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
The ESG scorekeepers are looking closely at everything we do to identify “victims” and “oppressors.” via @JessAnderson2 @DailySignal https://t.co/ZR6r0pAKLt
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) October 7, 2022
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The Dumb-o-crats’ “stakeholder” idiocy and nonsense is merely a continuation of their contemptible “equity” agitprop. It amounts to giving an undeserved seat at the corporate management and Boardroom tables and an undeserved voice to favored Dumb-o-crat cronies (e.g., labor unions, assorted racial victimhood groups, environmental fanatics, etc.) who haven’t earned it or otherwise paid their dues, as contrasted with shareholders and creditors who own the company or have lent it money — people who have actually put their money on the line and exposed themselves to risk, and, who therefore fairly should have the most influence on management.
Well, it’s an important part of their playbook that has worked so well for them in the past. Remember when the whims of student “stakeholders” weren’t what was used to run colleges?
No politician anywhere takes “Climate Change” seriously, least of all the UN, which had the bad taste to admit that it is an excuse for “wealth distribution.”
OTTMAR EDENHOFER, UN IPCC OFFICIAL
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/noel-sheppard/2010/11/18/un-ipcc-official-admits-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-climate
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/
The other issues are similar: ESG is all about getting companies to pay for ultra vires political activities. OF COURSE it affects a company’s bottom line, because this is not just about paying what amounts to an illegitimate tax.
Also included is a great deal of what is known to unions as “featherbedding,” the hiring of people without regard to their individual productivity. In practice, many of these people are intentionally disrupting the function of their companies by stirring up dissension and ill will among employees.
There’s another name for ESG, and it is “Fuck the System.” That is, intentionally, overloading an entity so that it can no longer function well for its intended purpose.
ESG is essentially a Cloward-Piven Poison Pill for the corporate world.
Why aren’t conservative normal types in the streets? These Dutch farmers have had enough and are in the streets.
Enough with the use of the term “Progressive”, call these miscreants what they are, COMMUNISTS.
‘Progressive’ is intro to communism for uninformed people.
People who may be otherwise persuaded shut down when they hear commies. The vast majority of the d/prog ain’t commies. Instead they are useful idiots. It’s up to the rest of us to convince them that progressivism and their naive adoption of this failed ideology is actually the road to hell paved with their misguided good intentions.
It’s either convince them or fight them. Personally I’d rather do my best to convince them instead, while always reserving other options for resolution.
I dare say those under 40 have no understanding of communism and if they went to college, may think it is a pretty good thing.
Fund and business managers who push this nonsense should be thrown in prison for abrogating their fiduciary responsibilities to their investors.
The labels change; the agenda never does.
‘Climate change’ is an embezzlent operation.
Never forget that Al Gore became a BILLIONAIRE on his ‘global warming’ scam.
Or, for that matter, that Fauci’s wealth grew by FIVE MILLION DOLLARS during the Covid shutdowns. (And this is wealth we at least know about.)
Our federal government is an organized crime operation. We are the victims. The FBI, CIA and IRS are its goons.
“Corporate shakedown” would be a little more accurate than “embezzlement scam” IMHO.
Nice little bidness you got there. It’d be a shame if sumt’un were to happen to it.
The suggestion to rebrand ESG to progressivism should actually be to rebrand both to Marxism. Why misbrand Marxism?
Here’s a test – What one thing do Warren Buffet, Elon Musk, and Jamie Dimon agree on?
Answer: ESG is not a good idea.
“Socialism is a left-wing[1] economic philosophy and movement encompassing a range of economic systems characterized by the dominance of social ownership[2] of the means of production[3][4] as opposed to private ownership.[5][6][4] As a term, it describes the economic, political and social theories and movements associated with the implementation of such systems.[7] Social ownership can be state/public, community, collective, cooperative, or employee.” -Wikipedia
Isn’t ESG just a way of implementing the “social ownership of the means of production?” A de facto government takeover?
In other works, the leftists are doing a slow motion Venezuela crash and burn for the U.S., with the same results.
Or worse, it is an exact copy of the ChiCom social scoring system.
Don’t be fooled. ESG was always designed to create an advantage by positioning investors in less than stellar securities, while those that would make real money were bought by those in on the scam.
Diamondback Energy… pledging themselves to be fully carbon-neutral.
An oil company. How exactly is that going to work? Or does it really matter as long as you say the right words and genuflect on call in the cause of gaia worship?