Time To ‘Rebrand’: Enthusiasm for ESG (Environmental, Social, and ‘Corporate’ Governance) Crashing and Burning
“ESG is mostly a cover for ‘climate change’ and social-justice activism, and as such its real agenda is to divert private capital to politically-favored causes”
This was never anything more than a progressive scheme, and people know it.
From The Pipeline:
As ‘ESG’ Falters, the Left Seeks to Rebrand
As Clarice Feldman has explained here at The Pipeline, the Wall Street enthusiasm for ESG (environmental, social, and governance) investing is already starting to wane. Which means the greens will go back to the drawing board, and will bring it back again under a new name. ESG is mostly a cover for “climate change” and social-justice activism, and as such its real agenda is to divert private capital to politically-favored causes, such as “green” energy and disguised redistribution schemes benefitting favored client groups like Black Lives Matter.
Investment funds that follow the ESG mantra are suffering from sub-par investment returns, and suddenly fear shareholder lawsuits for failing their fiduciary duty to maximize returns. Moreover, the attempt to enshrine ESG by regulation through the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is running into political opposition on Capitol Hill and appears vulnerable to legal challenge.
Suddenly the biggest boosters of ESG investment, and especially de-investing in oil, natural gas, and coal production, are backtracking, with J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon telling Congress last week that cutting off credit to fossil-fuel production would be “the road to hell” for America. Late in the week the state of Louisiana announced that it was pulling all of its assets invested with BlackRock, one of the prime cheerleaders of ESG.
ESG is likely to persist, however, on account of its unseriousness and malleability. Several traditional domestic oil producers, like heavy fracking user Diamondback Energy, have received high ESG ratings from the third-party gatekeepers of ESG seals of approval through the simple expedient of buying “carbon offsets” and pledging themselves to be fully carbon-neutral . . . someday. Think of it as the environmental version of St. Augustine’s famous intercessory petition, “Lord, make me chaste—but not yet.”
ESG should be regarded as the third iteration of the left’s attempt to co-opt corporate America, which they otherwise hate, under the banner of “corporate social responsibility” (or CSR). CSR attempts to blur the lines between shareholders and “stakeholders,” that is, self-appointed advocates who want businesses to serve some special “social” interest as defined by the advocacy groups. But such “stakeholders” have neither a tangible “stake” in the businesses they mau-mau, nor do they represent anyone but themselves.
Suppressing fossil fuel investment
For fossil fuel energy to remain low-cost requires sufficient investment. But the "climate emergency" movement has used government and private entities, often under the banner of "ESG," to punish and suppress it—meaning less fossil fuel supply.
— Alex Epstein (@AlexEpstein) October 12, 2022
ESG wars: the BlackRock/Davos class meets an unexpected grassroots resistance
“ESG” is merely the bumper sticker for a sophisticated subversive enterprise.https://t.co/HUu6zy2Kap
— Jordan Schachtel @ dossier.substack.com (@JordanSchachtel) October 6, 2022
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) October 7, 2022
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.