https://nypost.com/2023/04/13/tragic-trans-battle-of-the-brands/
Consumers across the country were bewildered last week when Budweiser and Nike waddled into the transgender debate.
Inexplicably, in less than a week, both the King of Beers and the athletic apparel behemoth dubbed trans activist Dylan Mulvaney the new face of their respective brands.
It doesn’t take a marketing executive to spot that this probably isn’t a winning sales strategy.
But the knee-jerk response among most people is: What the heck is going on in corporate America?
What the heck is going on in this country?
Sure, it’s a fast-track for a CEO to virtue signal and curry social status and power.
But that’s only a piece of the story.
This is just the latest episode of a mystifying trend in corporate culture.
I wrote an entire book, “Woke, Inc.,” about it, but there’s a more complex dimension that deserves an exploration of its own: the ESG movement in capital markets.
I expose this trend in my sequel “Capitalist Punishment” later this month (that’s not a plug, that’s a promise).
Here’s how the game works: The world’s largest asset managers use your retirement funds, 401(k) accounts and investment dollars to pressure US companies to adopt political agendas that most Americans did not and would not vote for at the ballot box.
This isn’t a theoretical idea or a conspiracy theory. It’s a plain description of reality.
Chevron buckles
Take what happened at Chevron in 2021: A Dutch nonprofit founded by a former refrigerator salesman who wanted to fight climate change submitted a shareholder resolution demanding that Chevron reduce “Scope 3 emissions.”
The Environmental Protection Agency’s website defines those as emissions that are “the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organization, but that the organization indirectly impacts in its value chain,” including employee commuting, leased assets and downstream use of products by customers.
This is a completely senseless decision for an American oil company to make — it’s like asking McDonald’s to take responsibility for reducing the body weight of adults who eat Big Macs, without asking the consumer to share any semblance of responsibility.
Chevron’s board initially recommended to shareholders against adopting the proposal.