploits", other persons for
sexual purposes. Sexual opportunism is
sometimes also defined as the use of
sexual favours for selfish purposes quite
unrelated to the sexual activity, in which
case taking a sexual opportunity is merely
the means to achieve a quite different
purpose, for example to advance one's
career or obtain status or money.[15] This
may be accepted or tolerated, or it may be
criticized because the concerns of others
are not adequately taken into
consideration (or because it is contrary to
authentic sexual love).

To the extent that the feelings, wishes,

intentions, purposes, interests or norms of
others are not adequately considered in
the pursuit of sexual gratification, it then
conflicts with some or other principle for
appropriate behaviour, and it may involve
deceit or dishonesty (for example, the
deliberate exploitation of sexual
innocence). In that case, the sexual
opportunist is considered to lack sexual
and/or personal integrity. In a clinical or
scientific sense, sexual opportunism is
often straightforwardly described as
observable sexual promiscuity or the
observable propensity to engage in casual
sex, whatever the motive.

Evolutionary

In the theory of evolution, "evolutionary

opportunism" refers to a specific pattern
of development in the history of a species.
The behaviour, culture or body part of a
species that long ago evolved to serve a
particular purpose or function may
subsequently lend itself to a very different
positive purpose or function that helps the
species to survive.[16] Thus, in a new stage
of evolution, a long-existing behaviour,
culture, or physical characteristic can
respond to a wholly new opportunity and
acquire a new role. It turns out to have new
advantages or potential benefits the
species previously never used—and,
therefore, the species retains an
adaptation even if the original purpose it
served is long gone.

Biological

In biology, an opportunist organism is

generally defined as a species that can live
and thrive in variable environmental
conditions, and sustain itself from a
number of different food sources, or can
rapidly take advantage of favorable
conditions when they arise, because the
species is behaviorally sufficiently flexible.
Such species can for example postpone
reproduction, or stay dormant, until
conditions make growth and reproduction
possible. In the biological disciplines,
opportunistic behavior is studied in fields
such as evolutionary biology, ecology,
epidemiology, and etiology, where moral or
judgmental overtones do not apply (see
also opportunistic pathogens,
opportunistic predation, phoresis, and
parasitism).
In microbiology, opportunism refers to the
ability of a normally non-pathogenic
microorganism to act as a pathogen in
certain circumstances. Opportunist micro-
organisms (such as bacteria, viruses, fungi,
and protozoa) are ones that, when they
invade the host organism, can cause
infection in the host organism, but cause
real disease only if the natural defenses,
resistance or immune system of the host
organism are lowered (see opportunistic
infection). In macrobiology, opportunist
behaviour by an organism generally means
that it is able to seize and use diverse
opportunities in its environment to survive
and grow. If one single opportunity or need
occurs, the organism can "improvise" a
response to it with whatever resources it
has available, even if what it can do is not
the best possible strategy.

Some animals also show this behavior for

group-foraging. In other words, they try to
optimize the feeding intake of their colony.
The Australian stingless bee Tetragonula
carbonaria, for instance, has several
workers search for an area full of rich
resources, and will then recruit heavily in
this area until the resources are
depleted."[17]

Political
The term "opportunism" is often used in
politics and political science, and by
activists campaigning for a cause. The
political philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli
as described in The Prince is often
regarded as a classic manual of
opportunist scheming.[18] Political
opportunism is interpreted in different
ways, but usually refers to one or more of
the following:

a political style of aiming to increase

one's political influence at almost any
price, or a political style that involves
seizing every and any opportunity to
extend political influence, whenever
such opportunities arise.
the practice of abandoning or
compromising in reality some important
political principles that were previously
held, in the process of trying to increase
one's political power and influence.
a trend of thought, or a political
tendency, seeking to make political
capital out of situations with the main
aim being that of gaining more
influence, prestige or support, instead of
truly winning people over to a principled
position or improving their political
understanding.
 believing that there is much more at
work behind the scenes for the
combining of alliances, making of pacts
and signing of agreements for a cause.
having experiencing suffering for a
political cause, without real political
positions and/or beliefs being revealed
in the process, though with or without
critique.[19]

Typically, opportunist political behavior is

criticized for being short-sighted or
narrow-minded.[20] Most politicians are
"opportunists" to some extent at least
(they aim to use political opportunities
creatively to their advantage, and have to
try new initiatives), but the controversies
surrounding the concept concern the exact
relationship between "seizing a political
opportunity" and the political principles
being espoused. The term "political
opportunism" is often used in a pejorative
sense, mainly because it connotes the
abandonment of principles or
compromising political goals.[21] Political
integrity typically demands an appropriate
combination of principled positions and
political flexibility that produces a morally
consistent behavior in specific
circumstances. There are four main
sources of political opportunism: suivisme
(a specific political methodology that is
applied to maintain or increase political
influence), populism, risk management,
and "means become ends".

Economic

There exists no agreed general, scientific

definition or theory of economic
opportunism; the literature usually
considers only specific cases and
contexts. Market trade supplies no
universal morality of its own, except the
law of contract and basic practical
requirements to settle transactions, while
at the same time legal rules, however
precise in their formulation, cannot control
every detail of transactions and the
interpretation (or implications) thereof.
Since economic opportunism must be
assessed against some relevant norm or
principle, controversy about what that
norm or principle should be, makes a
general definition difficult.[22]

Market trade is compatible with a great

variety of moral norms, religions and
political systems, and indeed supporters
of the free market claim that this is exactly
its advantage: people can choose their
own values, buying and selling as they
wish within a basic legal framework
accepted by all.[23] People would not
normally trade, if they did not expect to
gain something by it; the fact that they do
trade normally presupposes at least a
respect for the basic rights of the party
being traded with. Nevertheless, the gains
or benefits of trading activity (and indeed
the losses), although entirely legal, might
be distributed very unequally or in ways not
anticipated by previous understandings,
and thus accusations of "economic
opportunism" can arise nevertheless in
many different settings.[24] If this is the
case, relevant trading obligations (or civil
obligations) are usually considered as not
being (fully) met or honored, in the pursuit
of economic self-interest. Greed is
frequently mentioned as a primary motive
for economic opportunism.[25]

Glenn R. Parker[26] claims that the five

most discussed examples of economic'
opportunism are:

adverse selection
moral hazard
last-period exploitation, when it is
known that competitors or stakeholders
are not able to respond to a suitably
timed selfish action.
reneging (in contracts), where a
contractual agreement, promise,
intention or understanding of a deal is
 not fully honoured by a party to the
contract, for selfish motives, because it
is possible "to get away with it" and/or
because there is an incentive to do
so.[27]
shirking, involving some kind of
negligence, or failure to acquit oneself
of a duty (or a responsibility) previous
agreed or implied (see also efficiency
wages).

In transaction cost economics,

opportunism means self-interest seeking
with guile, involving some kind of
deliberate deceit and the absence of moral
restraint. It could involve deliberately
withholding or distorting important
business information, shirking (doing less
work than agreed), or failing to fulfill
formal or informal promises and
obligations. It occurs in trading activities
especially where rules and sanctions are
lacking, and where the opportunist actor
has great power to influence an outcome
by the attitude he assumes in practice.
However, others[28] argue that this reflects
a narrow view of economic opportunism,
because there are many more ways that
economic actors can take selfish
advantage of other economic actors, even
if they do not violate the law.[29]
Game theory

In game theory, opportunism concerns the

contradictory relationships between
altruistic and self-interested behaviour,
where the different kinds of common and
sectional interests existing in a situation
are used mainly to make gains for oneself.
If some actors in a game are placed at a
disadvantage in some way, for any reason,
it becomes an opportunity for other actors
to capitalize on that fact, by using the
disadvantage of others to improve their
own position – under conditions where
actors both compete and cooperate in
different areas. Two classic cases
discussed in game theory where
opportunism is often involved are the free
rider problem and the prisoner's
dilemma.[30] In this game-theoretical
sense, Paul Seabright defines opportunism
as "the behaviour of those who seek to
benefit from the efforts of others without
contributing anything themselves."[31]
Game theory can, for example, model the
effects of information asymmetry, where
people have unequal access to relevant
information, so that those who "do know"
can take advantage of those who "don't
know".
From a game-theoretical perspective,
opportunism is objectively a "problem", if
the pursuit of self-interest – in conflict with
other interests at stake – has an
undesirable or unwanted result for some
actors or most of them. However, in
principle examples could also be
constructed where opportunist behaviour
unintentionally serves other, broader
interests (such as when, in their rush to
take selfish advantage of a situation, the
opportunist actors create more
opportunities for other actors at the same
time – the "bandwaggon" or "food chain"
effect; see also Pareto optimality). In
game theory, therefore, opportunism is not
defined as being intrinsically and
necessarily always a good thing or a bad
thing; it could be either. Usually though, it
is assumed, that the game theorist is able
to "stand outside" the different interests
being studied, to view the situation
objectively – in a detached, uninvolved,
impartial and unbiased way.

Kenneth Arrow explains that markets

require trust to operate effectively, but that
trust may not be spontaneously generated
by market activity:

"In a rational type of analysis it

will be said that it is profitable
to be trustworthy. So I will be
trustworthy because it is
profitable to me. But you can't
very easily establish trust on a
basis like that. If your basis is
rational decision and your
underlying motive is self-
interest, then you can betray
your trust at any point when it
is profitable and in your interest
to do so. Therefore other people
can't trust you. For there to be
trust, there has to be a social
structure which is based on
 motives different from
immediate opportunism."[32]

Social

Social opportunism refers to the use of

opportunities for social contact only for
selfish purposes or motives. Because it is
only selfish, the implication is usually that
obligations to other participants in the
given social setting are not (fully) met or
honoured. The social opportunist
participates in a group, cooperates with it
or associates with it, not primarily because
he wants to "contribute", give or share
something to the group, or because he
values being part of it as an intrinsic good,
but only because he wants to get some
advantage out of the participation for
himself. Consequently, the participation by
the opportunist is substantively only a
"means" that serves some other, selfish
purpose. This may be tolerated, to the
extent that the selfish purpose of the
opportunist is compatible with, or does not
conflict with, the goals and intentions of
the group. It may be regarded as
undesirable and unwanted, or indeed a
breach of trust or good faith, if that is not
the case.
Groups, gatherings, associations, or
organizations that operate on the basis of
voluntary or involuntary association, or in
an atmosphere of mutual trust, may
provide resources or contacts to their
participants that are:

Provided and shared only because of

their cooperation, or being together.
Conditional on actually participating in
the social setting.

Thus, to use those resources or contacts

for some selfish aim, paradoxically the
social opportunist necessarily has to gain
entry, join in and participate socially; there
is no other way to gain access to or extract
what he wants for himself. Some social
groupings may welcome social
opportunists, because they can serve a
useful function, or can be persuaded
(perhaps with group pressure) to change
their ways through participation. Other
social groupings may try to prevent social
opportunism, by imposing strict
preconditions of participation to ward off
opportunists, or with the aid of rules
prohibiting opportunist behaviour.

Marxist theory

Karl Marx provided no substantive theory

of opportunism; insofar as he used the
term, he meant a tactic of convenience or
expediency used for self-serving motives,
involving some or other kind of political,
economic or intellectual trick.
Nevertheless, some Marxists claim that
Marx's theory of capitalism does imply a
substantive theory of opportunism. Its
main claim is that opportunism is not
simply an aberration or impediment to the
efficient functioning of capitalism, but an
integral and necessary characteristic of it;
capitalist market activity promotes
opportunist moves in all sorts of ways.
Five kinds of factors are usually cited:
Capitalist society constantly reorganizes
the structure of human cooperation, so
that, more and more, people produce
things they do not need themselves, or
that are surplus to their own
requirements, and can therefore be
appropriated by others for personal
gain. This causes alienation, and it
creates a specific motivational
structure. It promotes an inability to
respond adequately to the needs of
others except in the form of self-
interested trade-offs.[33]
Although people necessarily have to
cooperate to survive, the way they go
about this is highly contradictory, and
involves "character masks", because
there is also constant competition
among individuals, businesses and
social classes for money, power and
prestige. They all have different
interests, and are likely to take
advantage of others, when they sense
they can get away with it. This
competition is rarely a level playing
field.[34]
Capitalist society is itself founded on
the exploitation of the labour of others
and on unequal exchange. This is
enabled by the ownership or control of
assets, money and credit that investors
use to extract unearned income from
the work of others who have to sell their
work capacity to survive. It makes it
possible for private owners of capital to
claim more resources than they have
themselves produced or contributed to
society. Owning property is rewarded
more and more, and working to create it
is rewarded less and less.[35]
Regulating all the conflicting interests
and values, the capitalist state enforces
the constraints of a legal system, but
this legal system splits moral value and
economic value into separate
compartments, as well as splitting
public and private spheres.[36] While it
formally regards all citizens as equal
and free, in reality people are very
unequally positioned with respect to
their social status, power, knowledge
and wealth, and consequently also their
freedoms. Information asymmetry is not
simply a problem in trade, but occurs in
every sphere of life, and thus some
capitalize on the ignorance of others.[37]
Capitalist society is of itself aimless and
amorphous with regard to the purposes
of human life, lacking any shared,
consensual ethic. Any candidate for
such an ethic, such as a religion, is only
as influential as the power that exists to
assert it, but even so its norms are
constantly contradicted in practice.
 Capitalism makes human development
conditional on the unbridled pursuit of
self-enrichment. This promotes personal
qualities such as egoism and
selfishness, where people try to
"privatize the gains and socialize the
losses."[38]

Taken together, these five factors make it

difficult for any individual or group to
reconcile self-interest with the general
interest, genuinely and durably, and it
means that moral double standards are
very pervasive.[39] In turn, that creates a
total environment where opportunism can
flourish – including within the socialist
movement. In fact, "opportunism" as a
political term began to be used widely
among Marxists, when the
parliamentarians from the leading party of
the Second International, the German
Social Democratic Party, voted in favour of
the war credits necessary at the beginning
of World War I.[40] Marxist critics argued
that this policy was a total abandonment
of socialist principles, especially the
principle of anti-militarism and the
international solidarity of the working
class.[41] Since that time, opportunism has
been often defined by Marxists as a policy
that puts special interests ahead of the
interests of the working class[42]
Legal

Legal opportunism is a wide area of

human activity, which refers generally to a
type of abuse of the proper intention of
legal arrangements (the "spirit of the law"
as distinguished from the letter of the
law). More specifically, it refers to
deliberately manipulating legal
arrangements for purposes they were not
meant for, guided by self-interested
motives. Usually, legal opportunism is
understood to occur legally: it is itself not
necessarily a "crime" (a violation of the law
or an unlawful act), but it could be
considered "immoral" ("there ought to be a
law against it"). The general effect of legal
opportunism, if it really occurs, is that it
discredits the rule of law or destroys the
legitimacy of particular legal rules in the
eyes of the people affected by them.
Inversely, if people perceive a legal
framework as arbitrary, obstructive or
irrelevant, they are tempted to search for
opportunities to find ways "around the
law", without formally breaking the law.

Typical of legal opportunists is that they

accept or approve of the application of
legal rules when it suits their own interest
but reject or disapprove of the application
when the rules are against their interest (or
if taking self-interested action would mean
breaking the law).[43] The law should serve
them, and not the other way around; or,
there is "one rule for them, and another
rule for other people." Often, legal
opportunism is enabled because a rule
must be interpreted in order to apply it,
where the chosen interpretation is
precisely the one that favours one's self-
interest. Since there are many dubious
ways to manipulate the applicability of
legal rules and procedures for selfish
purposes, a general definition of legal
opportunism (one which covers all cases)
is exceptionally difficult. Legal
opportunism can involve practices such as
the following:

Making or changing laws not for the

good of the country as a whole, but to
benefit a particular interest group in the
country.
Making or changing laws, primarily to
benefit the position of the lawmakers
themselves.[44]
Applying or referring to legal procedures
not for the sake of obtaining justice (or
so that justice is served), but mainly
with the aim of making money out of it,
or promote one’s own position, or to
place competitors at a disadvantage.
Exploiting legal loopholes or ambiguities
for personal gain or to the advantage of
a particular organization.
In some cases, "tinkering with" bad
legislation, formalities or rulings "after
the fact": after it is proved that a legal
rule previously established is definitely
unjust, wrong, inapplicable, mistaken
etc. or incriminating someone using a
new rule adopted only after the alleged
crime was committed.
Deliberately "embellishing" selective
evidence relevant to a legal situation, to
benefit one's own position, in ways that
are not strictly illegal.
 Trying to sway legal opinion about a
case by using arguments or utterances
that appeal to the audience, but have
substantively nothing to do with the
case at hand.
"Cherry-picking" pieces of evidence,
rules or precedents to construct a
justification for the policy option that
favour's one's own interest.

Spiritual

Spiritual opportunism refers to the

exploitation of spiritual ideas (or of the
spirituality of others, or of spiritual
authority): for personal gain, partisan
interests or selfish motives. Usually the
implication is that doing so is unprincipled
in some way, although it may cause no
harm and involve no abuse. In other words,
religion becomes a means to achieve
something that is alien to it, or things are
projected into religion that do not belong
there.

If a religious authority acquires influence

over the "hearts and minds" of people who
are believers in a religion, and therefore
can "tap into" the most intimate and
deepest-felt concerns of believers, it can
also gain immense power from that. This
power can be used in a self-interested
manner, exploiting opportunities to benefit
the position of the religious authority or its
supporters in society. This could be
considered as inconsistent with the real
intentions of the religious belief, or it might
show lack of respect for the spiritual
autonomy of others. The "good faith" of
people is then taken advantage of, in ways
that involve some kind of deceit, or some
dubious, selfish motive.

The term spiritual opportunism is also

used in the sense of casting around for
suitable spiritual beliefs borrowed and
cobbled together in some way to justify,
condemn or "make sense of" particular
ways of behaving, usually with some
partisan or ulterior motive. This may not
be abusive, but it often gives rise to
criticisms or accusations[45] that the given
spiritual beliefs:

are not an organic, sincere or authentic

expression of the real nature of the
people who contrived them.
do not really express what people's lives
are about, but are in some way an
"artificial add-on".
lack any deeper principled foundation,
and are more an "eclectic, self-serving
concoction"
are made to serve partisan interests,
contrary to the real intention of the
 beliefs.

Supporters of traditional religions such as

Christianity, Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism
sometimes complain that people (such as
New Age enthusiasts) seek out spiritual
beliefs that serve only themselves, as a
form of "spiritual opportunism". Such
complaints are often highly controversial,
because people are considered to have the
right to their own spiritual beliefs (they
may not have that right, to the extent that
they are socially excluded unless they
profess certain spiritual beliefs, but they
may only subscribe "formally" or
"outwardly" to them).
Spiritual opportunism sometimes refers
also to the practice of proselytizing one's
spiritual beliefs when any opportunity to
do so arises, for the purpose of winning
over, or persuading others, about the
superiority of these beliefs. In this context,
the spiritual opportunist may engage in
various actions, themselves not directly
related to the spiritual beliefs, with the
specific aim of convincing others of the
superiority of his own belief system – it
may effectively amount to "buying their
support".

See also
 Business opportunity
Corruption
Enlightened self-interest
Individualism
Jeitinho brasileiro
Meritocracy
Opportunity cost
Positive accounting

References
1. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/opp
ortunism
2. E.g. Donald L. Luskin, "Newt's Bain
Opportunism Is Mitt's Opportunity".
 Wall Street Journal, 17 January 2012.
[1]
3. Luke Johnson, "A new lexicon to
celebrate capitalism", Financial Times,
October 25, 2011.
4. Shraga F. Biran, Opportunism: How to
Change the World--One Idea at a Time.
New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux,
2011.
5. According to the Grand Larousse
encyclopédique, opportunism was the
name given to the cautious reformism
and nationalism of French
Republicans, who advocated moderate
policies to consolidate the French
 Third Republic after the eviction of the
monarchists. The French Opportunists
did not call themselves by this name;
rather, the term was used by French
radicals to describe centrist and
centre-left politics in the country.
Possibly, the term was originally
popularized by Victor Henri Rochefort,
Marquis de Rochefort-Luçay, who used
it in his criticisms of Léon Gambetta.
6. "The World That Never Was: A True
Story of Schemers, Anarchists and
Secret Agents", p. 153, Alex
Butterworth, Vintage, 2010,
ISBN 9780099551928
7. Louise Lucas and Andrew Bounds,
"Unilever's pension move prompts
strike". Financial Times, December 9,
2011.
8. The quotation is attributed to Baldwin,
according to a Penguin Dictionary of
Quotations, but the exact source is
unclear.
9. cited in Daniel Singer, Is Socialism
Doomed? The Meaning of Mitterrand.
Oxford University Press, 1988, p. 189.
Perhaps the quote referred back to a
line in John Milton's Paradise Lost
according to which it is, "Better to
reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven."
The mind is its own place, and in it
self
Can make a Heav'n of Hell, a Hell of
Heav'n.
What matter where, if I be still the
same,
And what I should be, all but less
then he
Whom Thunder hath made greater?
Here at least
We shall be free; th' Almighty hath
not built
Here for his envy, will not drive us
hence
Here we may reign secure, and in
my choyce
 To reign is worth ambition though
in Hell
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in
Heav'n. (Book 1)
[2]
10. Borzou Daragahi, "Libya: Back to the
bad old ways". Financial times,
February 16, 2012.
11. "Government's sudden need to debate
terror bill smacks of opportunism", The
Globe and Mail, 22 April 2013.[3]
12. Farah Stockman, "Opportunist of war".
The Boston Globe, 13 december 2011.
[4]
13. Bogdan Mieczkowski, Dysfunctional
Bureaucracy: A Comparative and
Historical Perspective. Lanham,
Maryland: University Press of America,
1991, p. 37.
14. Chester Barnard has a chapter on the
"theory of opportunism" in his classic
work The Functions of the Executive
(Harvard University Press, originally
published in 1938).
15. Graham Scambler, "Sex Work Stigma:
Opportunist Migrants in London".
Sociology, vol. 41, no. 6, December
2007, pp. 1079-1096.
16. Michael Ruse, The Oxford handbook of
philosophy of biology. Oxford
University Press, 2008, p. 199.
17. Bartareau, T. (1996). "Foraging
Behaviour of Trigona Carbonaria
(Hymenoptera: Apidae) at Multiple-
Choice Feeding Stations". Australian
Journal of Zoology: 143.
doi:10.1071/zo9960143 .
18. Rothbard, Murray. "Who was Niccolò
Machiavelli?" . Mises.org.
19. Pierpont, Claudia Roth. "The Florentine
The man who taught rulers how to
rule" . www.newyorker.com. Retrieved
5 June 2019.
20. See e.g. Caroline B. Glick, "Column
one: Israel's premier opportunist". In:
Jerusalem Post, 22 July 2011.[5]
21. E.g. As'ad AbuKhalil, "Yusuf Al-
Qaradawi and Political Opportunism".
Al Alakhbar English, 28 March 2012.
[6]
22. Chao C. Chen, Mike W. Peng, Patrick A.
Saparito, "Individualism, Collectivism,
and Opportunism: A Cultural
Perspective on Transaction Cost
Economics". In: Journal of
Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, 2002, pp.
567–583."Archived copy" (PDF).
 Archived from the original (PDF) on
2013-09-03. Retrieved 2013-05-07.
23. Thomas C. Leonard, "The price is
wrong: causes and consequences of
ethical restraint in trade." Journal des
Economistes et des Etudes Humaines,
Volume 14, numéro 4, Décembre 2004,
pp 1-17.[7]
24. Kurt Eggert, "Limiting abuse and
opportunism by mortgage servicers".
In: Housing Policy Debate (Fannie Mae
Foundation), Vol. 15, Issue 3,
2004."Archived copy" (PDF). Archived
from the original (PDF) on 2013-05-
15. Retrieved 2013-05-07.
25. Damian Saunders, "Mark Hurd and HP,
economic opportunism and greed, one
year on." Opinion, 30 January 2010.[8]
Dan Ackman, "Kozlowski Speaks!".
Forbes Magazine, 28 April 2005.[9]
Ken Frost, "The Ongoing Trials of The
Late Michael Jackson: Greed and
Opportunism." 2 February 2005.[10]
26. In his book Self-policing in politics: the
political economy of reputational
controls on politicians (Princeton
University Press, 2004, p.21).
27. See e.g. G. Richard Shell,
"Opportunism and trust in the
Negotiation of Commercial Contracts:
 Toward a New Cause of Action."
Vanderbilt Law Review, Vol. 44, March
1991, pp. 221-282.
28. Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein,
"Critiques of transaction cost
economics: An overview".
Organizations and markets, September
2009 [11]
29. See further Kuntara Pukthuanthong
and Harry J. Turtle, "Legal
Opportunism, Litigation Risk, and IPO
Underpricing", January 2009 "Archived
copy" (PDF). Archived from the
original (PDF) on 2013-05-17.
Retrieved 2013-05-07.; Paul J. Zak
 (ed.), Moral markets: the critical role of
values in the economy. Princeton
University Press, 2008.
30. Reinhard Bachmann and Akbar Zaheer
(eds.), Handbook of trust research.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006, p.
201.
31. Paul Seabright, The company of
strangers: a natural history of
economic life. Princeton University
Press, 2004, p. 5.[12]
32. Richard Swedberg, interview with
Kenneth Arrow, in: Richard Swedberg,
Economics and Sociology. Redefining
their boundaries: conversations with
 economists and sociologists.
Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1990, p. 137.
33. See Karl Marx, Economic and
Philosophical Manuscripts 1844.
Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1959.
34. See Karl Marx, Capital Volume 3.
Harmondsworth: Pelican Books, 1981.
35. See Karl Marx, "The general law of
accumulation", in: Capital Volume 1.
Harmondsworth: Pelican Books, 1976.
Steven Mufson and Jia Lynn Yang,
"Capital gains tax rates benefiting
wealthy feed growing gap between
 rich and poor", in: Washington Post, 12
September 2011.
36. See e.g. Heide Gerstenberger,
Impersonal Power: History and theory
of the bourgeois state. Haymarket
Books, 2009.
37. See: Samuel Bowles, Richard Edwards
and Frank Roosevelt, Understanding
Capitalism: Competition, Command
and Change. Oxford University Press,
3rd edition, 2005.
38. See e.g. Psychology of the Private
Individual: Critique of Bourgeois
Consciousness. Gegenstandpunkt,
2009 [13]
39. Ernest Mandel, "Marx, Engels en het
probleem van de zogenaamde
'dubbele moraal'", in: Veelzijdig
marxisme, acta van het colloqium “De
actualiteit van Karl Marx” – in
opdracht van het Instituut voor
Marxistische Studies, 1983
40. Pierre Broué, The German revolution
1917-1923. Leiden: Brill, 2005, p. 55-
56.
41. See e.g. V.I. Lenin, "Opportunism, and
the Collapse of the Second
International", 1915. V.I Lenin
42. "See e.g. Elif Çağlı, "A Dangerous
Tendency: Opportunism" " . Archived
 from the original on 2010-08-16.
Retrieved 2010-07-11.
43. Joanna Brylak, "Legal awareness and
access to law". University of Warsaw,
c. 2007, p. 5. [14]
44. "It should be no surprise that when
rich men take control of the
government, they pass laws that are
favorable to themselves. The surprise
is that those who are not rich vote for
such people, even though they should
know from bitter experience that the
rich will continue to rip off the rest of
us. Perhaps the reason is that rich
men are very clever at covering up
 what they do." - Andrew Greeley, "U.S.
should try to reduce income disparity".
Chicago Sun-Times, 18 February 2001.
45. An example is Robert M. Price, Top
Secret: The Truth Behind Today’s Pop
Mysticisms. Prometheus Books, 2008

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Opportunism&oldid=906863381"

Last edited 18 days ago by SuperWi…

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.