Why ESGs Are Greenwashing At Its Worst

What are ESGs? Well: “I am increasingly convinced that corporate ESG is the Devil Incarnate,” Elon Musk said in a Tweet. And we agree. Here’s why we think ESGs are greenwashing at its worst.

By Chere Di Boscio

The newest environmental scam set to sweep across the world under the guise of saving the planet is the new ESG movement, or Environmental, Social, and Governance rating system. And like everything that the Globalists put forth to humanity, it is a giant scam designed to modify and ultimately control the behavior of everyone else.

ESG refers to a class of investing also known as “sustainable investing.” The umbrella term covers three main factors.

‘E’ is for ‘environment’

This includes issues such as climate change policies, carbon footprint, use of renewable energies, deforestation, waste, natural resource conservation, and treatment of animals.

‘S’ is for ‘social’

This includes workers’ rights and protections. Social criteria look at the company’s business relationships. Does it work with suppliers that hold the same values as it claims to hold? Does the company donate a percentage of its profits to the local community or encourage employees to perform volunteer work there? Do the company’s working conditions show high regard for its employees’ health and safety? Are other stakeholders’ interests taken into account? Is there a policy of equity in outcomes in place?

‘G’ is for ‘governance

It includes diversity of the board and corporate transparency. It involves avoiding conflicts of interest in their choice of board members, don’t use political contributions to obtain unduly favorable treatment and, of course, don’t engage in illegal practices.

By quantifying the environmental, social, and governance decisions made by corporations, the International Business Council of the World Economic Forum seeks to remake society by assigning a score to both the corporations and the products that they manufacture and sell. This score will then be used to measure how well a particular company is playing ball with the dictates of the WEF.

The World Economic Forum claims that having an ESG score will make companies more competitive. But the opposite is likely to be true.

We think ESGs are greenwashing at its worst and will make the planet a worse place to be. Here are 7 reasons why.

8 Reasons Why ESGs Are Absolute BS

ESGs are greenwashing

1. Determined by who?

We first need to ask ourselves: who will determine if a company has a high or low ESG? The short answer is: global elites. Like: the World Economic Forum. International banks. Prestigious accounting agencies. The unelected governors of the European Union. And if you think they care about people and the environment, you’re wrong. They only care about two things: money and power. And that’s exactly what ESGs will give them.

How? Well, they will determine where major investment funds will go – namely to companies with high ESGs. And you can bet your bottom dollar that knowing which companies will be green-lighted with a high ESG means those elites will then put their own money into the corporations they’ve recommended. Knowledge is power! For them, that is.

For us, we’ll be ‘guided’ into putting our pensions into funds that score high on ESGs. But shouldn’t be be guided towards putting our savings into funds that actually perform? That bring us good dividends?

According to the World Economic Forum, the answer is NO. Shareholder capitalism – where we look for investments that pay off in terms of money – is dead. So-called “stakeholder capitalism” – where we invest in gains in social and ecological justice – is (for them) the way of the future.

Great. But personally, I’d rather have both. The problem is, as you’ll see below, there’s no guarantee a company with a high ESG score is actually contributing to better environmental and social justice.

2. They can make terrible decisions

Those recommended corporations may have a high ESG score. But it doesn’t mean they’re green and socially responsible.

For example, a major arms company or toxic chemicals manufacturer that produce deadly goods – but with net zero carbon emissions – could potentially have a higher ESG score than an organic cotton clothing manufacturers or organic, vegan food producers who do not have net zero carbon emissions. Total madness, right? But the idea is to ‘cook the books’ as it were, to present data that will appeal to the elite ESG arbiters.

Don’t believe me? Well, check this out.

Some top ESG scorers in 2021

1. Microsoft, a company that has been accused of providing a ‘toxic’ work environment to women, not offering permanent contracts to its employees, and creating products with built-in obsolescence, causing loads of toxic waste, was given the top ESG score in 2021.

Is it any surprise that Bill Gates is closely connected to the World Economic Forum (WEF)? Isn’t the ‘G’ meant to reveal conflicts of interest?

2. YUM brands – which include fast food giants KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell – was also given a high score.

That’s despite the fact that:

  • KFC is notorious for sourcing its chickens from horrifying factory farms.
  • All three brands generate mountains of non-biodegradable waste
  • The three brands kill billions of people slowly with their disgusting, uber-processed, GMO-laced junk food.

So, how could they possibly have obtained such a high score? Well, guess what? Its CEO, David Gibbs, is also closely connected to the World Economic Forum.

3. Accenture, which ranked number 3 on the list for 2021, is a tech firm focused on AI for ‘social change acceleration.’ Translation: making AI so good, it could make millions or even billions, of humans unemployed.

Not very good for the S for ‘social’ in ESG, right? But hey, Accenture is also a partner of…you guessed it, the WEF.

Seeing any trends here?

Additionally, China’s state-owned Sinopec got an ESG score of 41 from S&P Global. ExxonMobil Corporation, by contrast, received a 36, while Chevron Corporation received a 39.

Sinopec’s scores on both “social” and “governance and economic” factors were well above the industry mean. These results raise questions about the objectivity of ESGs in light of the use of literal slave labour in China.

3. They cherry pick the application of their criteria

Speaking of China, I should also mention that nearly all the companies mentioned above are heavily invested in that country. So…how did they score high on the E? (China is one of the world’s biggest polluters, and many companies invest there because environmental laws are so slack).

And the S? (China has an appalling human rights record and is famous for using slave labour, as mentioned above). And the G? (China is heavily authoritarian, and all companies that invest there must form a relationship with the ruling party).

Surely, any company investing in such a place should be penalised? But no. ESG scores will actually reward you for it.

3. They’re stupidly expensive

Brian Monahan of the Bank of America says we need 6 trillion a year to make ESG scores work. Six. Trillion. Dollars. First of all: why? What could possibly be so costly about enacting accounting rules?

Plus, if you really cared about social justice and the environment, wouldn’t that money be better spent cleaning up say, ocean plastic? Or creating job schemes for those in the Global South? Six trillion dollars could end world poverty and clean up every single piece of plastic in the oceans – with change to spare.

Clearly, ESGs are greenwashing, since they really don’t put their money where it could make a difference.

4. They’re backed by the darkest entities on the planet

The fourth reason why ESGs are greenwashing is because they have been developed by some of the darkest entities on the planet. As mentioned above, these include The World Economic Forum, led by transhumanist fanatic Klaus Schwab. This group’s vision for an ‘equitable’ future is: ‘You will own nothing and be happy.’ Sounds pretty dystopian to me.

BlackRock, one of the world’s largest and most nefarious corporations, which own shares in pretty much every major arms, media, banking, construction, pharmaceutical, chemical, mining and agricultural company in the world, is also promoting ESGs. And is planning to make a killing off them. If you think they’ll allow honest ESGs to interfere with their (earth-and-people-killing) investments, well, you’re wrong.

The same could be said for financial services companies involved in using ESGs, such as JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs. Each of these has published annual reports that extensively review their ESG approaches and the bottom-line results.

Let’s not forget that these ESG-obsessed companies are the very same nasty entities which cause economic crises, then take taxpayer money to bail themselves out. They also fund dictatorial regimes around the world, and worse. And they’re the ones who will be guiding investors to put their money into companies that rank high for ESGs.

In short? It’s a total racket.

5. They’re so political

As I’ve mentioned, the criteria for granting high ESG ratings is based on rather arbitrary – and often political – criteria.

This fact was highlighted by tech experts Marc Andreessen and Elon Musk on Twitter. Andreessen pointed out how ESG funds are happy to invest in weapons companies that destroy millions of lives, buildings and ecological habitats. But they’d never invest in something as ‘dirty’ as petroleum or gas! What?

It should also be pointed out that any Russian company or company that invests there has zero chance of getting a good ESG score. Even if it vacuums carbon from the atmosphere, pays its workers a King’s wage, and makes only biodegradable products. But if you put your money into a fashion company with branches in the dystopian technocratic nation of China? Well, that’s just fine. Why?

Just more evidence that ESGs are greenwashing.

6. They can destroy entire nations

At the time of writing, Sri Lanka is in chaos. Tens of thousands taking to the streets and storming the Prime Minister’s office. The President has fled in terror. So, what sparked this disaster? In short, ESGs.

Tea is a vital export of this nation. And most of Sri Lanka’s tea is grown by small farmers, who are reeling from the impact of a sudden, poorly thought-out government decision to ban chemical fertilisers.

The ban was a deliberate policy decision taken by the President, as part of his dedication to reduce CO2. Some so-called ‘fact checking’ sites, like investorintel.com, claim ESGs didn’t collapse the government and economy of Sri Lanka. But then, in the same article, they did admit the fertilizer ban was the trigger for the collapse. And that that ban was forced on the country by global ESG pushers. Specifically, the ban was put in place in order to “renegotiate some of its IMF and World Bank financial obligations in exchange for an excellent emissions rating.”

In other words, the debt-trap mafia made Sri Lanka a deal it couldn’t refuse. That is: commit economic suicide in the name of improving your ESG score, or we shut off your money supply.

Accordingly, Sri Lanka signed on to the suicide pact. The country’s disgraced ex-President even made a speech at last year’s COP26 conference in Glasgow bragging about the country’s commitment to it. The results?

Countless numbers of small hold tea farmers and their families, starving. Tea prices rising globally. A country in total chaos. And more countries, like the Netherlands and Canada, are following the same disastrous policies. Well done.

7. Green investing is a no brainer, really

The Vigor Times said: ‘[ESGs create] a handy marketing tool for asset managers such as BlackRock to sell funds to customers who do not want their investments to finance bad stuff.” But the truth is, it’s easy to make ethical investments. Just avoid arms manufacturers, for-profit jails, banks, chemical, petroleum, alcohol, and tobacco companies, and casinos. We don’t need ESGs to tell us which companies are ethical, thanks very much.

(And if you don’t want to support ‘bad stuff,’ what the heck are you doing employing the nasty AF BlackRock, anyway?)

8. It’s a social credit system by another name

At the World Economic Forum this year, J. Michael Evans, president of China’s Alibaba Group, gave presentation.

He said his company is developing an “individualised carbon footprint tracker,” which he claimed would let consumers measure their travel, food consumption, and more.

In other words: when you buy something, that purchase will have a kind of ESG score. And if you’re not buying items with a low ESG score, YOU will be punished.

The irony? You’re more likely to be ‘punished’ for buying organic veggies from a local farmer who still uses a diesel fuelled tractor than you would for buying Roundup from Bayer/Monsanto, who are likely to have a higher ESG score for reasons mentioned above. But hey, GMOs are saving the planet, right?

Let’s be real. This is basically a form of social credit score. First, for businesses. Then for us. ESGs are a greenwashing tool, sure. But they could also be a tool to sneak in a dystopian, technocratic future, where Chinese-style social credit systems dictate what you can and can’t do. Where you can and can’t buy. What you can and can’t eat. And so on.

In Conclusion

ESGs are greenwashing at its worst because they’re not based on fairness. They’re based on an agenda

ESGs are nothing but a financial instrument, used to create investment vehicles that have a green slant to them. There’s nothing wrong with that necessarily. But as I’ve proven above, they’re far from fair and objective.

And it seems they’re not even voluntary. The IASB (International Accounting Standards Board) will be working with the IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) to create Sustainability Accounting Board. And if your state or company decides they want nothing to do with that, the banks will go after you.

Now, ESGs are ‘voluntary.’ But you know when the banks are threatening to penalise states for not implementing them, well…they’re about as ‘voluntary’ as vaccines, which, if not taken, will lose you your job and travel rights. In short, it’s extortion.

That’s pretty scary….if you run a company. But first they’ll come for the companies. Then, when ESGs are established, there’s nothing to stop those who run them from penalising US.

Social credit score, anyone?

As Camus once said: “The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Definitely something to keep in mind when it comes to ESGs.

Other sources used for this article





Do you think ESGs are greenwashing? Let us know in the comments below!


Chere Di Boscio
Latest posts by Chere Di Boscio (see all)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to Top