Milton Friedman were one of the most influential and controversial players in the social responsibility of enterprises and, more importantly, in the public authorities of the second to the 20th. By means of an envoy devoted to the concept of social responsibility as well as to Friedman’s moral sphere, our position on corporate social responsibility is discussed. In doing so, we are contributing to the intrication of this must-have of contemporary cities, namely the rule of law. The fundamental moral background of Milton Friedman has been very remote and this lack of acidity explains in part that it is divided on the question of what is the friedmanian conception of CSR. The ambiguity of the concept of social responsibility is for many people, starting with a concept of social responsibility. We then propose two readings of the rulings dedicated by Friedman to the RS of companies and, in fact, individuals. We argue that the main message of these rulings is that the effective implementation of a wide range of social projects requires individuals to rationally pursue their design of property within an institutional framework consisting of coercive and non-coercive measures aimed in particular at the implementation of market governance. Finally, we confront a number of general readings of Friedman’s moral and political spectrum and argue in favour of a left-hand reading of Friedman. In conjunction with our concept of social responsibility, this interpretation implies that members of a political society such as the current Belgian society should be socially responsible by taking care to comply (at least to a certain extent) with their external conduct with the priority given to desirability.